Quote:
Originally posted by Seahawk
The range and scope of the Civil War escapes most.
|
+1
First of all, there never was a civil war in the USA. By definition, a civil war is where two or more factions are fighting for control of the same country. Technically, once the states succeeded they became entities separate from the united states - indeed, a separate nation. The war was therefore not a
civil war but a war for the union to exercise a claim of ownership of the southern states, and to prevent their sovereignty as an independent nation. This is why the war is, perhaps more appropriately, known by many as the War of Northern Aggression.
But some will say I'm just arguing semantics.
It can also be argued that of prime importance to the union was a desire to not lose a very significant geographical part of the USA - a part which contributed a very large percentage of the US GDP in the form of agricultural products.
But isn't every war about money and power?
High school history class doesn't even come close to teaching the depth of the problems that brought on secession, or the reasons for having a war... but unfortunately that is the limit of most peoples knowledge on the subject.
And of course you have the groups who have boiled the whole war down to an issue of slavery....
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally posted by nota
...the fact is the CSA fired the first shot to start the mess...
|
Which "first shot"? Some consider the first shot to be the firing upon Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861, while others know that the first shot was fired at a supply ship off Morris Island on January 10, 1861. We were justified, in as much as any country would be justified in firing upon an enemy position which threatens her borders. Further, major Anderson had been given terms and opportunity for surrender and abandonment of Fort Sumter. He failed to comply.