Sumter Provocation

[B Peach]

Actually as a note you set the tone from your first posts on this board. Any who disagree you gleefully refer to as "idiots, ignorant, stupid etc." You reap what you sew and cleary you can dish it out but not take it. Some of us have thicker skin than others.

Note to you, after you apoligesied, you continued with the personal attacks rather than the content, you set then tone, i meerly followed it.

As you know it's Sumter not Sumpter.

Its both.

 

[Baggage Handler #2]

...it's Sumter not Sumpter

Its both.

No it isn't. It's Sumter. Sumpter is in Oregon - wrong coast.

 

[dvrmte]

I can't stand a monkey pile. It has been spelled both ways. I find the "Sumpter" spelling more often used by northerners.

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/00651622/

 

[B Peach]

No legal agreement. No nation recognized the CSA as a legitimate government. Without recognition, there could have been no such agreement.

Not how treaty law works, look in International Law of treaties, insurectionlist under the US Mil law have rights to enter into treaties, Indian nations were entered into treaties with by POTUS without Congres input, who had no recognoition.

What law? Cite please.

Crossing anothers terr waters is an act of war, breach of treaty stipulations not to so cross into another terr, allows force to repel they incursion.

With this statement you assert that the US was justified in assaulting Charleston, not the other way around

No ishowed you were not using logic.
No becuase SC stopped the supplies due to treaty breach. Under the Constition, treason is to make war on a state, to invade a state for any reason is treason by the constition.

Incorrect. Guantanamo Bay has been leased by the US government since around 1903. The US continues to send rent checks to Castro, who generally does not cash them. Castro claimed the original lease was not valid after his revolution. Ike said it was, and it remains observed by both parties. This is VERY similar to the situation at Sumter, except that Cuba's government is recognized by some foreign powers and therefore has a stronger claim than the CS did in 1861.

Nope Gitmo (Camp Delta was bought and payed for for by TR, the rest is on perpetaul lease. No federal post can exist on something that the Congres does not own, its in US code of law as stipulated by Congress.

Here you state that the CS was not a separate country. I grant you that it was not recognized, but in 1861, it had the potential to become one and thought of itself as one. Consequently, the US forces were their tripwire. Fire on them: get a war.

Its not who fires first, it who render actions that require the use of force.

And yet they are eerily parallel: Movement of military equipment and personnel in response to denial of rations. Stalin knew that to escalate further would bring a war down on his head. He did not want that.

Problem with anology is they seldom work, better by far to not resort to them imho. No one went into or over other Terr for instance which may well have broughta fire fight.

This is pretty clearly something you've just made up. What international law existed at the time? Please cite. Also, please explain how bread and pork are weapons which require a defense?

Not really,http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm or Halleck internation lawhttp://books.google.com/books/about/Halleck_s_international_law_or_rules_reg.html?id=HsAyAAAAIAAJ sending ships to Cuba ( god is a imperfect anologies....) was considered an act of war, the law of preemptive self defence alows force to be used to prevent greater harm from not acting, comes from D Webster in 1814 and Uk ship blew a US merchant ship up in US waters to kill its Irish insurgents from entering Canada.

Entering a state against its wishes is invasion, all states have the right to defend their soil.
Lincoln
Indiana State legislature on 12 February 1861: "What is 'invasion'? Would the marching of an army into South Carolina, without the consent of her people, and with hostile intent toward them be 'invasion'? I certainly think it would, and it would be 'coercion' also if South Carolinians were forced to submit.

Um, no. It doesn't actually work that way.

Ive seen the aquitals of that exact set of circumstance.
Lincoln
"Every man thinks he has a right to live and every government thinks it has a right to live. Every man when driven to the wall by a murderous assailant will override all laws to protect himself, and this is called the great right of self-defense. So every government, when driven to the wall by a rebellion, will trample down a constitution before it will allow itself to be destroyed. This may not be constitutional law, but it is fact."

