Ignoring the issue of slavery, who would you have wanted to win the civil war?

[SuperSneak]

Union...I wouldn't want my ancestors to lose, like the crackers did, or I wouldn't be here now.
Simple.

[MrFun]

All of David Floyd's arguments are pointless anyway, for two reasons, as I have pointed out:

1) The federal government did not abuse the Constitution.

2) No sane government provides a legal means of its own destruction. The Declaration of Independence only provides one reason to destroy a union of a government -- when number one, stated above, occurs.


But since that did not happen, secession had no legitimacy.

[Lincoln]

Even though I am from Tennessee I would support the Union regardless of the issue of slavery. Lincoln's primary focus was the preservation of the union and I think it is usually a good thing if people can learn to get along despite our differences. His first inaugural address pretty much spells out the issue as it would have stood even without the issue of slavery. Two nations with a border of over 2,000 miles between them would have to learn to get along eventually regardless.

[MrFun]

You mean like with the border between Canada and United States??

[Lincoln]

Well Lincoln was talking about how the South and the North would never be able to ignore each other regardless of division. He thought that we may as well stay together and work things out. Of course we did work things out with Canada anyway so maybe it wouldn't have been too bad.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by MrFun
All of David Floyd's arguments are pointless anyway, for two reasons, as I have pointed out:

1) The federal government did not abuse the Constitution.

2) No sane government provides a legal means of its own destruction. The Declaration of Independence only provides one reason to destroy a union of a government -- when number one, stated above, occurs.


But since that did not happen, secession had no legitimacy.

But nobody here has been arguing that.

[Frankychan]

The Yanks.

Simply put, the Confederates were secessionists and tried to destroy the country by their actions.

Luckily the North brought them back into the fold.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


But nobody here has been arguing that.

Ever heard of the "calm before the storm" or the "eye of the storm?"


stay tuned




But seriously, many Southerners who worship the Confederate flag today DO claim that the federal government violated the Constitution because of their power over the territories.

Well, the Northwest Ordinance gave the Congress jurisdiction over the territories.

[Kirnwaffen]

I would have supported the Union for the simple reason of stability. Had the south won, we would have seen an additional competing power on the continent, opening the door for future territorial skirmishes. We also would have likely seen an attempt at control from Europe, which definitely could have been bad.

[SlowwHand]

The South, as a general statement, didn't own slaves.
That noted, it's for the best that the Union won; even though I have an ancestor who spent 2 years as a P.O.W. at Rock Island, Illinois.
God Bless America.

[MrFun]

Slowwhand --- most of us already know that the minority of white and mulatto Southerners owned about 4 million blacks as slaves.


BTW, I live right across the river from Rock Island.

[SlowwHand]

Just want to keep the record straight.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
The South, as a general statement, didn't own slaves.

How are you defining General?

Over a third of the South held slaves, and in the Deep South it was half.

Regardless, over 90% of Southerners owed their livelihoods and economic prosperity to the institution of slavery.

[chequita guevara]

Union

[MrFun]

We're thread jacking Cal's thread.

We're suppose to ignore the topic of slavery -- my bad.