I tend to think Lincoln is a bit overrated like most icons but this is a goood quote

[zitothebrave]

What negotiations did Lincoln have with the South? Please enlighten me.

The South wanted to be left alone. The South did not want to go to war. They were protecting their homes from an invading army.

And I never once said that slavery was not part of the reason for the War. But states rights was the cause, of which slavery certainly consisted of that.

What a ****ty history teacher you had.

The south started the war by bombarding Ft. Sumter. I guess Lincoln was invading them with ****ing ghosts hahaha.

Slavery was the cause of the civil war. States rights was the rallying cry so the poor folk who didn't own slaves (aka the ones dying in the war) would fight. If they strictly said "We're doing this to own slaves" most people would be like, "Nah, **** you" if slavery wasn't the main reason, then why didn't the resolution to ban importing African SLaves pass? Despite the massive potential boom from it?

[zitothebrave]

I wish that we could step outside of this kind of oversimplified postmodern viewpoint on slavery in the context of the Civil War. I mean, you are seriously going to have trouble finding a sane person who would ever defend slavery -- on any level. However, is it so unfathomable to assert that slavery might have been extinguishable without going to war? We know that abolition was a preeminent issue in the mid-1800s with somewhat broad national support, even in the South. Industrialism was beginning to supplant the agrarian way of life. The tide appeared to be changing, slowly, but surely.

But then you have the war, which came at an enormous cost to the fledgling nation in literally every aspect of its being; lives, money, innovation, global stature, etc. These are effects so profound that they are STILL playing out sociopolitically as well as economically.

Not to detract from the immediate positives of the war, or even to really suggest that Lincoln's strategy wasn't the only path which would have ultimately worked ... it's just sometimes a beneficial academic exploration to revise history.

Yes, it wouldhave been. It would have died. BUT the South decided to revolt for the right to own slaves cause they saw the writing on the wall as the free states were well on their way to crushing them, especially with the 1850 compromise that wouldn't allow slavery in expansion.

[Hawk]

What a ****ty history teacher you had.

The south started the war by bombarding Ft. Sumter. I guess Lincoln was invading them with ****ing ghosts hahah

Except that Fort Sumter (which is 15 minutes from my house by boat) was a Union outpost in Confederate territory which Lincoln not only refused to abandon but also kept trying to supply.

[zitothebrave]

Except that Fort Sumter (which is 15 minutes from my house by boat) was a Union outpost in Confederate territory which Lincoln not only refused to abandon but also kept trying to supply.

So he kept trying to keep his people in place. If the South was interested in negotiating as Carpe insists, attacking someone isn't a good way to start. I can get to a point turning away aid, but I don't get attacking, unless your goal is to provoke war. If the Germans were to attack our bases in Germany wouldn't we view that as an act of war?

[Gary82]

Except that Fort Sumter (which is 15 minutes from my house by boat) was a Union outpost in Confederate territory which Lincoln not only refused to abandon but also kept trying to supply.

In their eyes, there was no such thing as Confederate territory.

[Hawk]

So he kept trying to keep his people in place. If the South was interested in negotiating as Carpe insists, attacking someone isn't a good way to start. I can get to a point turning away aid, but I don't get attacking, unless your goal is to provoke war. If the Germans were to attack our bases in Germany wouldn't we view that as an act of war?

Fort Sumter is at the mouth of Charleston harbor and the Confederacy was concerned about it being used to essentially lay siege to the city by restricting supply lines, etc. The Confederacy actually offered to buy the fort before attacking it. Seward even wanted to give it to the South to placate the rising tensions.

[Hawk]

In their eyes, there was no such thing as Confederate territory.

In Lincoln's eyes, yes, but this wasn't a view universally shared by everybody in his cabinet. Others wanted to compromise. Abe took a hard line.

[BedellBrave]

I mentioned it in another thread, but it bears repeating: fortunes were made North, South, and overseas on the slave economy. I hope nobody is glossing that over in the discussion. But that's isn't really at issue here.

