Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LLAN-DDEUSANT
LD, the South wasn't stupid. After declaring independence, they provided for their protection.

"In fact, it was actually necessary for politicians to organize campaigns in the North to stir up the idea of fighting to keep the southern states in the Union."

I agree.

"The initial response of most northerners was that they were actually glad to see them go due to the fact that they had always leached off the north economically. It was only after longer reflection that the people in the North started to realize the kinds of trouble and grief the inane idea of releasing the incompetant southern states into the world was likely to bring."

ROTFLMAO! If that's the case the North should have let the South go. Then the North would have enjoyed all those millions that had been "leached" off by the South. Your comment makes about as much sense as a doctor advising a cancer patient to forego surgery or chemo, and just live with it, even though it kills them.

128 posted on 12/17/2001 11:28:38 AM PST by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies ]


To: 4ConservativeJustices
When the south rebelled the standing U.S. army was, I believe, about 18,000 men. Desertions to the south no doubt decreased this abount by perhaps as much as 25%. One of the first acts of the confederate congress was to establish a general staff and fund an army of 100,000 men. If the intentions of the south were peaceful then why was their first action to create an army 7 times the size of the U.S. army?
129 posted on 12/17/2001 11:37:06 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson