Nixon was a man of peace (i.e., with China) but waged war when necessary, as in Vietnam.
He also supported Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur war bringing the world to the very brink of nuclear war.
Fortunately, unlike idiot Davis at Fort Sumter, Soviet Brezhnev backed down and global holocaust was prevented.
Yom Kippur is the war which lead Arab OPEC countries to embargo their oil exports to the United States.
But again fortunately, unlike idiot Confederates in 1861, 1973 Arab OPEC countries did not provoke, start, declare & wage war against the United States.
Even in 1973 there were US bases in Arab OPEC countries which would have served as their own Fort Sumter, but wisely didn't.
That just miiiiiiiight be why Nixon didn't respond with military force, do you think?
Ah, the Christmas bombing of Hanoi. I remember it fondly.
But Nixon never started war gratuitously or for empire.
Your analogy was designed to create an unfavorable impression of the actions of southern states and southern people by making a comparison to Arab OPEC countries.
Like them or not, Arab states are recognized - even by the government in Washington D.C. - as legitimate, sovereign states with cultures different than that of the northern United States. Since you contend the southern states were not free and independent, and that the Confederate States of America never existed, you need to rush to denounce your own analogy.
Your original post about this discovered analogy included a referenced to “Fire Eater radicals” at a time when the world was focusing on the knife attacks in London by real radicals whose slashings were all-to-reminiscent of the radical knife-wielders at the Pottawatomie Creek Massacre.