- Joined
- Aug 1, 2018
- Location
- Nashville, TN
I'd fight in the 2nd Michigan Cavalry of course!
Rampage on the River: The Battle of Island No.10
The Perils of Perryville
Rampage on the River: The Battle of Island No.10
The Perils of Perryville
to protect their farms and their families (not a slave among them)
What were they protecting against in TX? Union occupation never went beyond Galveston and a couple barrier islands. Many (most?) Texas units spent the war serving outside of Texas.
I agree to the extent that for the first time (1860), that a sectional political party threatened to increased Northern political power permanently leaving the South unable to defend its interests whatever they were.
I agree, entirely why I said I would fight for my state, whether then or today I would think family, neighbors, and your local community would always top the list, I honestly can't see anyone wanting to fight and kill everyone they know.Well, at some point we have to exercise some judgement about what's worth fighting for and what the alternatives are.
That is certainly A way to look at it. But, not very historical, IMO.
Lincoln and the Republican Party presented No threat to any rights of the southern peoples that did not threaten all the same rights of all the peoples of the United States except slavery of course.
As a matter of historical history, the continuing politiical controversy over slavery in ante-bellum America was not slavery as much as its expanson. The previous compromises by Congress, 1820 and 1850, were attempts to control its expansion; not the legality of slavery itself.
Your contention is correct only in relation to its refeerence to Slavery AND its expansion. Tosoutherners at the time, you could not touch the one without touching the other.
for instance, invading New MexicoWhat were they protecting against in TX? Union occupation never went beyond Galveston and a couple barrier islands. Many (most?) Texas units spent the war serving outside of Texas.
Compromise had been tried through the 50's without any permanent success. Southerners seemed to get more and more riled at not getting their way. The two sides are basically incompatible.Because the question of slavery and what to do with its expansion was politically insoluable. i.e., It defied rational compromise by the normal give and take of conventional political processes provided in its basic laws(Constitution).
Where in Montana...? I've been all over Montana. It's one of the most beautiful states I've ever been to. I wouldn't want to spend a winter there but, spring/summer are fantastic.Born in Alabama, living in Montana. Dixie born, Dixie bred for Dixie I'll die !
Hey Viper, live in a little Mayberry like place about 30 miles south of the capitol Helena called Townsend . Love it but I do miss Bama sometimes lol .....Where in Montana...? I've been all over Montana. It's one of the most beautiful states I've ever been to. I wouldn't want to spend a winter there but, spring/summer are fantastic.
Cool..! I've been to Helena, Missoula, Great Falls, Anaconda, & Kalispell. I dig Montana. I could live there from May to early Sept Not so much after.... lolHey Viper, live in a little Mayberry like place about 30 miles south of the capitol Helena called Townsend . Love it but I do miss Bama sometimes lol .....
Perhaps you have the cart before the horse.How were Southerners going to expand slavery into the western US by seceding from that country?