Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2011 18:19:52 GMT -5
From Wikipedia: "[Civil war] Hostilities began on April 12, 1861, when Confederate forces attacked a U.S. military installation at Fort Sumter in South Carolina."
So on the 12th, happy 150th anniversary. (?)
|
|
|
|
Post by ssmynkint on Apr 1, 2011 20:27:41 GMT -5
What, me worry?
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin Thyme on Apr 2, 2011 9:55:43 GMT -5
From Wikipedia: "[Civil war] Hostilities began on April 12, 1861, when Confederate forces attacked a U.S. military installation at Fort Sumter in South Carolina." South Carolina seceded from the United States on 20-Dec-1860. It looks to me like SC was not attacking a US military installation but instead was repelling a foreign occupier. And since South Carolina was not a part of the United States during those hostilities it does not meet the definition of a "civil war." This was a war between two foreign countries with the North being the aggressor. Whether or not SC was righteous in their secession or not let us use proper terminology for what was going on instead of the revisionist terminology we have been fed for the last fifteen decades. |
|
printemps
Full Forumite
And a bag of chips.
Posts: 1,545 
|
Post by printemps on Apr 2, 2011 10:34:25 GMT -5
You see the Constitution as essentially a contract between sovereign states—with the contracting parties retaining the inherent authority to withdraw from the agreement? The final version of the Constitution never actually refers to the states as "sovereign." "Our States have neither more, nor less power, than that reserved to them, in the Union, by the Constitution—no one of them ever having been a State out of the Union. The original ones passed into the Union even before they cast off their British colonial dependence; and the new ones each came into the Union directly from a condition of dependence, excepting Texas. And even Texas, in its temporary independence, was never designated a State." - Abraham Lincoln |
|
|
|
Post by daworm on Apr 2, 2011 11:16:56 GMT -5
Disregarding the fact that most of them joined the union only after being assured that they could leave it at any time.
|
|
printemps
Full Forumite
And a bag of chips.
Posts: 1,545
|
Post by printemps on Apr 2, 2011 12:24:21 GMT -5
"Assured" by whom or what?
Ft. Sumter was an American base operated by the U.S. Government. Vermonters and Pennsylvanians, et.al., paid for its upkeep. They likely staffed it, as well. South Carolina, by seceding, held no more claim to the fort and its possessions than a foreign government would to our embassy or military base simply because it disagreed with current Washington policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by ssmynkint on Apr 2, 2011 12:43:02 GMT -5
What is revisionist is claiming that the states had a constitutional right to secede . No. Rebellious states brought back under control by the national government. To have had a right to secede, the South would have had to be the victor, thus being able to rewrite history and fact.
|
|
