Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Abraham Lincoln as Statesman
American History ^ | April 2005 | Dinesh D'Souza

Posted on 02/05/2005 6:30:51 PM PST by quidnunc

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-220 last
To: TexConfederate1861
Lincoln as President, like any President had a sworn duty to defend all U.S. forts against any & all attacks.

If Lincoln had withdrawn U.S. troops from that fort, he would have caved into blackmail and should have been impeached for dereliction of Presidental duties.

Individuals or mobs of citizens from any state never have a right to attack U.S. troops, never mind attack a United States military instillation.

Such actions are treason, sedition, and if such actions were undertaken today, it would naturally be termed a terrorist attack, plus being swiftly dealt with. Think about the same incident in 2005.

I fault President James Buchanan when he refused to act when a federal supply ship was attacked in Charleston Harbor in January 1861. Buchanan non-action set in motion the attack on Fort Sumter. Once again how would President Bush react if either whacked out leftists or Islamic thugs attacked any U.S. ship?

Are you aware Congress was not in session when Ft. Sumter was attacked & Lincoln took the required legal steps he knew were necessary to preserve the Union, because inaction, as demonstrated by President Buchanan, would have promoted further attacks by mobs of South Carolina, radical secessionists.

Happy Birthday :)

201 posted on 02/11/2005 4:54:18 AM PST by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: M. Espinola

The fact is this: You can't compare actions of a group of states, to terrorist actions. The Confederacy seceded through what most people at the time felt were legal means.
They sent commissioners to NEGOTIATE a transfer of federal property. They were snubbed. Lincoln chose to initiate the actions that followed. The South had no choice BUT to fire on the fort, and force the troops out, or their sovereignety as a nation would have been a sham........
Lincoln was quite aware of the actions that would take place. He knew that when Southrons fired on the old flag, it would inflame passions. He was a consommate politician.


202 posted on 02/11/2005 5:36:53 AM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Lincoln: a waste of Southern lead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
Lincoln was quite aware of the actions that would take place. He knew that when Southrons fired on the old flag, it would inflame passions

So did Davis. And he fired anyway.

203 posted on 02/12/2005 4:32:16 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
They sent commissioners to NEGOTIATE a transfer of federal property.

Nonsense. The commissioners were sent to "for the purpose of negotiating friendly relations between that government and the Confederate States of America, and for the settlement of all questions of disagreement between the two governments upon principles of right, justice, equity, and good faith." Nothing specific about NEGOTIATING a transfer, just a vague offer to settle questions of disagreement. Since the south had already seized, or planned to seize, all the federal property in the rebellious states what incentive was there for them to pay for it?

204 posted on 02/12/2005 4:35:10 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

I am not so sure Davis thought so.


205 posted on 02/12/2005 2:24:57 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Lincoln: a waste of Southern lead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

The incentive is in Jefferson Davis's Inaugaral Speech....
The South wanted to leave peacefully, and to be left ALONE.


LIncoln chose war. Not the South, their honor would allow them no other recourse.


206 posted on 02/12/2005 2:27:21 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Lincoln: a waste of Southern lead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
I am not so sure Davis thought so.

He was wrong, and Toombs was right.

207 posted on 02/12/2005 2:52:43 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
LIncoln chose war. Not the South, their honor would allow them no other recourse.

Sorry but that makes no sense at all. The south didn't choose way, but their honor would allow for nothing but war????

208 posted on 02/12/2005 2:54:19 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

I realize to you Northern types, "honor" isn't a valid concept.

I will explain: Lincoln snubbed their offer of peace, therefore, they were bound by their code of honor, to reduce the fort, or be looked upon as cowards. Even the method of negotiating the surrender of the Ft. was done in an honorable manner. They were notified that unless the Ft. was surrendered by a particular time, they would begin bombardment.


209 posted on 02/12/2005 4:14:23 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Lincoln: a waste of Southern lead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
I will explain: Lincoln snubbed their offer of peace, therefore, they were bound by their code of honor, to reduce the fort, or be looked upon as cowards.

Of all the "it was all Lincoln's fault" arguements I've heard that has to be the most ridiculous.

210 posted on 02/12/2005 6:38:58 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Look:

I get tired of having to lead you by the nose. As I said, you don't have a clue about honor. Everything that doesn't fit in your little Yankee Box is "ridiculous". Wake up and smell the grits. How can I explain a concept that 99% of you and the rest of the "Brigade" can't even comprehend?


211 posted on 02/12/2005 8:01:05 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Honor....a Southern Virtue (Lacking North of the Mason-Dixon Line!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
As I said, you don't have a clue about honor.

I have a problem with a concept of 'honor' that calls for war as the first solution. But you go right ahead and keep trying to explain it.

212 posted on 02/13/2005 4:48:06 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

So then, you don't believe honor calls for war?



Trying to explain Honor to you would be like trying to teach algebra to a 2 year old. Impossible. Honor is something a man is BORN with. And you seem to be sadly lacking.








213 posted on 02/13/2005 5:05:32 AM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Honor....a Southern Virtue (Lacking North of the Mason-Dixon Line!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
So then, you don't believe honor calls for war?

Not as the first resort, no.

214 posted on 02/13/2005 5:28:16 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

It wasn't a first resort. The South had tried to negotiate.


215 posted on 02/13/2005 5:35:47 AM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Honor....a Southern Virtue (Lacking North of the Mason-Dixon Line!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
It wasn't a first resort. The South had tried to negotiate

The delegation was sent to Washington "for the purpose of negotiating friendly relations between that government and the Confederate States of America, and for the settlement of all questions of disagreement between the two governments upon principles of right, justice, equity, and good faith." That's not negotiation, that's an ultimatum. Accept the legitimacy of the southern rebellion, period. Vague offer to settle 'disagreements' aside, unless Lincoln was willing to accept southren independence then there was nothing to talk about. Had everything been on the table, including reunification, then you might have a point but laying down a 'take it or leave it' proposition, and then using that as an excuse to claim wounded honor and start a war is nonsense.

216 posted on 02/13/2005 5:48:45 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Sounds like negotiation to me. Southern Independence was a fact. Not a point of negotiation.


217 posted on 02/13/2005 3:24:03 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 (Honor....a Southern Virtue (Lacking North of the Mason-Dixon Line!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
Sounds like negotiation to me. Southern Independence was a fact. Not a point of negotiation.

Obviously hardly anyone agreed.

218 posted on 02/13/2005 7:14:20 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I'm with you.


219 posted on 08/27/2005 10:19:56 PM PDT by Nephi (Globalism is incompatible with originalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nephi

Thank you.


220 posted on 08/28/2005 7:45:52 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-220 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson