- Jun 17, 2017
UB, I dont excuse their acts, but i understand the "why" behind them. Certainly to one side its aggressive and could be deemed warlike.@Greywolf ,
Still don't understand how this excuses all the war-like actions of the Southern slaveholding states prior to Lincoln taking office.
It seems the terms like "aggressive" and "bloodthirsty" should be applied to those South of the Mason-Dixon, especially before even some of those folks had seceded.
The way I see it they had little choice, they went all in. What they saw as patriotic and constitutional, the US saw as rebellion. Kind of secure your border and hope for the best. Be prepared in case negotiations fail. I believe they hoped to get out peacefully but that was not to be the case. We know Lincoln was not going to allow the fracture of the nation permanently, they had a sliver of hope he would. I also believe doing it the "legal" way would not have flown, see sentence before this one. Again, they were all in, no negotiation, no recognition, no tucking tail and going back, the die was cast. That is why borders were secured. Lastly, yes,there was plenty of bloodthirsty to go around.