Replies

A full scale hostile of invasion of the entire south is a bit drastic as a response to a zero-casualty siezure of a single fort, don't you think?

Lessee, the south declared war on the north when Lincoln tried to reinforce the fort. The full-scale invasion was in response to that situation. The fort was just the catalyst.

So you think invading 13 states and 2 territories with one of the largest armies ever assembled on the continent is "tit" for the "tat" of a single fort being siezed in a battle with no casualties and no prisoners?

No, S.C. refused to give up federal property - as did the other southern states. A war was declared - in which the south thought that they would win. The tit-for-tat comes in when the south strikes at Union interests, the Union strikes at southern interests.

You have yet to explain how anything he said about the forts was "critical" to his definition of invasion, which was my matter of concern. Care explaining yourself?

I would have thought it was rather obvious. He basically tells S.C. that they have no fear of invasion, but then asks them why they are invading Ft. Sumter. Remember that they are officially still at peace, even though S.C. has initiated hostilities.

Back off? Where? I firmly believe it is a people's right to remove a hostile garrison from their presence when they are no longer subject to that garrison and when that garrison has no business being there other than for hostile motives.

What hostile motives? Were they planning on attacking S.C. with less than a hundred soldiers? From a military standpoint, the fort was negligible (although from a political standpoint, it was quite a firebrand). It was federal territory. It did not belong to the state of S.C. What right did S.C. have to attack territory which was not even theirs? If S.C. can attack and remove a federal garrison from federal territory in S.C., then why can't they just as ethically attack and remove a federal garrison from N.Y. For that matter, why can't they just attack any state?

If you don't want to be called a liar, don't fib about Lincoln's quotes by throwing out false allegations that I somehow denied their meaning by only quoting the sentence on the matter I was making a point about.

Lessee, you purposely exclude Lincoln's slamming of S.C. for attacking Ft. Sumter. You claim that Ft. Sumter belongs to S.C., because S.C. seceded from the Union, therefore they can revoke all prior commitments to the Union. As such, the Union, by retaining the fort and trying to resupply it is invading S.C. But wait, you say that the Union is not invading S.C. by retaining the Island. Sheesh, at least you could try for some consistency.

Since when did the US Government have the right to collect taxes for itself on the goods going into another political entity that has clearly indicated the termination of its political affiliation with that government? Lincoln had no more business collecting taxes there than King George did in Philadelphia circa 1780.

So, if I start a political entity (of two or more people), then if I clearly indicate our termination of our political affiliation with the government, does that mean that said government has any right to collect taxes on us? I don't believe that your argument will get you very far as there was no constitutional right for any state to secede.

Lessee, the south declared war on the north when Lincoln tried to reinforce the fort.

Actually, the Confederate Congress declared war on the United States on May 6, 1861. Lincoln declared it de facto with his blockade proclamation two weeks earlier on April 19, 1861. And for the record, Virginia (may 6), Arkansas (may 6), North Carolina (may 20), and Tennessee (june 8) did not become members of the confederacy until after Lincoln's blockade.

The full-scale invasion was in response to that situation.

Not so. Lincoln's decisions were the first full scale acts of war in the conflict.

No, S.C. refused to give up federal property - as did the other southern states.

Then you think invading 13 states and 2 territories with one of the largest armies ever assembled on the continent is "tit" for the "tat" of a couple of forts being taken without casualties.

A war was declared - in which the south thought that they would win.

The confederacy declared war on May 6th. Lincoln had already initiated it with his blockade order back in April - a full scale act of war which he "justified" on a single skirmish over a fort in south carolina without casualties and under circumstances that he himself provoked.