When lincoln enacted the blockade called up milita, HC etc he commented on his actions.
Lincoln on those measures.
"These measures, whether strictly legal or not, were ventured upon under what appeared to be a popular demand and public necessity, trusting then as now that Congress would readily ratify them."

"These rebels are violating the Constitution to destroy the Union; I will violate the Constitution if necessary, to save the Union; and I suspect, Chase, that our Constitution is going to have a rough time of it before we get done with this row."

If one governemnt can use self defense as the ultimate ratio to perpetuate itself, then any and all others have the same right, or was Lincoln right here instead?, and that all must obey the letter of the law.
Lincoln
Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well-wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country, and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of '76 did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, and so to the support of the Constitution and laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor — let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his fathers, and to tear the charter of his own and children's liberty. Let reverence for the laws be breathed by every American mother to the lisping babe that prattles on her lap; let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in primers, in spelling books, and in almanacs; let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation.

You've made much of the amount of supplies, as if the quantity was cause for war. This is illogical. We appear to agree.

No the amount of supplies and amount of days, (120 being neither), is used to determine the flow of supplies in and out to answer the question of how much and when etc. I have no idea what your 120 is a refernce to, the reduction of the supplies is the fault of who, the US Governemt caused the SC to stop it, when had it continued, there was supplies for 2 more months. Congress would be back in session and lincoln could not invade at will, one of the last things it had done in 19609 was to deny to Buchanon a force bill to raise militia and toi use force to retake sumpter.

Simple arithmetic. You're entire argument revolves endlessly around an assertion that Anderson should not have been resupplied. There isn't any justification for this.

The maths is fairly starightforward, it show that there was no need to resupply as no one would starve unless relief force was sent, and supplies cut off, untill May.

The logic is there was a supply mission because Lincoln had already chosen to retake all forts before taking office, so the CS was forced into either acpting an invasion or fireing on it. Justification is to show that when lincoln said he sent Fox in it was to feed starving men, this is not the reason he sent Fox, he had already chosen to retake the Forts, its just his means of selling the war he want, like Bush in Iraq, and Johnston in Nam, history repeats itself all the time.

Um, yes. Yes I do and yes I have.

Your posts had not shown that to be the case.

 

[B Peach]

No it isn't. It's Sumter. Sumpter is in Oregon - wrong coast.

Not acording to US GOV, NYT, and national park links i provided for Sumpter.

That would not be you, all those refernces come from a time period after the supplies are cut, Wigfall speech is after the SC stopped supplies from entering and the SC had chosen to starve the garrison out rather than use force, which occurs a month after Lincoln gives the order to go, lastly your cite of cod and grits does not exist in the OR, and in any case, it means nothing on its own.


Its called both, but Sumter was more common in the era.
http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/00651622/
http://www.nytimes.com/1861/03/21/ne...airs-fort.html
http://books.google.com/books/about/...d=ZOsSAAAAYAAJ
http://www.sciway3.net/clark/civilwar/sumpter.html
http://civilwarwiki.net/wiki/Fort_Su...Correspondence

 

[wilber6150]

[QUOTE=B Peach;424813]

FORT SUMTER, S. C., April 1, 1861.

(Received A. G. O., April 4.)
Colonel L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
COLONEL: I have the honor to report that everything is still and quiet, as far as we can see, around us. The South Carolina Secretary of War has not sent the authority, asked for yesterday, to enable me to send off the discharged laborers. Having been in daily expectation, since the return of Colonel Lamon to Washington, of receiving orders to vacate this post, I have kept these men here as long as I could; but now, having nearly completed the important work of cleaning up the area, &c., I am compelled, in consequence of the small supply of provisions on hand, to discharge them. An examination of the accompanying report of the A. A. C. S. will show that the supply of provisions brought over would, had the issues been limited to my command, have lasted for a longer period than that mentioned in my letter of December 26, 1860. I have not made frequent mention of the question of our rations, because the Department was kept fully informed, from time to time, of the state of our supply. Lieutenants Talbot and Hall gave full information in reference to it when they went on, and on the 27th of January a detailed statement was sent on, from which any one in the Commissary Department could have told, knowing the number of souls in the fort, including the Engineer laborers, the exact amount on hand at any given time.*
I told Mr. Fox that if I placed the command on short allowance I could make the provisions last until after the 10th of this month; but as I have received no instructions from the Department that it was desirable I should do so, it has not been done. If the governor permits me to send off the laborers we will have rations enough to last us about one week longer.
I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ROBERT ANDERSON, Major, First Artillery, Commanding.