It usually does get glossed over in these discussions. I make it a point to not let us forget. ;-) Damn Yankees and all.

[Carp]

What a ****ty history teacher you had.

The south started the war by bombarding Ft. Sumter. I guess Lincoln was invading them with ****ing ghosts hahaha.

Slavery was the cause of the civil war. States rights was the rallying cry so the poor folk who didn't own slaves (aka the ones dying in the war) would fight. If they strictly said "We're doing this to own slaves" most people would be like, "Nah, **** you" if slavery wasn't the main reason, then why didn't the resolution to ban importing African SLaves pass? Despite the massive potential boom from it?

South Carolina was 1 state acting alone at Ft. Sumter. And SC tried numerous times to negotiate the forfeit of Fort Sumter without a shot being fired.

[Carp]

Except that Fort Sumter (which is 15 minutes from my house by boat) was a Union outpost in Confederate territory which Lincoln not only refused to abandon but also kept trying to supply.

This. The Union was trying to reinforce Ft. Sumter well before the 1st shots were fired. That certainly seemed like a threatening act to the civilians of SC.

[zitothebrave]

Fort Sumter is at the mouth of Charleston harbor and the Confederacy was concerned about it being used to essentially lay siege to the city by restricting supply lines, etc. The Confederacy actually offered to buy the fort before attacking it. Seward even wanted to give it to the South to placate the rising tensions.

As I said, if they wanted to refuse aid, that's one thing. They attacked it. You attack a fort it's a declaration of war. I agree there were potentially other ways to go about it. The South chose to attack. Rather than wait it out.

[Carp]

So he kept trying to keep his people in place. If the South was interested in negotiating as Carpe insists, attacking someone isn't a good way to start. I can get to a point turning away aid, but I don't get attacking, unless your goal is to provoke war. If the Germans were to attack our bases in Germany wouldn't we view that as an act of war?

Sending reinforcements to a place that does not want you there is certainly not sending a message that you want to negotiate. More like a display of force.

[zitothebrave]

South Carolina was 1 state acting alone at Ft. Sumter.

Except the orders came from Montgomery to use any means necessary to repel the union from the fort. So yay for you and your continual being wrong about the Civil War.

[zitothebrave]

Sending reinforcements to a place that does not want you there is certainly not sending a message that you want to negotiate.

Neither is mustering 100,000 troops liek the confederates were. They knew war was coming.

[Carp]

Except the orders came from Montgomery to use any means necessary to repel the union from the fort. So yay for you and your continual being wrong about the Civil War.

This is false, or at the very least misleading. The "order" from Montgomery came after SC had already demanded that the Union turnover the fort.

[Hawk]

As I said, if they wanted to refuse aid, that's one thing. They attacked it. You attack a fort it's a declaration of war. I agree there were potentially other ways to go about it. The South chose to attack. Rather than wait it out.

They exhausted every peaceable avenue available before resorting to an attack, which was really more than one might have expected given that Sumter was an enemy base smack dab in the middle of Confederate territory.

Plus, no one died.

[Runnin]

It usually does get glossed over in these discussions. I make it a point to not let us forget. ;-) Damn Yankees and all.

I believe the early slave ships came from England and were largely manned by Brits. A lot of people got rich off the slave trade.

Anybody watching The Book of Negroes?

[goldfly]

I believe the early slave ships came from England and were largely manned by Brits. A lot of people got rich off the slave trade.

Anybody watching The Book of Negroes?

didn't England abolish slavery and make the slave trade illegal like 40 years before the Civil War even happened?

[Runnin]

didn't England abolish slavery and make the slave trade illegal like 40 years before the Civil War even happened?

That's why I said "early". The point was that England deserves blame as well, as do African warlords who gladly participated for guns to rid themselves of enemies.

[50PoundHead]

didn't England abolish slavery and make the slave trade illegal like 40 years before the Civil War even happened?

The Dutch were involved from pretty much the beginning of the slave trade and kept on after the English left the business.