This pose is for Old Sarge ....
Posted on 07/13/2015 8:05:28 AM PDT by HomerBohn
The union struggled with desertions.
Actually both sides struggled with desertions.
The glue that stemmed the desertion tide for the Union was the slavery issue. Their troops weren't willing to die to preserve tariffs. Many would be willing to die to abolish slavery. So as the war stretched into an effort of several years abolition became the force that made it possible for the Union to continue to field a competitive army at all.
So to argue that the North could have won without abolition as an issue is unequivocally to insist that the North didn't need an army. There is not and never has been a credible refutation of that.
I therefore assert that this article is cut from the same cloth as analysis of the American Revolution which fail to note the contemporaneous political and military situation in Europe as a factor.
Disclaimer: my ancestors didn't immigrate to North America until the 1880s. I have no dog in the fight.
How do you figure declaring independence is instituting war?
The governing document which came after the Articles of Confederation? The one that implicitly accepts slavery? The one who's authority derives from ratifying legislatures rather than God and Nature?
Yeah, what of it? The Declaration trumps it. It is the Declaration that created this country. The Constitution is just the outline for governing it.
So you are saying that using oil to drive our cars and heat our homes is equivalent to owning slaves?
Sounds like you would be more at home in Kalifornia. :-)
Homer, how come it’s .com on your posr but .org at link???
And this is also true of the Southern states efforts to leave. The Difference was at the time the Slave Owning Colonies left the English Union to form their Confederacy, this act was in defiance of British law.
However, they held up the Declaration of Independence as authorized by the Highest law, the law of God and of Nature. Therefore, they ought to subsequently accept the same law as governing future efforts at independence.
The south chose to institute war against it’s fellow states because it perceived a shift in the balance of power represented by the 1860 election.
Your side keeps saying this. Kicking Foreign military people off of your own land without killing any of them is hardly the equivalent of sending 35,000 men into someone's country for the purpose of toppling their government.
The difference is like a slap in the face compared to clubbing someone in the head. Very disproportionate.
And you keep muttering this non sequitur. Sumter was only the opening salvo. Anyone with half a brain knows that. I guess that means you're excused.
I smell a false flag op.
They did far more tahn just try to declare independence. Their first acts were those of insurrection against their fellows states.
From what I’ve read when the southern states rebelled they immediately began seizing anything that they desired. These were federal installations that weren’t the property of the rebelling states and they had no moral or legal right to seize them.. Buchanan, the lame-ass, lame-duck bleated that the south had no right - but beyond that said very little.
The following represents a list of federal properties which fell to the rebels outside of any negotiations:
Alabama seizures:
United States Arsenal at Mount Vernon
Fort Morgan
Fort Gaines
Arkansas seizures:
United States Arsenal at Little Rock
United States ordnance stores at Napoleon
United States subsistence stores at Pine Bluff
Fort Smith
Georgia seizures:
Fort Pulaski
United States Arsenal at Augusta
Oglethorpe Barracks
Fort Jackson
Dahlonega Mint
Louisiana seizures:
United States Arsenal at Baton Rouge
Baton Rouge Barrack
Fort Jackson
Fort Saint Philip
Fort Pike
Fort Macomb
United States paymaster’s office at New Orleans
New Orleans Mint
Mississippi seizure:
Fort Massachusetts on Ship Island
Florida seizures:
United States Arsenal at Apalachicola
Fort Marion
Barrancas Barracks
Fort Barrancas
Fort McRee
Pensacola Navy Yard (Warrington Ship Yard)
Missouri seizures:
United States Arsenal at Liberty
United States ordnance stores at Kansas City
North Carolina seizures:
Fort Johnston
Fort Caswell
Fort Macon
United States Arsenal at Fayetteville
Charlotte Mint
South Carolina seizures:
Fort Sumter
Castle Pinckney
Fort Moultrie
United States Arsenal at Charleston
Fort Johnson
Texas seizures:
United States Arsenal at San Antonio
San Antonio Barracks
Camp Verde
Fort Clark
This pose is for Old Sarge ....
No doubt a component of the Union army was fanatical abolitionists, but a not insignificant component of the Union was drafted.
Apart from that, what were the abolitionists fighting for that first two years when abolishing slavery wasn't on the table? Did they not even believe their own Commander in Chief either? They thought he was lying too?
Thank you for the eye-wash this afternoon...
In terms of impact to your economics, it is the closest modern analogy. But no, don't try to pull that bait and switch.
I simply pointed out that North Eastern Liberals are trying to impose a new found morality that would be economically ruinous to those affected, and that some things haven't changed.
If you think they were planning an invasion, you need to either take more drugs or fewer drugs.
Cause everyone knows that all those forts were worth a lot of money. Why, you never know when someone is going to need a fortress for something, and they were flying off the real estate listings like hotcakes!
The people of those states paid taxes to FedGov™ for many decades. Its not like they got anything for “free”.
Besides Lincoln wouldn’t meet with Southern “agent” who want to negotiate for the dispensation of said Federal property. No, he wanted war and did not parley. He got war and 600,000 deaths. He discussed this in his second inaugural.
What this tells me is that you have no grasp of the economic realities of the Southern States in the 1860s. Their economic engine ran on Agriculture and it's heavy dependence on slavery.
It is not a trivial comparison. Today our economic engine runs of fossil fuels. To them (And You really need to learn to comprehend the concept of "zeitgeist") this would have been very similar to shutting down 1/4th of our economy.
Ignoring the human component, which the Union also did as long as it suited their interests, the economic and assets of that industry were simply too big to eliminate without much upheaval and destruction to their economic condition.
We modern people have just become accustomed to looking at things from a prism of modern ideas, and many of us have no comprehension of what things looked like to the people involved.
If gay marriage stands, a hundred years from now, indoctrinated people like you will be regarding us all as barbarians for not having legalized it sooner.
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.