1st April Anderson refers to no requirement to go onto half rations, despite informing them he will exhust supplies by the 10th. When told that a resupply fleet was being sent.

Anderson replied to this news.
FORT SUMTER, S.C., April 8, 1861.
Col. L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
COLONEL: I have the honor to report that the resumption of work yesterday (Sunday) at various points on Morris Island, and the vigorous prosecution of it this morning, apparently strengthening nearly all the batteries which are under the fire of our guns, shows that they either have received some news from Washington which has put them on the qui vive or that they have received orders from Montgomery to commence operations here. I am preparing by the side of my barbette guns protection for our men from the shells, which will be almost continuously bursting over or in our work.
I had the honor to receive by yesterday's mail the letter of the honorable Secretary of War, dated April 4, and confess that what he there states surprises me very greatly, following as it does and contradicting so positively the assurance Mr. Crawford telegraphed he was authorized to make. I trust that this matter will be at once put in a correct light, as .
It is, of course, now too late for me to give any advice in reference to the proposed scheme of Captain Fox. I fear that its result cannot fail to be disastrous to all concerned. Even with his boat at our walls the loss of life (as I think I mentioned to Mr. Fox) in unloading her will more than pay for the good to be accomplished by the expedition, which keeps us, if I can maintain possession of this work, out of position, surrounded by strong works, which must be carried to make this fort of the least value to the United States Government.
We have not oil enough to keep a light in the lantern for one night. The boats will have, therefore, to rely at night entirely upon other marks. I ought to have been informed that this expedition was to come. Colonel Lamon's remark convinced me that the idea, merely hinted at to me by Captain Fox, would not be carried out. We shall strive to do our duty, though I frankly say that my heart is not in the war which I see is to be thus commenced. That God will still avert it, and cause us to resort to pacific measures to maintain our rights, is my ardent prayer.
I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ROBERT ANDERSON,
Major, First Artillery, Commanding.

There you have Anderson argueing against being resupplied. Do starving men ask not to be relived?.




Yes its in the OR, and yes its all before supplies are stopped.




Never disputed what Anderson said in that letter, just what it ment.

It just does not mean what you think it means.

Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, Tuesday, March 12, 1861
(Report on Fort Sumter)From Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, March 12, 1861The President has done me the honor to propose certain military questions, concerning FortSumter to which he desires replies."1st." To what point of time can Major Anderson maintain his position at Fort Sumter withoutfresh supplies or reinforcements?Answer. In respect to subsistence he has bread, flour, and rice for about 26 days, and salt meat(pork) for about forty eight days. Without additional supplies of provisions he may hold out someforty days without much suffering from hunger.

Thats April 26 on full rations acording to the head of the army looking at the QM reports, and very close to the maths i used to find the same. I gues the QM and Scott any myself all getting the same maths means we all cant count and you not using any maths can.

Anderson is not saying do not send Fox because he has supplies, as you keep asserting, this does not support you claim.He lists other reasons as i had previously written. An ample supply of food is not one of them. Did you actually read what the memo says or are you just throwing things up on the wall to see if anything sticks...
So by your own source they will be out of bread and flour and rice by the end of the first week of April then only salt pork...How do you get April 26 on full rations...They will be eating only salt pork after the first week of April, or do you think living on rancid pork ok? Did you happen to notice also they didn't mention anything about all the fresh beef they you keep claiming they were receiving during this time..

