The War Between the States OR The War of Aggression, whichever you like.

This is a topic for civily discussing the -Civil War- War of Aggression! Anything about it, so long as it's discussed in a kind and godly manner.

Thanks Dani, this might be a good topic.

This is a great discussion to have. Thanks, Dani. :)
I read some of the comments on the similar discussion yesterday, and here's what I have to say. I hope it makes sense…

1. The South is, both now and at the time of the Civil War, a place full of sinners in need of a Savior, just like the North. Please let's not be angry with each other over a war that was fought by our ancestors. Enough relationships were ruined then.

2. Some of you are probably wondering why people keep saying that the War wasn't about slavery. Who says, right? Abraham Lincoln, five months before the Emancipation Proclamation: "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slaverey, and the colored race, I do because it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union." From a letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862 (quoted in one of my school books, emphasis not mine).

3. Slavery in its essence is not unbiblical. Kiddnapping and racism are. Look it up. (Disclaimer: I do think that slavery, as it was in the antebellum South (and North) was an unchristian practice.)

A good book on this subject is Black and Tan by Douglas Wilson. (People say awful things about him because of it, but I don't see why. He simply confesses the Bible's truth and applicability to all of life. He isnt' racist. At all.)

:)

Much better!
Here's something I've been thinking about a lot recently:
What if … France and Britain had recognized the CSA? These two nations were fairly supportive of the Confederacy, (France more than Britain, I think), and there were several times when if something had gone better, they likely would have both given their recognition. For instance, if the South had won decisively at Antietam.
While France and England were supportive of the CSA, Russia was more or less supportive of the USA, and also an enemy of France and Britain. If France and Britain had given the Confederacy their recognition, and begun supporting it, would Russia have declared war on these two countries? And once we have three European nations on the field, would the whole thing have exploded into World War Zero?
Anyway, I think that's fun to think about. I haven't done a whole lot of research on the period relations between European nations, but they always seemed to have something to fight about, so I wouldn't be too surprised…

I still only like the ones from the south because they have rebel flags, and so do us rednecks!

I still only like the ones from the south because they have rebel flags, and so do us rednecks!

But the civilized world only recognizes the glorious Stars and Bars! (Actually, that's not true…)

We're sitting down to watch Gettysburg, and Christa says, "Bad confederates!" Me: glowering "What did you say?"

There were bad guys and good guys on both sides; so it depends on to whom she was referring. ;)

Yup, true. I like people on both sides, but simply picking a side, I'm obviously a Confederate sympathizer. :)

Much better! Here's something I've been thinking about a lot recently: What if ... France and Britain had recognized the CSA? These two nations were fairly supportive of the Confederacy, (France more than Britain, I think), and there were several times when if something had gone better, they likely would have both given their recognition. For instance, if the South had won decisively at Antietam. While France and England were supportive of the CSA, Russia was more or less supportive of the USA, and _also_ an enemy of France and Britain. If France and Britain had given the Confederacy their recognition, and begun supporting it, would Russia have declared war on these two countries? And once we have three European nations on the field, would the whole thing have exploded into World War Zero? Anyway, I think that's fun to think about. I haven't done a whole lot of research on the period relations between European nations, but they always seemed to have something to fight about, so I wouldn't be too surprised...

Yeah… Interesting thought. I think, and I've heard, that the only thing keeping Britain from allying with the CSA was the slavery issue, which in turn makes me wonder if perhaps that is why the North started putting emphasis on slavery, especially as the war progressed.

I also wonder what would have happened if the CSA had won Gettysburg. Would they have eventually been defeated, or would that victory have guaranteed that they would win the war?

Wars are expensive. I doubt Britain would have been in for the long hull.

I don't know… Britain seems to fight a lot, anyways. They just think about it for a long time before they actually enter it. ^It made me so mad to read about how long they delayed before entering WW2…^

Well, there is good reason to believe that the emancipation proclamation was written with a major goal of keeping Britain out of the war.
Interesting, but we never know what would have been. God is in control.

On that note, I just finished reading The Killer Angels (the basis of the movie Gettysburg). Will you believe it, the South lost again? It happens in every Civil war book.
Just kidding….but really, the second to the last chapter made me feel like they might actually win in the end.

I don't know... Britain seems to fight a lot, anyways. They just think about it for a long time before they actually enter it. ^It made me so mad to read about how long they delayed before entering WW2...^

They didn't delay nearly as long as the Americans, if I remember correctly.

I don't know... Britain seems to fight a lot, anyways. They just think about it for a long time before they actually enter it. ^It made me so mad to read about how long they delayed before entering WW2...^

They didn't delay nearly as long as the Americans, if I remember correctly.

