If Sherman is your hero, you must really love this guy.
Posted on 03/31/2006 6:24:26 PM PST by quidnunc
2. The fact remains that, while certain northern politicians deserve blame for "turning up the heat", it was the South that rejected the United States and fired the first shot on Fort Sumter, which was PROPERTY OF THE UNITED STATES.
3. Before you attack the last point with the issue of "state sovereignty" let me just say that I could declare the 20 blocks around my building as being the "Confederate Urbanization of Fredonia" but that doesn't mean that it will be recognized by others as such. The ONLY STATE that recognized the Confederacy as being a "sovereign nation" was the Vatican, which itself would be swallowed up by the Garibaldini by the end of the decade. In other words, the South's claim to be a "nation" was about as valid as Key West declaring itself the "Conch Republic" in 1981.
"We fought a war to get California and I dare say that we'll have to fight another war to get rid of it!"
For someone supposedly non-emotional, you have quite a vested interest in the topic.
The South was not going to wait around for that to happen. Look, Lincoln was very clear in his goals when he was elected: He was not going to affect slavery in the states where it presently existed; he did not want to see it spread into the territories. The South found that position unacceptable since they realized that slavery HAD to spread into the west to keep it politically viable in the South. That's why they rejected Douglas's bid for the presidency in 1860. That's why they seceded from the Union when Lincoln won the election.
As a proud AMERICAN and student of history, you bet your a-s that I have a vested interest in this topic.
Andrew Johnson was lenient because, as a southerner, he just simply wanted peace, not a new pretext for war.
The Confederates were TRAITORS to the Constitution of the United States. Going back to the Articles of Confederation is not what I would call being true patriots.
Slavery was not the only issue, but it was a major issue, indeed the hot button issue from the 1820s through the 1860s. Read the congressional record if you don't believe me.
The South, of course, were not the first to advocate secession. It was first breached by New Englanders in the war of 1812 and later by William Lloyd Garrison. Nevertheless, the political identity of the U.S. was formed by the constitution, which allocated certain powers to the states, but provided for a central federal government that would lay revenue, control interstate commerce, raise an army and negotiate foreign treaties. The states could NOT declare their independence, nor was insurrection to be tolerated. Ever hear of Daniel Shays or the Whiskey Rebellion? The Webster/Calhoun debates?
Of course. You defend that????
To be a traitor to the House of Hanover/Saxe-Coburg/Windsor is an honorable thing. To be a traitor to the U.S. something else altogether.
The Confederate States in both theory and practice were a new government which did NOT maintain the 1789 constitution, but instead sought a return to what they believed were the better aspects of the Articles, with some aspects of the Constitution incorporated. In short, they were not fighting to "preserve" the nation as you believe, but to create a new government.
In other words, the Confederacy was illegitimate as a stand-in for the United States of America.
*
If Sherman is your hero, you must really love this guy.
A great general, although I still wonder what the Pope told him to make him withdraw.
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.