 

[ole]

Simple enough. Who was the fort named after? Everything else is a misspelling.

 

[B Peach]

Simple enough. Who was the fort named after? Everything else is a misspelling.

No.
http://fl-genweb.org/sumter/History.htm
http://dotcw.com/horatio-nelson-taft-243/
http://www.archive.org/details/historyfallfort00crawgoog

http://discussions.mnhs.org/collect...he-weekly-pioneer-and-democrat-april-19-1861/

 

[wilber6150]

Troll wants others to do what he refuses to do, unlike you ive done it. Dont Parrot wilbers request which i have replied to, whilst refusing 4 times to do yourself what i have now done for Wilber.

Actually you didn't provide any proof that Anderson didn't want Fox's expedition sent because he had enough supplies.. He states, I'm paraphrasing, that the expediiton will fail, that it will cause a war he doesnt have the heart for, and that he doesnt have enough oil to light up lamps to use...Nothing about having enough food...

 

[B Peach]

FORT SUMTER, S. C., April 1, 1861. [/SIZE]
(Received A. G. O., April 4.)
Colonel L. THOMAS, Adjutant-General U. S. Army:
COLONEL: I have the honor to report that everything is still and quiet, as far as we can see, around us. The South Carolina Secretary of War has not sent the authority, asked for yesterday, to enable me to send off the discharged laborers. Having been in daily expectation, since the return of Colonel Lamon to Washington, of receiving orders to vacate this post, I have kept these men here as long as I could; but now, having nearly completed the important work of cleaning up the area, &c., I am compelled, in consequence of the small supply of provisions on hand, to discharge them. An examination of the accompanying report of the A. A. C. S. will show that the supply of provisions brought over would, had the issues been limited to my command, have lasted for a longer period than that mentioned in my letter of December 26, 1860. I have not made frequent mention of the question of our rations, because the Department was kept fully informed, from time to time, of the state of our supply. Lieutenants Talbot and Hall gave full information in reference to it when they went on, and on the 27th of January a detailed statement was sent on, from which any one in the Commissary Department could have told, knowing the number of souls in the fort, including the Engineer laborers, the exact amount on hand at any given time.*
I told Mr. Fox that if I placed the command on short allowance I could make the provisions last until after the 10th of this month; but as I have received no instructions from the Department that it was desirable I should do so, it has not been done. If the governor permits me to send off the laborers we will have rations enough to last us about one week longer.
I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ROBERT ANDERSON, Major, First Artillery, Commanding.



Anderson is not saying do not send Fox because he has supplies, as you keep asserting, this does not support you claim.He lists other reasons as i had previously written. An ample supply of food is not one of them. Did you actually read what the memo says or are you just throwing things up on the wall to see if anything sticks...
So by your own source they will be out of bread and flour and rice by the end of the first week of April then only salt pork...How do you get April 26 on full rations...They will be eating only salt pork after the first week of April, or do you think living on rancid pork ok? Did you happen to notice also they didn't mention anything about all the fresh beef they you keep claiming they were receiving during this time..

What claim do you refer?.

 

[wilber6150]

No i explained the rate of consumption of supplies doubled after the 7th, and that Anderson Qm reports do not return the same numbers of days of supply as Andersons gave, nor does expected date of exhustion, take into acount suppies now allowed into the Fort from contractor.



Yawn, you make a claim on maths but dont use maths to argue against maths, Scott got to roughly the same answer as i did from the same QM reports and rations.

Your childish claim is noted, it contradicts Anderson acount, the War dept payemnet and authorising of the contartcors to deliver, and we have letters telling when they are deilvered, and we know that when they are, consumption opf stores falls by 50%, if they are not eating anything else, they were on half rations therfore, which we know they were not, get an adult argument nota childish one.

