Phenia wrote:Maurepas wrote:Vervaria wrote:Bryn Shander wrote:Vervaria wrote:Derscon wrote:So?
Basically, what I'm getting is that "People can have self-determination, unless I don't like their opinions." Cool story bro.
Slavery was the straw that broke the camel's back, yes, and the direct cause of secession. However, it is intensely intellectually dishonest to lay everything on the backs of "They just want to whip them negro folk." Did the states secede because of slavery? Yes. Was the War of Northern Aggression fought because of slavery? Not by a long shot.
Funny, I seem to recall reading something about the South firing on Federal property.....
Funny, I seem to recall Yankee troops squatting on Confederate property.
Fort Sumter was Federal, not state property.
And irrelevant, it was in South Carolina, when it seceded, the Federal Government no longer had any authority over it...Anymore than Britain owned its forts in the United States after we declared Independence...
The authority of the USA doesn't just magically evaporate because a bunch of slave-owning yokels decide to take their toys and go home.
It is unreasonable in the extreme to expect a military base held by the US government to leave immediately the moment the local anti-USA crowd decides to call their rebellious treason a "confederacy."
And furthermore it is nothing but an act of war to then fire on that fort. But even IF as you say that Fort Sumter magically transferred authority and ownership to the Confederacy, then pray tell, why was the Confederacy attacking its own fort? Oh, right- just attacking the troops there. Golly, it's almost like they wanted to start a war or something!
The Confederacy fanboyism here is nauseating..
For the same reasons the United States had to take forts from Britain, but, the fact that you think that it was just a bunch of "slave owning yokels" prettymuch makes your position clear...
The self-righteous Union fanboyism here is nauseating...