Originally Posted by dassa
Originally Posted by johnn
Originally Posted by dassa
Originally Posted by johnn
Originally Posted by dassa
Originally Posted by Jim_Conrad
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by dassa
Say what you want about Lincoln. If not for his foresight there would be no "United States" as we know it today.
Are you happy with the United States as we know it today?
You have no idea what divided states would actually be like.
You are right, we don't know.

It couldn't be worse than what we became. At least we wouldn't be able to go all over the world getting involved in war.

Maybe we wouldn't be financially insolvent.

Maybe we would be 3 or 4 different countries getting along well enough but not strong enough to threaten peace all over the globe.

No.


You would have been invaded and would not be independent.
What country would have been strong enough to invade either the north of the south?

Great Britain? Not likely. They had just struggled through the crimean war, and a few decades later struggled to defeat the boers?

France? Okay.

Germany? And leave themselves open to invasion from their European enemies?

Russia? See crimean war.

Mexico? Their biggest holiday is the day they beat the French.

France from the north, Spain from the south, injuns everywhere.

This country United for strength, been pretty successful for the last several hundred years.

Imagine a mix of countries, vassal states, border crossings, different laws. Different rights.
You can own a gun in Virginia, but not west Virginia.

If they had just left religion out of it, we would all be better off
You must be kidding. Spain, in 1861, invading anyone?

But let's see if I got your point right. The South obviously was willing to take its chances going it alone against European invasion. But the north, to protect the south from being invaded and losing their independence, invaded them and took away their independence?

Is that right?

I'm glad your paying attention as that ship had sailed!

I doubt the south was concerned with a European invasion, they just wanted to keep their slaves.

To say the North was protecting the south is a typical democrats way of twisting and reshaping words to fit ones narrative.
You said "this country United for strength". That's not accurate. The South dis united but was forced back into the union. If the south wasn't worried about European invasion, that only leaves the north to worry about it.

I'm not twisting anything you said. You just seem to be having trouble keeping your own thoughts straight.

Show me were I said the country united for strength, I said Lincoln had the foresight to keep the nation whole.

What is "south dis" ...?
The south wasn't worried because the war of independence was over, and they probaly felt pretty secure in being part of a "nation".

We are both guessing here, who knows what hey were thinking. Bottom line they wanted to be separated from the union and attacked the union, then proceeded to lose, can we call this sour grapes, Jonny Reb....?

For those without thumbs, it's s Garden fookin Island, not Hawaii