This copy of the letter was printed by the New York Herald (New York, New York) on the front page of its April 5, 1861, issue:

Reported Letter from Fort Sumter

Buffalo, April 4, 1861

The Commercial Advertiser publishes a letter this afternoon signed "Johnson McNeill," a private in the army, who enlisted at Buffalo a year ago, and who is now with Major Anderson in Fort Sumter. There is not a doubt as to the genuineness of the letter, which, on account of the soldier's inability to write well, was written by a sergeant, and brought by a passenger to New York on the last steamer. He says:

"We have enough to eat and drink and sufficient to keep us for four months. Our fuel is scarce, but that is nothing. The rebels think we have been idle, but they nor anyone else will ever know how many men we have in this garrison. We have got sufficient to hold the fort against the whole South in a body. Major Anderson is a true soldier, and so are the other officers, and the men would die for him. I only wish we had a chance to give the rascals hell, and we can do it, too. If we ever go out of this fort, it will not be with the wish of our officers. As to sending us men and supplies, it is all nonsense to talk about it. It cannot be done. We are all right, if old Lincoln will only have the backbone to stand by us."

Your again not understanding answers already given to you, i posted Anderosn acount ofwhen Anderson had no supplies, when he was satisfied with them.

Heres the Workmen visiting Charleston on the 10th, 8 days passed when the board troll says they have no food left and are starving.
APRIL 10, 1861
THE SPRINGFIELD DAILY REPUBLICAN
WARLIKE MOVEMENTS AND RUMORS
The Washington correspondents for one day agree in their interpretations of the war movements, and assert that a portion of the fleet which ahs sailed from New York has gone to carry supplies to Fort Sumter. They say that messengers have been sent to Montgomery and Charleston to inform Jeff. Davis and Gov. Pickens of this design, and give them fair notice that if they resist this peaceful movement the responsibility of initiating war will rest upon them. The vessels were expected to reach Charleston harbor on Tuesday. If they are fired into they are prepared to resist the attack, and Major Anderson is said to be instructed in that case to open a fire upon the insurgent batteries, with the assurance that the government will sustain him at every hazard. Several laborers from Fort Sumter who were in Charleston on Thursday last, stated that there were in all thirty laborers in the fort, who are looking with anxious expectation for an opportunity to leave. They also state that there were seventy-two soldiers in the fort, most of tem Irishmen and married men; some of them have their families in Charleston. Nearly all the garrison are extremely anxious to avoid a hostile engagement, according to the statement of these men.

Do you think they refrained from purchasing any food while there or was it a sight seeing trip to ease stravation pains?, or did they wait for them to be delivered?
APRIL 12, 1861
THE LIBERATOR / THE BARRE GAZETTE

WAR AT HAND!
The last dispatch of our Secessionist friend at Montgomery leaves no room for hope of a peaceable adjustment of our country's intestine troubles. The Jeff. Davis Confederacy has resolved towage offensive war on the Government of the United States, and will assault or open fire on Fort Pickens forthwith. Meantime, the limited daily supply of fresh provisions hitherto allowed by Gov. Pickens to be furnished to Fort Sumter has been stopped, and we may hear at any moment that this Fort, too, has been carried by assault, or is so pressed that it must speedily surrender. Within a few days at farthest, the cannon of the insurgents will be battering down the defences and slaughtering the defenders of the American Union.
Let us pause a moment and consider.





Anderson was orderd to request supplies should he require them, he never did so, he advised on number of aciasion against relief efforts. I started in post 242 with Holt and andersons letters saying this and have posted extracts from them for you till you kept asking for them again and again.



