Civil War

[George Anderson]

Originally Posted by Saxon

It was not a Civil War.It was a War Between the States.

Absolutely correct!!! We call it the War for Southern Independence.

[LU1900]

Originally Posted by George Anderson

Absolutely correct!!! We call it the War for Southern Independence.

Sorry about my title
Hope no offence for any one

[ithacaartist]

Originally Posted by George Anderson

Absolutely correct!!! We call it the War for Southern Independence.

From the standpoint of The United States of America, it was an armed rebellion. I guess it's a matter of perspective. Some jibber-jabber about "States' rights," but the seceded states only cared about one "right," which was the ability to legally own other human beings as property. Understandable, perhaps, since the cheap labor was the cornerstone of their economy at the time. Let's just be glad that our society is more moral than that now.

Originally Posted by LU1900

Sorry about my title
Hope no offence for any one

No need for an apology, Patrice. When a nation is divided into factions that kill each other over who's going to control its destiny, that's the essence of a civil war. That the two factions occupied separate, relatively well-defined geographic areas is moot.

[Pistol]

"From the standpoint of The United States of America, it was an armed rebellion. I guess it's a matter of perspective. Some jibber-jabber about "States' rights," but the seceded states only cared about one "right," which was the ability to legally own other human beings as property. Understandable, perhaps, since the cheap labor was the cornerstone of their economy at the time. Let's just be glad that our society is more moral than that now."

Some would object that they only cared about ONE "right". And I'm not so sure our current society is any more moral today. Not to get political, but we have a Gov. from VA that wore black face and played dress up in a white sheet. He also believes in infantacide. Yet the "woke" and "moral" faction of this country have no objections to that depravity. Even Jefferson Davis would know that is immoral.

No doubt that no matter what you call it, Civil War, War of Rebellion, War of Northern Agression, etc., it was indeed a bloody and costly one. The bloodiest single–day battle in American history was the Battle of Antietam when 3,654 Union and Confederate soldiers were killed on September 17, 1862.

And violence often carried over even after the war. One of my ancestors in TN was a Major for the Union. He had to testify in a trial in Knoxville regarding the murder of a man that was beaten and set on fire after the war. The four men that killed him were confederates and possibly killed him over something he did while they were gone serving.

I had another ancestor in NC that was a confederate home guard killed on the last day of the war. Talk about luck.

My 3rd great grandfather had an older brother that was in the Confederacy, and two younger brothers in the Union army. They said it caused tension within the family............a war that at times truely pitted brother against brother. Hopefully, our country will never go through that hell again.

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by ithacaartist

From the standpoint of The United States of America, it was an armed rebellion. I guess it's a matter of perspective. Some jibber-jabber about "States' rights," but the seceded states only cared about one "right," which was the ability to legally own other human beings as property. Understandable, perhaps, since the cheap labor was the cornerstone of their economy at the time. Let's just be glad that our society is more moral than that now.



No need for an apology, Patrice. When a nation is divided into factions that kill each other over who's going to control its destiny, that's the essence of a civil war. That the two factions occupied separate, relatively well-defined geographic areas is moot.

I cannot agree with all you wrote, you assume too much; and hindsight is always 20/20.

This one of those areas that probably should fall under the
"no political discussion" subject ban of this forum.

Such discussion serves only to dredge up old animosities and differences of opinion.

JMHO.