What Was Lincoln's Best Option to Deal With States in Rebellion? (Poll)

What Was Lincoln's Best Option to Deal With States in Rebellion?

  • allow secession

    Votes: 4 6.7%
  • try diplomacy, if fails allow secession

    Votes: 14 23.3%
  • try diplomacy, if fails armed conflict

    Votes: 19 31.7%
  • armed conflict

    Votes: 16 26.7%
  • other

    Votes: 7 11.7%
  • Don’t know.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    60
The radical Republicans weren’t obsessed with control? Don’t forget they pressured Lincoln toward war, and after its conclusion pushed for retribution.

Obsessed?

Determined, yes, but understandable, after nearly 70 years of Southern domination.

Pressured Lincoln toward war?

In spite of all those cabinet members letters against resupplying Ft. Sumter? In spite of all the provocation of the seceded states in seizing federal property, money, ships, arms taking US soldiers prisoners, firing on civilian contracted supply ships, and no action taken until AFTER Ft. Sumter is fired on?

Retribution?

Four years of bloody war, endless treasure and blood expended to suppress an armed rebellion, and at the end there's just supposed to be a shaking of hands and let's forget the whole thing attitude?

The South got off far easier than any other rebellion at the time.
 
Last edited:
All this Yankee bloviating reminds me of just why the south seceded.

If only the actual posting of historical fact would be enough.

You people REFUSE to listen to a just argument.

This "people" refuses to accept excuses based on emotion and partisan feeling when the facts of the period are available and give clear accounts on why there was NO just argument in bringing on the American Civil War.

You can't seceded. End of story. Now get back here you little b**t**ds !!!

You can't secede just because you don't like who is elected President of the United States. You can't secede just because you are denied the right to extend slavery into the federal territories. You can't secede in a unilateral manner and claim such a right (never mentioned, never named) is somehow Constitutional. And you sure as heck can't secede when you steal everything of the nation's that isn't nailed down, and then demand international recognition after trying to kill US soldiers in a US fort.

You make us sound like ungrateful children.

Hey, choosing trial-by combat with an enemy right next door, who has more manpower, more money, almost all the manufacturing capacity and almost all the railroad track lines, you really don't come across as a "deep thinker."

Let me leave you with a few choice words and I'm sure such intelligent folks as yourself can source them.
Combined they pretty much sum up how I fell about the whole thing

1. Jefferson Davis and the leaders of the South have created a army. It appears they are making a navy, and they have made what is more then both,they have made a Nation.

Not even the man who uttered such words could bring himself to recognize the Confederacy as a sovereign nation. No one did.

2. A Union that can only be maintained by swords and bayonets has no charm for me.

And the man who uttered that urged at the end of the war and the defeated army he had once led, to become good citizens and to not let animosity interfere with their returning to civilian life in a reunited country.

and lastly from a musical number ... They have called us rebels and traitors
But themselves have thrown off the name of late.

"We" and "us" are emotional labels for a cause that no longer exists.

Emotion is not historical fact.

"We" here in this time and this place, are here to discuss history, events past that actually happened. The brutal truth of the matter is the Confederacy is gone and it was placed where it deserved, on the trash heap of history.

It's history and we need to learn from that history, not hope for it's return.

Unionblue
 
We will never know the consequences of not taking military action, but leaving nearly 4 million human beings enslaved for the foreseeable future is a very troubling alternative, which could lead to much greater bloodshed and more chaos later; not to mention the violence inherent in holding a person in bondage against his/her will.
 
We will never know the consequences of not taking military action, but leaving nearly 4 million human beings enslaved for the foreseeable future is a very troubling alternative, which could lead to much greater bloodshed and more chaos later; not to mention the violence inherent in holding a person in bondage against his/her will.
Agreed. By the time Lincoln took office (if not well before) a peaceful resolution of the slavery question was past. The South was determined to exit the U.S. to preserve it against any threat, whether gradual (as Lincoln hoped) or sudden (as the abolitionists hoped). In my opinion, Civil War became inevitable the moment that slavery took root in the South and withered away in the North. War was necessary for both preserving the Union and destroying slavery. I'd argue it was necessary for preserving the rights of the formerly enslaved as well, considering the insurgency that developed in the South following the war to keep African Americans from their Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
 
All this Yankee bloviating reminds me of just why the south seceded.
You people REFUSE to listen to a just argument.

You can't seceded. End of story. Edited.

You make us sound like ungrateful children.
I am curious about the use of the pronouns "you" and "us". It appears to be simply another attempt to avoid discussion by claiming every argument here is made by 'teams' intent on promoting their agenda, not individuals here to learn through an honest exchange of facts and opinion.
It is not helpful and, frankly, I find it insulting to our membership.
 
Are you saying since there were very few who actually favored secession, those Confederate soldiers who fought 4 bloody years must have been supermen?

No, just that in almost every state it wasn't put to a popular vote. In some like North Carolina the popular vote was no, and then the State Gov't ignored the vote and convened on it's own and chose secession on their own. In a Country where the people of the United States formed a more perfect union", 99.5% of the people did not vote for secession.
 
It depends on what time period you're talking about. Before SC seceded. Just after SC seceded? Early April? If he had publicly and loudly supported compromise as soon as he was elected, things probably would have turned out very differently.

What compromise would have been acceptable to the Confederacy?
 
Back
Top