Haveing answered in in post 242 and every time i used a extract from Holt letter, you will find i started with the information you asked for and refered to it throught the thread.
Joseph Holt and Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, Tuesday, March 05, 1861
(FortSumter)From Joseph Holt and Winfield Scott to Abraham Lincoln, March 5, 1861War Department,March 5th., 1861.Sir:I have the honor to submit for your consideration several letters, with inclosures, received onyesterday, from Major Anderson of the Artillery, and Captain Foster of the Corps of Engineerswhich are of a most important and unexpected character. Why they were unexpected, will appear from the following brief statement.After transferring his force to Fort Sumter, he addressed a letter to this Department, under date of the 31st. of December, 1860, in which he says "Thank god, we are now where the Governmentmay send us additional troops at its leisure. To be sure, the uncivil and uncourteous action of theGovernor in preventing us from purchasing anything in the city will annoy and inconvenience ussomewhat, still we are safe." And, after referring to some deficiency in his stores in the articles of soap and candles, he adds, "Still we can cheerfully put up with the inconvenience of doingwithout them for the satisfaction we feel in the knowledge that we can command this Harbor aslong as our government wishes to keep it."And again, on the 6th. of January, he wrote "My position will, should there be no treacheryamong the workmen whom we are compelled to retain for the present, enable me to hold this postagainst any force which can be brought against me, and it would enable me in the event of a war,to annoy the South Carolinians by preventing the from throwing in supplies into their new postsexcept by the aid of the wash channel through stone river."Before the receipt of this communication, the government, being without information as to hiscondition, had despatched the Star of the West, with troops and supplies for Fort Sumter, but thevessel, having been fired on from a battery at the entrance to the Harbor, returned without havingreached her destination.On the 16th. of January, 1861, in replying to Major Anderson's letter of the 31st. of December,and of the 6th. of January, I said "Your late despatches, as well as the very intelligent statementsof Lieutenant Talbot, have relieved the Government of the apprehensions previously entertainedfor your safety. In consequence, it is not its purpose, at present, to reenforce you. The attempt todo so would no doubt be attended by a collision of arms, and the effusion of blood -- a nationalcalamity which the President is most anxious to avoid. You will therefore report frequently your condition, and the character and activity of the preparations, if any, which may be being made for an attack upon the Fort, or for obstructing the government in any endeavors it may make to


strengthen your command. Should your despatches by of a nature too important to be entrusted tothe mails, you will convey them by special messengers. Whenever, in your judgment, additionalsupplies or reinforcements are necessary for your safety, or for a successful defence of the Fort,you will at once communicate the fact to this Department, and a prompt and vigorous effort willbe made to forward them. ( Anderson never request such supplies ever)"Since the date of this letter, Major Anderson has regularly and frequently reported the progress of the batteries being constructed around him, and which looked either to the defence of the Harbor,or to an attack upon his own position, but he has not suggested that their works compromised hissafety, nor has he made any request that additional supplies or reinforcements should be sent tohim. On the contrary, on the 30th. of January, 1861, in a letter to this Department he uses thisemphatic language: "I do hope that no attempt will be made by our friends to throw supplies in --their doing so would do more harm than good." On the 5th. February, when referring to thebatteries &c. constructed in his vicinity, he said "Even in their present condition they will make itimpossible for any hostile force, other than a large and well appointed one, to enter this Harbor and the chances are that it will then be at a great sacrifice of life:" And, in a postscript, he adds"Of course, in speaking of forcing an entrance, I do not refer to the little strategem of a smallparty slipping in." This suggestion of the "strategem" was well considered in connection with allthe information that could be obtained bearing upon it, and in consequence of the vigilance andnumber of the guard boats in and outside of the Harbor, it was rejected as impracticable.In view of these very distinct declarations, and of the earnest desire to avoid a collision as long aspossible, it was deemed entirely safe to adhere to the line of policy indicated in my letter of the16th. of January, which has been already quoted. In that, Major Anderson had been requested toreport "at once" whenever, "in his judgement additional supplies or reinforcements werenecessary for his safety or for a successful defence of the Fort." So long, therefore, as heremained silent upon this point, the government felt that there was no ground for apprehension.Still, as the necessity of action might arise at any moment, an expedition has been quietlyprepared, and is ready to sail from New York on a few hours notice, for transporting troops andsupplies to Fort Sumter. This step was taken under the supervision of General Scott, whoarranged its details, and who regarded the reinforcements thus provided for as sufficient for theoccasion. The expedition, however, is not upon a scale approaching the seemingly extravagantestimates of Major Anderson and Captain Foster, now offered for the first time, and for thedisclosures of which the government was wholly unprepared.The declaration now made by the Major that he would not be willing to risk his reputation on anattempt to throw reinforcements into Charleston Harbor and with a view of holding possession of the same, with a force of less than twenty thousand good and well disciplined men, takes theDepartment by surprise as his previous correspondence contains no such estimation. I have the honor to be, Very Respectfully,Your Obt. Servant,J Holt

