[DiogenesLamp]

The North didn't go to war to free the slaves Lampster. The South sure went to war to keep though.

You keep saying that, but this is factually incorrect. According to the North, Slavery wasn't under any threat, so your claim doesn't even make sense on the face of it.

The South went to war because the North invaded them. For nearly two years Lincoln reassured them that they could keep slavery so long as they recognized the authority of Washington D.C. to control their trade and finances.

The reason you keep bringing up the slavery issue is because you've got absolutely no moral justification for the invasion absent the false claim of "the war was over slavery."

The bloodshed of 750,000 people has to be justified somehow, and "Money" doesn't sound so good as a justification. People would rather believe they fought for some moral reason beyond just power and greed.

Unfortunately, the truth appears to be that the war was fought over power and greed.

[jmacusa]

The North invaded the South? So Ft. Sumter isn’t an issue? And The South invading Maryland in 1862 and Gettysburg Pa in 1863 was what exactly, a walk in the wood for Lee and his army?

[BroJoeK]

jmacusa: "The North didn't go to war to free the slaves Lampster.
The South sure went to war to keep though."

DiogenesLamp: "You keep saying that, but this is factually incorrect.
According to the North, Slavery wasn't under any threat, so your claim doesn't even make sense on the face of it. "

In fact, Deep South Fire Eaters were not in the least reluctant to record that they declared secession in order to protect slavery, which they believed was under threat by "Ape" Lincoln and his Black Republicans.
Republicans at the time said they did not threaten slavery, in the South, only in those western territories which didn't want it.
Constitutionally, that's all they could do.

War began because secessionists in early 1861 demanded military action, if necessary to remove Union troops from Union Fort Sumter, and by April 12 Jefferson Davis decided a military assault was necessary and so ordered it.

Some people argue that Fort Sumter did not begin Civil War, after all, no one was killed in battle.
But people at the time North and South understood that Civil War began at Fort Sumter.
Here are examples of newspaper reports after Fort Sumter's surrender:

1. ◾"The War Commenced!," Fremont Journal Extra (Fremont, OH), April 13, 1861, Saturday Morning, Page 1, Image 1, col. 1-2.

2. ◾"Latest War News!! Anderson Surrenders!," Memphis Daily Appeal (Memphis, TN), April 14, 1861, Page 2, Image 2, col. 3-6.

3. ◾"The Pro-Slavery War, The Bombardment of Fort Sumter," New-York Daily Tribune (New York, NY), April 15, 1861, Page 5, Image 5, col. 1.

4. ◾"Hostilities Commenced! Bombardment of Fort Sumter!!," Daily Nashville Patriot (Nashville, TN), April 16, 1861, Page 2, Image 2, col. 4.

5. ◾"Civil War Begun--Fort Sumter Taken," Western Reserve Chronicle (Warren, OH), April 17, 1861, Page 2, Image 2, col. 1-5.

6. ◾"War Begun!," The Jeffersonian (Stroudsburg, PA), April 18, 1861, Page 2, Image 2, col. 2.

7. ◾"Fort Sumter Given Up!!," The Anderson Intelligencer (Anderson Court House, SC), April 17, 1861, Page 2, Image 2, col. 2-5.

8. ◾"War Begun! The Traitors Fire the First Gun!," The Alleghenian (Ebensburg, PA), April 18, 1861, Page 2, Image 2, col. 1.

Point is: in early 1861 there was no doubt in anyone's mind that Deep South slave-holders declared secession to protect slavery and that Civil War started at Fort Sumter.