Oooh… burn lol! Good point. xD

I don't know... Britain seems to fight a lot, anyways. They just think about it for a long time before they actually enter it. ^It made me so mad to read about how long they delayed before entering WW2...^

For what? their island. ya. other people? not so much.
and the USA was not quite the threat Hitler was. (understatement maybe)

I don't know... Britain seems to fight a lot, anyways. They just think about it for a long time before they actually enter it. ^It made me so mad to read about how long they delayed before entering WW2...^

They didn't delay nearly as long as the Americans, if I remember correctly.

They sat there right across the channel, though, and watched Hitler take over several countries and violate their treaty for several years before they did anything about it. The U.S. didn't have quite as much to be concerned about from it as Britain.

That said, I'm pretty disgusted with America, too, for delaying their entry to the war for so long.

Are you talking about the World Wars?! If so. Um, like, would you like me to open up a topic on those wars, since you opened one up on the Civil War? ^I might disagree with you on the last sentence. No offense.^

^Yeah, I was talking about the World Wars… shamed face^

Why did you put that face? Anyways. If that's your opinion that you hold about the WWs we should definitely talk at nationals. =)

Are you talking about the World Wars?! If so. Um, like, would you like me to open up a topic on those wars, since you opened one up on the Civil War? ^I might disagree with you on the last sentence. No offense.^

Yeah, you should open one up! It's cool talking about the WW's.

I was ashamed because I was off topic.

Wait… if what is my opinion of the World Wars?

That America entered the wars too late or, later than they should have. Because I don't think we should have entered the War.

Wait…even after we were attacked and other countries declared war on us?

Well. That's kinda why I wanted the topic opened. So I could explain my position on it. But, I think that we had a big part on why we had war declared on us, and why we were attacked in the first place.

But, sadly, because of BB studying and nationals getting so close, I probably can't go too much more in-depth on my thoughts on the topic until after I get home. Sorryyyyyy!

I read somewhere else that you are able to make it to nationals - looking forward to seeing you there!!

Oh, that is absolutely fine. WWII is just an interesting topic to discuss (as is the Civil War), and I wanted to make sure that I was not misunderstanding you. :)

Yup! I hope to be able to make it there Thursday night. It will be nice seeing you too. :)

Yes, it is a fascinating topic to study and discuss. I've really enjoyed this past year of learning a lot more about it. I started this summer of making a long time-line of it, but got interrupted with BB. But I hope to finish it after November along with all the reports that I have in my mind. ;)

Cooool. XD

BETHANY come join me on SC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BETHANY come join me on SC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lol! Someone is wanted badly… xD xD

The most epic battle between states is the one Steve from MI and I have all the time here on Memverse.

The most epic battle between states is the one Steve from MI and I have all the time here on Memverse.

THIS IS SO TRUE. xD xD

The most epic battle between states is the one Steve from MI and I have all the time here on Memverse.

THIS IS SO TRUE. xD xD

lol. xD

Jimmy - you're going to be there?!?!? So, I'll get to meet you too? Cool! ;)

@Dani, I think I've got the most unpopular view on the -Civil War- War of Northern Agression in North Dakota, or anywhere around here, for that matter! It'll be interesting to talk about it at Nats, if you don't mind. :P :D ^(Or should I say, if nobody else minds too much!!!)^

Yup! It will great to meet you too!

@Bethany After nationals would you mind putting you opinion regarding WW2 on here?

Nope! But, would you mind if I put it under the WW2 topic, since this is about the Civil War? ;)

Of course not, thanks! :)

I don't mind! But you'll have to come talk to me…. It takes a whole lot of willpower for me to go talk to most people. x)

Gettysburg is the saddest event in U.S. history.

It is incredibly sad, but there was even more bloodshed at Antietam. Or at Normandy, for that matter. It depends on how you look at it.

If the Union lost though, the Confederates might have taken over the U.S.

Mmhmm…

Yeah, but Gettysburg, well, I guess…. I don't know how to put it into words…. ^I do this a lot….^

Why do you say that?

And even then, the battle of Stalingrad was bigger - most places say that 1,250,000 - 1,798,000 were killed in that battle.

cries

It's easy to put figures on things like this, but we gotta remember that each of these people had family too. That's over 1 million people who died, where a family was hurt by it.

And now. I must stop. Since this is a Civil War topic. Not WW2.

Here's the topic, Christian.

Awesome! Thank you! =D

Basically, the little I know about the civil war and Lincoln, was that it was about the states rights. And that ends what I know about Lincoln. Which isn't much. Which is why I shouldn't be on this thread, and only the WW2 one. ;)

But, it is supper time, shall I might return to the other one later.

All I've heard is that there's a lot about Lincoln that's kept under wraps. A friend recommended a book about the subject to me a while back, and I wish I would have remembered what it was… Apparently there's some pretty incriminating stuff. I mean, the fact that the war was really about the Union and not about slavery is only the tip of the iceberg, I guess.

@Caleb: The friend I'm talking about is Kenan, so you actually might know the book I'm talking about. Has he ever talked to you about the subject?