Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does one defend oneself from the Federal government by firing on an American fort in an act of naked rebellion?
I eagerly await your response.
By having already extracted a promise from the commander of said fort to evacuate, which was later retracted, and by advising the commander of one's intentions so that those occupying the fort could safely stay in sections not being bombarded. The attack on Fort Sumter was reckless and an exercise in bad judgment, but the act of secession had been carried out months before, and at the time it was not just a point of contention between the South and the North whether secession was rebellion or not, it was a legal matter that the sitting President did not want decided in the court system, since Taney's Supreme Court in all likelihood would have ruled for the South.
The libs like to try to re-write history so that they can cry racism and a host of other pathetic things. It is getting so old!
My husband joined a local branch of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and I cannot say enough good about the group. It is truly about heritage. I am so sick of people trying to make it all about slavery and racisim. The fact that the NAACP is getting involved in the upcoming celebrations to protest - let alone the fact that the NAACP is even a recognized organization - is racism at its finest.
I am looking forward to the upcoming Sons of Confederate Veterans events in my town!
The sons of the Confederate Veterans may be about heritage. However, slavery was a component of the Civil War. The abolitionists, "Bleeding Kansas", the Underground Railroad, the whole nine yards. To deny the slavery side of it is to deny reality.
Slavery was incidental to the cause of the Civil War but was used as an economic weapon against the South. By freeing the slaves the South lost a huge amount of collateral they could have pledged to foreigners for loans to buy weapons and ammunition.
My own opinion on slavery is simple; if I can own a human being then someone can own me. If someone tries to enforce his claim on me I will be honor bound to kill them regardless of the law.
The sons of the Confederate Veterans may be about heritage. However, slavery was a component of the Civil War. The abolitionists, "Bleeding Kansas", the Underground Railroad, the whole nine yards. To deny the slavery side of it is to deny reality.
No one is trying to deny slavery was a part of what was happening EVERYWHERE at the time. I am saying I am sick and tired of idiots trying to make it all about slavery.
How does one defend oneself from the Federal government by firing on an American fort in an act of naked rebellion?
I eagerly await your response.
Being that, the U.S. Government would not see Confederate diplomats, didn't pave the road to peace or reunification.
[LEFT]Not surprisingly, Roman, Forsyth, and Crawford—who arrived in Washington in early March—had no success there. Seward refused to meet with the commissioners or to arrange a meeting with Lincoln, which they had requested. Unwilling, however, to antagonize the agents, Seward maintained contact through a third party. He assured the Confederates that the Union would not attempt to coerce the seceded states into returning to the Union and still hoped that a peaceful reunion was possible. On 8 April, after a month of waiting impatiently and distrusting Seward's assurance of Lincoln's commitment to the maintenance of peace, Crawford informed Davis of rumors that Lincoln was committed to war. A few days later the three Confederates returned home.
Please read the Nebraska Kansas act and take another look at that statement
The South had seen that the North was trying to tip the political favor into their hands, making them irrelevent in their own country, and that's no good.
No one is trying to deny slavery was a part of what was happening EVERYWHERE at the time. I am saying I am sick and tired of idiots trying to make it all about slavery.
*** EVERYWHERE? I don't think so. See this:
Northern Emancipation The American Revolution was the death knell of Northern slavery.
As Lincoln himself said,he had no lawful right to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists....
What you seem to forget is that Lincoln[govenment] was not King. It was/is the People that choose the course of change. If the People Of the US wanted slavery to end; and were working to that end...then the constitution sets forth steps to acomplish that change "legally". What the South did was claim states rights...then tried to leave the Union, by means other that afforded the "people" in the Constitution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
