Replies

The issue was when did most of the Southern states secede.

Not what I asked. I asked who was following McDowell into Virginia.

That was before the Army was raised, not after.

Not what I asked. I asked who was following McDowell into Virginia.

So the question was not whether a army was raised, but did it cause most of the Southern states to secede and the answer is no, most of the South had secede before the Army could be assembled.

Not what I asked. I asked who was following McDowell into Virginia.

The problem is (as I see it from my computer) is that you think I asked that question because I was trying to blame the North for something. I was not. I read your post (and not the argument) and you wrote, what I thought, was the most ridiculous thing I've read in a long time. That Lincoln did not have an army. (I wonder what those men ((all dressed in blue and calling each other Captain, Colonel, etc., in November, 1860)) thought they were a part of... a fraternity, a country-club, a debating society? Sorry, but even that has no bearing on the question I asked.)

I asked who did McDowell have with him?

Instead of just answering - an army - you go on the attack and try to explain to me that had nothing to do with the Southerns or States seceding from the Union.

I don't really care. Are you so agenda driven that you are afraid to answer a question as simple as the one I asked?

Did you think I was trying to trap you?

How sad is that?

Even in your last post, you won't answer the question. You just write another post ordering me to look at the context.

I get where you are coming from. North good, South bad. North not to blame. South-100% responsible.

So, I will try asking again. Who did McDowell have with him in July, 1861, all dressed in blue and heading toward Richmond? Perhaps you can find it in yourself to post the answer. (Hint, it was an army.)

The issue was when did most of the Southern states secede.

Not what I asked. I asked who was following McDowell into Virginia.

And your question was in relation to the question I was dealing with another poster that stated that most Southerners were fighting against a massive Union invasion.

So, once again, you are trying to avoid the context in which you posted that question to me.

That was before the Army was raised, not after.

Not what I asked. I asked who was following McDowell into Virginia.

And you asked that in relation to my comments to another poster on why most Southerners joined in the rebellion.

So the question was not whether a army was raised, but did it cause most of the Southern states to secede and the answer is no, most of the South had secede before the Army could be assembled.

Not what I asked. I asked who was following McDowell into Virginia.

What you asked was in relation to the other question.

Well, it is clear you did not read the article I posted that stated that the American Army was small and scattered when the Southern States began to secede.

So, secession was not a reaction to any Union invasion threat.

Lincoln had to call up troops to battle the rebellion after most of the States had already seceded.

No one was stating that Lincoln did not eventually raise an Army, but that Army was not in existence when the secession crises began-now was it?

And that was the context of the discussion, not whether Lincoln eventually raised a great Army, but its relation in why the Southern States seceded.

So, once again, you have shown yourself unable to understand context.

I asked who did McDowell have with him? Instead of just answering - an army - you go on the attack and try to explain to me that had nothing to do with the Southerns or States seceding from the Union.

That the Union raised an Army had nothing to do with why most of the Southern States had seceded.

So your comment followed by 'hmmmm' was made as if that Army had been raised had been a factor in those earlier states in seceding-and it wasn't.

I don't really care. Are you so agenda driven that you are afraid to answer a question as simple as the one I asked? Did you think I was trying to trap you?

No, if you are going to ask a question that has nothing to do with an earlier one make it read as such.

If you want to step into a dialog as if what you are stating has some relevance to what is being discussed with some clever remark, then make sure that what you are saying has relevance.

Everyone knows that the Union raised a massive military machine, but that was not the question being discussed, what was being discussed was that massive military machine in relation to Southerners fighting for the Confederacy, and that machine did not exist in 1860-61, when 7 States left the Union.

How sad is that? Even in your last post, you won't answer the question. You just write another post ordering me to look at the context.

Yes, and it is sad that you will not admit that you were wrong in what you posted in relation to the question being discussed.

It is you who refuses to see that your 'question' (which was rhetorical) is a meaningless one by itself and in connection to what was being discussed, wrong.

The American Army was raised in reaction to an attack on a U.S. military installation and as such, it was raised to put down a rebellion already in progress.

I get where you are coming from. North good, South bad. North not to blame. South-100% responsible.

Hey, that was the most accurate thing you have yet posted.

And I did also get the implicit idea behind your comment, that the North was wrong-and it wasn't.

So you were wrong in all of your posts.

And (hint) so what?

It was an Army that was raised after the U.S. flag was fired upon.

And it was an army raised with the same purpose that the army was raised to put down another rebellion, the Whiskey Rebellion led by Washington himself.

You do know that rebellion is illegal and unconstitutional?

So, once again, your rhetorical question (The North had an army at Bull Run) is meaningless in context.