I understand what you are saying but Lincoln was president and could have and should have sought ways to end the war short of a bloody victory for one side - push for a cease fire, peace talks, compromises on both sides, etc.
His object should have been to end the war with as few casualties as possible, not to seek total victory leading to destruction of the south.
Hell - we treated Japan and Germany better than the federal government treated the defeated south.
After all - the war was fought ostensibly to maintain the Union with only one president.
Consequently his stance was that he was still president of all the people.
But his every move was political and made to appease the north.
If he was acting on principal for the benefit of the entire nation instead of for political advantage he would not have declared only the slaves in the southern states free in his Emancipation Proclamation.
He would have declared all slaves free including those in the northern states and the border states.
But he didn’t.
And we know why - political expeediency
So he pursued the war against the south, killing Americans on both sides by the thousands, because southerners didn’t want to give up slavery. \
While at the same time he preserved the right of the other states to keep slaves for reasons that had nothing to do with morality.
Many of our pro-Confederate FRiends even insist Lincoln was driven by New York globalist businessmen, and that's why he started and sustained Civil War.
Of course, that's total rubbish & nonsense.
Lincoln did not start Civil War and could not end it short of victory without destroying the Union he was sworn to preserve, protect and defend.
And had Confederates wanted peace, they could have asked for it on any day before April 1865, on much better terms than the Unconditional Surrender they finally received after fighting to total defeat.
Vlad the Inhaler: "His object should have been to end the war with as few casualties as possible, not to seek total victory leading to destruction of the south.
Hell - we treated Japan and Germany better than the federal government treated the defeated south."
Less than total victory would have lead to destruction of the United States, which Lincoln was sworn to prevent.
Plus, Unconditional Surrender were the terms George Washington offered Cornwallis at Yorktown in 1781.
Unconditional Surrender were the terms Ulysses S Grant offered Lee at Appomattox Court House.
Unconditional Surrender are the terms Franklin Roosevelt offered Germany and Japan in WWII.
The results in each case were a real and satisfactory peace, contrasted to, for example, the First World War when Woodrow Wilson's "Peace without Victory" lead to first twenty years of international strife and then WWII.
So it makes a huge difference long-term when we force our enemies to surrender unconditionally.
Vlad the Inhaler: "But his every move was political and made to appease the north.
If he was acting on principal for the benefit of the entire nation instead of for political advantage he would not have declared only the slaves in the southern states free in his Emancipation Proclamation.
He would have declared all slaves free including those in the northern states and the border states.
But he didn’t. And we know why - political expeediency"
Total rubbish & nonsense.
In 1861 Republicans were the party of abolition, that's why Deep South Fire Eaters declared their secessions.
But amongst Republicans were serious discussions on how best to achieve abolition, with most favoring the gradualist approach of many Northern states in the early 1800s.
Regardless, it was understood by all that abolition could not be forced on loyal Union states short of Constitutional Amendment.
However, constitutionally, states in rebellion could have their slaves seized by the Army as "contraband of war", and thus Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation.
At around the same time, Republicans in Congress began work on the 13th Amendment to abolish slavery constitutionally.
Of course, if you are a dedicated pro-Confederate propagandist, none of that matters, right?