Which ignores the fact that the South had already seized several Federal armonies and declared that they were going to refuse both compensation and access to the Federal government. Sending supplies, (food and building supplies), was a legitimate act by the government that had already spent the money to build the fort, that was hardly an act of war.
Straw man argument. There has been no claim that the South wished to invade the North. Challenging an argument that you introduced is fallacious and silly.
The statement was that the South was preparing to attack the North, which it was and which it had already begun in the seizure of forts and armories.
Yeah, to be entirely clear on this point, their intent was to attack the United States, of which country they were citizens, and to take over large swaths of US territory through violent force. That’s what they did.
To be fair, though, did they really have much of a choice? As far as they were concerned, of course, the forts and armories they seized were in territory that had seceded from the US. So, if, say, South Carolina didn’t take Fort Sumter, they would have had a fort filled with troops of a country that they had just left (and which didn’t recognize their leaving) in one of their cities controlling access to one of their biggest harbors.
So I guess the question I’d have for you is, what’s South Carolina’s path to independence in 1860 that doesn’t go through seizing Fort Sumter, given the Lincoln administration’s refusal to recognize their independence.
No, see, the claim was that the Union were the aggressors. If South Carolina wanted independence, and was willing to go to war over it, own it.
Or, (and this is a straw man, just addressing your hypothetical), they could petition. If both the US and South Carolina agreed that South Carolina could leave the union, so be it.
But ‘the north was an invading army’ is horse shit. This was attempted revolution on US soil.
They’re path to independence was either (a) get a law passed by Congress to allow them to secede (and perhaps requiring a veto override), (b) get a Constitutional Amendment passed to allow them to secede or (c) go to court and try to get a favorable ruling allowing for secession.
None of those were likely to succeed, but those were the options available to them.
War. Once one chooses to commit treason, one is generally locked into a path of violence. That, however, does nothing to make an argument about “Northern aggression.” Given the decision to rend the nation apart over political differences, (a consideration for which the South heartily condemned the states meeting at the Hartford Convention who opposed Mr. Madison’s War and were hoping to withdraw from that war by withdrawing from the union), war would appear to have been inevitable. However, claiming that the war was the result of actions initiated by the Northern states, (or the Federal president who had not yet been inaugurated), makes no sense.
LOL. It took me until now to realize that the Confederate Battle Flag has not been flying over the S.C. Capitol dome for the last 150 years but was installed in 1962 in response to the civil rights movement and school desegregation.
Think of it this way, BC. Imagine that your body is the U.S. of A. Now you’re having some bowel problems, so you stick your hand up your own ass to pull out some shit and flush it away. The turds put up quite a stink, insisting that you are invading their territory, but really it is your body, the body politic, corpus legum et dominator territorio, and the turds just reside there in your body, so you are not invading when you stick your hand up your ass.
I won’t argue that if the Confederacy hadn’t declared war, the United States wouldn’t have eventually done so. But it’s a moot argument. The Confederacy did declare war against the United States.
More irritation than bitterness, irritation that this delusional interpretation of the civil war that white washes the slavery issue as the driving factor has STILL not been slapped out of the minds of these fools.
People actually take PRIDE in that flag? PRIDE in their ancestors fighting to succeed over slavery? Pride? They ought to feel embarrassed and ashamed of their forefathers involvement if they feel anything at all. How many decades of failed broken logic and understanding can persist in the south? How stupid can those people be? You would think there would be some limits and then you see comments in forums where throngs of these paint sniffers refuse to concede the primacy of slavery, the wrongness of the southern cause. It feels almost like you are talking to some deranged isis member so confused about reality as it is vs how they interpret it to be.
This would be a better analogy if the Confederacy was a Kingdom of the United States colony 3000 miles across the ocean being unfairly exploited for its resources and oppressed by a half-mad monarch.
Yeah, but after 150 years I think its safe to say were united militarily as a country. At the very least, surely after 150 years, the South has produced enough non-Civil war leaders to names these bases after, if that is what this is all about.
Well, the most important part of that is that the Founding Fathers WON, and the Confederate traitors DIDN’T. The white flag of surrender is the only Confederate flag that actually matters.
Just to be absolutely crystal clear: The Civil War was not the South vs. the North. The Civil War was the South vs. the United States. The South absolutely did intend to invade the United States at the start of secession, because they already had: They had invaded the portions of the United States known as Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, etc. This invasion was just as unacceptable to the United States as an invasion of Maryland or Pennsylvania would have been.
The South has spent 150 years picking at the scab. And to quote Sparky Sweets, PhD, from his commentary on To Kill a Mockingbird “Ain’t no about of cocoa butter going to make that shit go away.”
Absolutely not. The United States engaged in war, but would never have formally declared war; to do so would be to recognize that the CSA was a legitimate nation-state.