Ive boldied so you dont ask the same question again.

And again you use any information related to subject irregardless of the date to try to support your position...Why do you keep posting things from Jan and Feb when the crisis with food and the time we keep discussing centers around the middle of March when Anderson is saying he is short on food.. All this other tripe is a smoke screen that doesnt support your position, and anonymous soldiers whose identities can't be confirmed is not evidnece...Anderson does state that he needs supplies in the April 1 report per his instructions so whats your point.. 9/10 of your post is just things not even related to the food crisis...

 

[B Peach]

Actually you didn't provide any proof that Anderson didn't want Fox's expedition sent because he had enough supplies.. He states, I'm paraphrasing, that the expediiton will fail, that it will cause a war he doesnt have the heart for, and that he doesnt have enough oil to light up lamps to use...Nothing about having enough food...

Asked and answerd, he was ordered to ask for supplies should he require them he never did, i have supported my claims, not the way you worded your questions, is what has thrown you. The board troll makes no effort to support his false statements.

 

[B Peach]

And again you use any information related to subject irregardless of the date to try to support your position...Why do you keep posting things from Jan and Feb when the crisis with food and the time we keep discussing centers around the middle of March when Anderson is saying he is short on food.. All this other tripe is a smoke screen that doesnt support your position, and anonymous soldiers whose identities can't be confirmed is not evidnece...Anderson does state that he needs supplies in the April 1 report per his instructions so whats your point..

Because they are the answers to the question, and are required to support my claims.

Fits right in here.

I was always taught that you go in to research with an open mind and let the data take you to your destination....

 

[wilber6150]

Asked and answerd, he was ordered to ask for supplies should he require them he never did, i have supported my claims, not the way you worded your questions, is what has thrown you. The board troll makes no effort to support his false statements.

Anderson knew that by asking for supplies a war would start, he waited to the last minute to say that he was short on rations..Thats why it took the Lincoln administration by surprise when he stated that he couldn't hold out unless relieved, because as you stated he didn't ask for them before that...Also, another reason that some in the North had second thoughts about Anderson's loyalty, as he didnt ask for supplies when it would have been easy to bring them in...

 

[wilber6150]

Because they are the answers to the question, and are required to support my claims.

Fits right in here.

You seemed come into this thread trying to prove that Lincoln had no reason to send the ships and that the food shortage was only a smoke screen as a reason to start the war; and that the food shortage was only caused by the Confederate reaction to Lincolns actions..I might not agree with your conclusions or how some were derived but it is a very interesting aspect of the battle to study so thank you for bringing it up. My apologizes if I was out of line with some comments....

 

[Glorybound]

Wow, you guys are tenacious for sure, thanks for keeping it civil.


Lee

 

[wilber6150]

What claim do you refer?.

Your claim that Anderson didn't want the expedition sent because he had enough food..

 

[dvrmte]

B Peach has done an honorable job defending his position. It may not be worded and spelled the best but I understand what he's trying to prove.

Peach, thanks for having the guts to take on this debate.

dvrmte

 

[wilber6150]

Wow, you guys are tenacious for sure, thanks for keeping it civil.


Lee

Well it was a "civil war" Ba dom Bom

Hey my name is Will and Im here all week lol

 

[Glorybound]

Well it was a "civil war" Ba dom Bom

Hey my name is Will and Im here all week lol

Oh!....Rimshot!