PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.

You also said: "Brian Devon wrote:
******
The civics lesson, known as the civil war, began in 1861...that's 153 years ago. It looks like some of you goobers are begging for an up to date remedial version.
Suit yourself..."


What is remedial about correcting your error?

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

I don't think anyone is re-fighting the Civil War. I think many people are trying to put the history in perspective. Yes, the North won. Did they win morally? Maybe, maybe not. No matter in that it is over. However, there are people in this country in high places who might like to see another Civil War - I wouldn't argue that possibility. And there are some in our government who will, if allowed, start one. Mark my words.

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

It is unlikely that any State will secede.The civil war was tragic and I doubt a war would break out if a State were to break away. The people of that State would suddenly be faced with a problem regarding their citizenship. There would be an exodus of people leaving to stay American citizens. Those who chose to stay would certainly endure hardship.As another poster put it There would be banking and currency problems along with a need for educational services a postal service, passports and so on. A big hassle not hardly worth it

Hartbreaker

Typical response of irrational people. Please explain where I said any of that.

The South started the war and thus began the battering. I suggested the South explain their legal case for secession rather than attacking the North unprovoked. You want to get battered by someone, go attack him. You want to avoid a battering, try talking first. Violence should be the last resort, not the first one. That is my take.

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

====================================

Your statement is typical of the propaganda written by "historians" from the winning side, parroted by the news media, Hollywood, and taught as fact by the government schools. It's sad trhat you are sincere in what you said, because you are repeating the lies and propaganda you have been taught and brainwashed with for your entire life..

I posted some facts gained by a lot of years of study and research. I will repeat it here..


The war was about money.

The feds collected a 23% import tax on the southern seaports, but not on the northern ports. Because the south exported cotton and other crops to Europe and bought machinery, especially ag equipment, the ships would be carrying revenue cargo both directions. This caused many Europran ships to bypass northern ports because there was not a market for European goods and no export cargo from northern ports. The federal government collected 75% of its total revenue from the south and spent 90% in the north. Congress passed the Morrill Tariff which increased the tax to 43%. That is when the southern states, led by South Carolina, began to secede.

When asked by Secretary of State Seward why not let the south go in peace, Lincoln's reply was "Then I would have no money to run the government".

Slavery was not the cause of the war. There were abolutionists in the north and in the south, but they were not the cause of the war. They were merely a small number of the population..

When the war was going badly for the north and the citizens were calling for an end, England was considering entering the war on the side of the Confederacy because the U.S. was blockading southern ports and preventing the brits from trading with the Confederate States.

Britain had recently outlawed slavery there and Lincoln, being aware of that issued his phoney Emanciipation Proclaimation that did not free one single slave anywhere in the world. It specifically limited itself to areas of the south where the north had no control and exempted itself from all areas controlled by the north, whether in the north or douth.. It was a propaganda move aimed at getting sympathy from the Brits. It's a simple matter to look up and read Lincoln's first inaugration speech and his Emancipation Proclaimation. He said that he had no intention of interferring wirh slavery.

Slavery was ended in December 1865, about eight months after the end of the war. That's when the slave states of Delaware, Maryland, and Kentucky freed their slaves. Those states as well as U.S. Grant owned and kept slaves all the way through the war and until forced to free them by the 13th amendment eight months after the war's end. Grant said that if he thought the war was about slavery he would have "offered his sword to the other side".

The war killed about 600,000 people and bestowed rape, murder, looting, burning, and pillaging on several southern states.

If the war had been to end slavery, all that could have been avoided simply by outlawing slavery, instead of invading the Confederacy, a nation that only desired to be left alone ro go its own way in peace. But Lincoln conspired to try to make the south look like the agressor by planning an operation at Fort Simter. The USA and the CSA had negotiated the transfer of the military assets of the southern ports to the CSA, making payment to the USA for them. Negotiations were underway for the departure of the U.S. forces from Sumter and Lincoln promised not to try to teinforce the fort(which was actually not a fort, but a customs collection station). He sent ships carrying forces into the harbor which resulted in a few shots being fired at the fort. No one was killed, but Lincoln accomplished his purpose, claiming that the Confederacy had attacked a U.S. military reservation. which was immediately echoed by the day's news media. The naval officer who had led the theatrical incursion into Charleston harbor was promoted and given a medal by Lincoln.

As another poster noted, history is written by the winners of wars. And I might add that the government schools teach only the propaganda written by the winners.

I don't want to secede. I don't want to refight the war. I don't deny that the Confederacy lost the war.

I only wish the truth was told instead of the propaganda that has been washed into the brains of so many.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

This goes to show that there is more to life than what meets the eyes.

We need to look deeper into the things going on today if we are to understand what truly is going on.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for explaining this again, hprinze. I wasn't going to re-state all of it again. I am quite weary of the mentally blind and the terminally ignorant. Thanks again.

PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Hartbreaker

None of that changes the fact that the South attacked first leaving the North a very open chance to force their will on the South through conquest. You are simply talking politics. I am talking the results of actions taken. They may influence each other but the politics behind something does not change what happened. Lincoln was given every right to conquer the South because the South fired the first shots. And you cannot tell me what would have happened had they not, because we do not have any parallel universes to look at where they didn't. The best you can do is suppose yet you seem to want to force those guesses on others.