Scourge of War Boards

"Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable and most sacred right - a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so many of the territory as they inhabit."



Abraham Lincoln
January 12, 1848.


Seems old "Honest Abe", might not have been that honest after all. There are plenty of examples of the "great emancipator" flip-flopping on his views. Guess it was just another case of say whatever it takes to get elected, and then do the bidding of those who control the puppet strings.

Even if "screw you, we're leaving" was the South's point of view.....refer to Mr. Licoln's quote I've already posted above. Seems to me, according to said quote, that was his point of view too.....until greedy Northern business owners started telling him what he would say and think.

"Any people, anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable and most sacred right - a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so many of the territory as they inhabit."



Abraham Lincoln
January 12, 1848.


Seems old "Honest Abe", might not have been that honest after all. There are plenty of examples of the "great emancipator" flip-flopping on his views. Guess it was just another case of say whatever it takes to get elected, and then do the bidding of those who control the puppet strings.

Even if "screw you, we're leaving" was the South's point of view.....refer to Mr. Licoln's quote I've already posted above. Seems to me, according to said quote, that was his point of view too.....until greedy Northern business owners started telling him what he would say and think.

You seem to have missed the entire point of this though. He did say they had a right to rise up and SHAKE OFF the existing government, but that government also has the right to resist that. Lincoln as President had a duty to resist that with all the force he could muster. Those that oppose the government may Revolututionize as Lincoln says here, but they must defeat the government to have a Successful Revolution, just saying your leaving isn't enough, you must also win the revolution. The South tried it and LOST. I just love it when Southern Revisionists try to use things like this to justify their point of view and also use them to villify their opposition.

I guess it is that simple, if you prescribe to the theory of "might makes right" as you suggest....of course that line of thinking absolves from guilt men like.... Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein and....Abraham Lincoln.

I guess it is that simple, if you prescribe to the theory of "might makes right" as you suggest....of course that line of thinking absolves from guilt men like.... Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein and....Abraham Lincoln.

As soon as the Godwin Law is invoked, I lost all patience with a debate. With thousands of years of history, it seems like an argument always ends up at Hitler. No thank you.

just a simple example of the "might makes right" theory AG. I didn't mention only him alone...and I could list many more examples...those 3 are just the ones more familiar to everyone. Might DOES NOT make right...

And I couldn't care less about Mike Godwins "LAW".

just a simple example of the "might makes right" theory AG. I didn't mention only him alone...and I could list many more examples...those 3 are just the ones more familiar to everyone. Might DOES NOT make right...

And I couldn't care less about Mike Godwins "LAW".

Well, if you're going to indict Lincoln, you may as well indict every president that has ever gone to war. With the exception of FDR and the reaction to Pearl Harbor (and, to bring it back to the topic at the hand, Lincoln in reaction to Fort Sumter), every war this nation has been in has been started because "Well, we have these really big guns, might as well use them." Polk in Mexico, McKinley in Cuba, Truman in Korea, the mess of Vietnam, the blatant militarism of Grenada and Panama, etc, etc, on and on.

"Well, we have these really big guns, might as well use them." Polk in Mexico, McKinley in Cuba, Truman in Korea, the mess of Vietnam, the blatant militarism of Grenada and Panama, etc, etc, on and on.

I'd be inclined to agree with you absolutely on that point.

There is no doubt that Lincoln started the war. Did he intend to? Certainly not. Lincoln wanted to keep the Union together. He made some mistakes in judgement which brought the war to fruition. Virginia and North Carolina both originally voted 2 to 1 against secession. They wished to be neutral. Lincoln thought such was not possible. The above two states seceded only after the Yankees invaded their lands in an overt act of war. Lincoln should have allowed them to be neutral. The war would have been over quickly as these two states provided 40% of Confederate troops.

General Sherman addressed his troops as they moved across the border between the two Carolinas. He told his men not to pilledge but to leave things alone. North Carolina had been drawn into the war and should be spared the destruction that other states had suffered.

Lincoln was not against slavery. He planned to immediately re-instate the Confederate States. In doing so, there would not have been enough states to affirm the 13th amendment. Slavery in the border states would have continued until later, but in only a few years.

Why did Lincoln issue the Emancipation Proclamation? Was it to free slaves? No, the intent was to disable the Confederate War machine that was powered by slave labor. As slaves began to desert their owners, there were fewer workers. As such it was successful.

Burymeonthefield

Short Answer: Maybe

Long Answer: Yes and No