KaiBear said:
cowboycwr said:
KaiBear said:
cowboycwr said:
KaiBear said:
The North had a far larger population than the South.
And because .......membership in the house is determined by....you guessed it..... population....
The North ALREADY dominated the house.
Since there were not any further slave states possible to be admitted to the union......the north would dominate the senate as well. The North would have total control of the South's economic and political future.
You can argue the number of KIA's all you wish....but the civil war remains the deadliest in US history.
When including the huge number of yankees dying in the hot/humid climate of the deep south....yellow fever, malaria, typhoid, smallpox 500,000 is approachable.
Confederates lost approx 400,000 again mostly from disease.
States had the legal right to leave the union. which is why Davis and Lee were never tried for treason.And the SC did not make that ruling until the war was already won ( shocking right....imagine if the SC had ruled in favor of the south when the north had spent so much in blood ! )
Lincoln rejected compensation out of hand....Lincoln did NOT attack South Carolina after Fort Sumter surrendered. He mobilzed 75,000 troops and invaded Virgina, Missouri, and Maryland.
Making a long post full of lies doesn't change the facts.
The Supreme Court said that Congress could not determine slave or free state. That is fact.
I asked for specific laws I. Place that prevented new slave states. You gave none because there are none.
You can dismiss the Supreme Court ruling all you want but it is fact and proves there was no legal right to secede. You cannot point to any law, ruling or anything to back up your claim. All you have is you saying that.
States did not have a legal right to leave the union. Period. Provide a law or Supreme Court ruling stating otherwise or admit you are wrong.
They not being tried for treason is not proof of anything.
Your casualties numbers are wrong. There were not that many combined deaths.
Is the US invading itself with military bases in the states?
I don't appreciate you saying I am lying. I do not refer to you
In such a manner and it's just a matter of typing. So let's keep it civil or forget it.
The SC did not rule against the right of secession until 1869.
Texas vs White I believe .
Now think about it. The war has been over for several years but Federal bayonets still control Texas and several other southern states . Reconstruction is ongoing and a nightmare for the South and an embarrassment for the North.
Hundreds of thousands of Yankees died 'preserving the Union '. Many thousands more were crippled by wounds or illnesses. Do you really think ANY Supreme Court would then turn around and pronounce the war a fraud ? That everyone's 'noble dead' had been led to the killing fields on a lie ?
Of course not. The judges would have been immediately attacked or worse.
Not sure where you got your estimates …but when deaths from illnesses are included the numbers skyrocket. As they did in every war until WW2. In any case the casualties were catastrophic…..even more so when the relatively small populations of the North and South are taken into account.
Great Britain solved their slavery issue via compensation.
The US could have easily done the same; and in the process save the lives of hundreds of thousands of people , both North and South.
The slaves would have then be emancipated and just as importantly…..educated .. in an orderly fashion without the bitterness that came with the war and Reconstruction.
But Lincoln and the North had other goals.
And they accomplished them …and the results lasted for almost a century.
When you keep typing the same thing despite facts being presented to you, ignore other facts presented to you, and ignore questions asked of you I can only assume you are lying on purpose.
For example, I have asked multiple times about the invasion question. You have ignored it because it destroys your argument.
I have also asked multiple times about the law passed that prevented new slave states from being added. You have ignored it because there is no such law and answering this question also destroys your claim.
On the casualty figures, look them up. Counting battlefield deaths and sickness/disease does not get close to the numbers you claim with the exception of a few fringe estimates that were increased to account for error.
For example most estimates put the disease totals at 400,000 max for both sides with low end at about 250,000.
On the Supreme Court case you can try to dismiss it all you want but it is a FACT that it proves secession was illegal. All you can argue on that is hypothetical and opinion "the war was over" and they couldn't make the war meaningless. But that is not fact.
Facts beat opinions every time. When someone keeps ignoring facts and keeps repeating the same opinions over and over again that to me is lying. Sorry if that offends you.
Although I am aware it is a total waste of time…as you never alter your views on anything…....will go through my library and look up the the references regarding the legal position of the
succession. Not going to happen over night as I have bigger priorities; but will do so as time allows.
Broadly speaking southern states referred to the articles in the Constitution that not only guaranteed the right of slavery….but obligated all states to return fugitive slaves. Since northern states were not returning such slaves ( representing a huge financial loss to the owners ) the southern position was the Constitution, as a contract among , sovereign states had been repeatedly violated. And as with any other contract….failure to honor the terms of that contract permitted the termination of the contract by those same sovereign states.
Of course this will not satisfy you….. however will enjoy re reading the applicable works.
As far as whether or not it was an invasion……common sense would dictate that hundreds of thousands of southerners were willing to fight and die to protect their homes from the yankee hoard. This wasn't a football contest ….or some social phenomenon; rather it was a natural response to a huge, physical and financial threat.
Keep in mind Virginia , Tennessee and North Carolina only left the Union AFTER Lincoln had called for the mobilization of 75,000 men. Obviously the people in these states were responding to the threat of invasion.
Since you persist with the insults…..can only wonder if such an attitude contributes to your dramatic business and financial success.
Will continue our discussion when I have pertinent references.
Have a nice day.
What insults? I merely pointed out why I consider you to be lying. If that is an insult to you I apologize (again as I did it previously). As for any other insults please point out what was an insult because I truly am not seeing any in my posts and want to know what you are taking as an insult.
You again avoided the question.
Is the US currently invading itself with military bases in the states?
There is NO article in the constitution that dealt with fugitive slaves. Those were laws passed by Congress.
As to a state refusing to enforce federal law… well look at current issues where states say they are not responsible to do so but rather the federal government is.
Also, one state violating federal law does not give another state a right or reason to leave the Union.
As to the financial side…. That is a myth. The south produced MORE cotton by 1870 than before the war. Within a short amount of time they were making MORE money on cotton than before the war. So the financial threat was proven wrong as doing away with slavery made more profit and production.
As to the 3 states that seceded after mobilization….. they did not secede because of a threat of invasion. There were slave states that stayed in the union. So that premise is false. Virginia did not secede because of a threat of invasion of South Carolina.
Again, seriously provide the insults (plural) as you claim. I only pointed why I consider you to be lying. Again if that offends you I will stop.
Is the US currently invading itself?
