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.
Perhaps you should do a little more studying on the civil war. If they had been left alone to leave there would not have been a war.
Not sure what you were being taught in your history classes, but in our history classes, we learned that the Civil War began when Confederates attacked U.S. forces at Fort Sumter.
Just to be sure I wasn't taught some nonsense, I googled it.
According to the Civil War Trust:
"The war began when the Confederates bombarded Union soldiers at Fort Sumter, South Carolina on April 12, 1861. The war ended in Spring, 1865. Robert E. Lee surrendered the last major Confederate army to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse on April 9, 1865."
It wasn't up to Lincoln to split up the nation. He took an oath to defend the Constitution and the U.S.
Unlike Lee, Lincoln honored his oath.
Anyway, Congress is likely the branch of government who would have negotiated an exit.
If Confederates didn't want a war, then raising an arm and attacking Ft. Sumter was a damn dumb move.
Confederates wanted to split off in order to avoid any possible future interference with owning slaves. Hardly an honorable cause.
Then they lost.
Where in the Constitution gave Lincoln the right to wage war on the sovereign
states when they declared their independence from the Union?
if you think FT. SUMTER was the reason the North sent troops to die in the bloodiest war in our history then you are clueless......all Lincoln had to do was accept the independence of the South and call off his troops and Navy in the South to not escalate the situation into a war.
You don't know history.......go read the Corwin Amendment.....it was an Amendment to the Constitution before the Civil War, passed entirely by the NORTHERN states and supported by Lincoln to make slavery a state's right forever and the federal government could NEVER interfere. They did this so the South returns to the Union, the South didn't.
Not sure what you were being taught in your history classes, but in our history classes, we learned that the Civil War began when Confederates attacked U.S. forces at Fort Sumter.
Just to be sure I wasn't taught some nonsense, I googled it.
According to the Civil War Trust:
"The war began when the Confederates bombarded Union soldiers at Fort Sumter, South Carolina on April 12, 1861. The war ended in Spring, 1865. Robert E. Lee surrendered the last major Confederate army to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse on April 9, 1865."
I can see you do not understand the whole story so I will no longer try to discuss this with you. Just to say once more that if the south had been left alone to leave there would not have been a war. Now if you wish to follow up on that you will find it to be the truth. Why was Sumter fired on?
Last edited by Scotty011; 10-14-2017 at 08:44 PM..
Let the people of the state decide that.,,,,,it's their history and heritage.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (10th amendment)
I was born in Mississippi. I saw racism first hand. The Confederate flag needs to go away. It's not our history or heritage.
It wasn't up to Lincoln to split up the nation. He took an oath to defend the Constitution and the U.S.
Unlike Lee, Lincoln honored his oath.
Anyway, Congress is likely the branch of government who would have negotiated an exit.
If Confederates didn't want a war, then raising an arm and attacking Ft. Sumter was a damn dumb move.
Confederates wanted to split off in order to avoid any possible future interference with owning slaves. Hardly an honorable cause.
Then they lost.
Losing is quite often the result when a smaller force is attacked by a much larger force. Many people seem to assume that the armies of the Confederacy and the US were fairly equal. In fact, the Union Army was anywhere from 2 to almost 3 times as large as the Confederate Army, depending on the times. But the Union forces lost almost 50% more soldiers than the Rebs. They simply had more raw numbers to throw in the battles than the Confederates, not superior skill or leadership.
It is a little known fact of history that Robert E Lee's battle plans for the invasion of the US were lost by a courier and recovered by the Union forces. With full knowledge of Lee's plan , the Union army still lost more soldiers than the Rebs and couldn't defeat them at the Battle of Antietam ( the Confederate invasion of the US at Maryland ), despite having over twice the number of forces as Lee, AND Lee's battle plans. The battle was strategically a draw, but as the Rebs withdrew first and went back to the South it was proclaimed a Union victory. The proclamation of a victory over the Confederacy gave Lincoln the confidence to make the Emancipation Proclamation, and as a result the British and French decided not to recognize and aid the Confederacy , as was being contemplated.
The strange quirks of history. What happens if Lee's plans are not found by the Union side, they are routed by Lee's forces, and Lee marches on DC? And then England and France recognize and supply aid to the Confederacy?
Last edited by wallflash; 10-14-2017 at 08:54 PM..
Originally Posted by geekigurl There is nothing...nothing more inherently unAmerican than the confederate flag. It's sort of the point of the f-ing thing.
there is nothing more unAmerican that Americans who don't know their own history and excuse a tyrant who violated the sovereignty and the rights of people in the bloodiest war in our history who just wanted to be independent and be left alone.
that's unAmerican, A PERSON that ignores the principles of our founding fathers that the people had every right to break away from a federal government that didn't represent them and overtaxes them! The same reason our founding fathers broke away from Great Britain....same principles.
Seriously. You can't compare the racism in the north versus the south.
Detroit is a result of racism in the north. The blacks left the south for Motor City and manufacturing jobs thinking the enlightened northerners weren't racist. They found out differently, and as the white people fled the growing numbers of black people out to the burbs, the black people were left to try and fend for themselves with a failing city and tax base.
Detroit is the result.
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.
