Posted on 10/26/2013 7:01:38 AM PDT by Davy Buck
“If only it wasn’t for all those pesky statements from southern leaders saying that they were rebelling over issues around slavery.”
Why would they do that since Lincoln’s own inaugural address stated he did not seek to change slavery in the South or North?
“actually the war started April 12 1861. This is the date that the Confederate Government forces fired on A United States Government installation.”
Public school education, I see. The war started before that.
I pointed out to you that the presence of slaves does not naturally result in war, which seemed to be your contention.
I'll assume you're really dumb and not just playing at it.
While Lincoln made it clear that he had no intentions of interfering with slavery in the states where it existed, a fundamental part of his campaign (and indeed, the founding of the Republican Party) was stopping the spread of slavery into the territories. The south saw this as enough of a threat to their economic well-being to rebel.
Go on.
Lincoln did do that.
However it was his blockade decree which was the first act of war and its beginning.
It is evident that it is you dealing in opinion.
That is correct. The invasion of Virginia was not to free any slaves, and thus the initiation of hostilities was not to free slaves.
You offered: “actually the war started April 12 1861. This is the date that the Confederate Government forces fired on A United States Government installation.”
Your school history book may have said that, but the US Government set the beginning date as the day Lincoln decreed the blockade.
Which is sort of like saying that World War 2 didn't start until December 8, 1941, when FDR signed the declaration of war passed by Congress and not on December 7, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
Who claimed it was?
YAWN
I see that the Lost Cause Losers aren’t even offering up any original crap - just the same old threadbare revisionism.
*sigh*
I would begin with you.
Have you seen the documentary? What do you think of it?
You can imply some truth in the use of that analogy, but the truth and facts are not on your side.
Then you’ll have to show where.
So your position is that firing on Ft. Sumter was not an act of war, is that correct?
It is your analogy. Make it stick.
That is correct. Sumter was nothing more than a reinforced hunk of rock.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.