If only Lee didn't go to Gettysburg - Page 4




 
--
 
February 28th, 2011  
MC Martel
 
1. War within a country, civil war
2. They illegally seceded, so they had to be readmitted. For example, if you steal something illegally, you still have to give it back.
March 22nd, 2011  
03USMC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MC Martel
1. No, they were not legally seceding, the idea that they were is ludicrous.
2. So therefore it is a civil war, as they were rebels
3. Finally, once again, the south fired first, this makes then quite clearly the aggressors.
The legality of secession was not decided until 1869 in SCOTUS's ruling in Texas vs White.

Prior to that there was no Constitutional interpretation or precedent concerning secession, even when the New England States threatened it during the war of 1812 .
March 25th, 2011  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MC Martel
1. War within a country, civil war
2. They illegally seceded, so they had to be readmitted. For example, if you steal something illegally, you still have to give it back.
1. Maybe under the watered down definitions people use today, but a secession attempt isn't a Civil War. The English Civil War where 2 groups fight for control of a country is a Civil War. 2.The official US position during the War was the southern States didn't legally seceede so they were still part of the US, therefore there wouldn't be a need to readmit. Comparing to theft is silly.
--
April 2nd, 2011  
MC Martel
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by George
1. Maybe under the watered down definitions people use today, but a secession attempt isn't a Civil War. The English Civil War where 2 groups fight for control of a country is a Civil War. 2.The official US position during the War was the southern States didn't legally seceede so they were still part of the US, therefore there wouldn't be a need to readmit. Comparing to theft is silly.
Whatever you want to pretend about todays definitions, a civil war is, by current academic standards in the the field of political science, roughly defined as a conflict between two groups within the same country in which there have been over 1000 casualties total, and at least 100 on both sides. Some maintain that it needs to be 1000 casualties annually, but this is still fits in any case
April 3rd, 2011  
Logan Gustavson
 
An advance into the North was only truly feasible after the First Battle of Bull Run, where the Confederates had the Union army routing.

I believe the Confederates could've pursued and went for Washington.
April 6th, 2011  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logan Gustavson
An advance into the North was only truly feasible after the First Battle of Bull Run, where the Confederates had the Union army routing.

I believe the Confederates could've pursued and went for Washington.
I disagree while taking Washington was a possibility early on any advance into the North was a pipe dream at best because the South lacked the infrastructure to support the force.

As it was the South had enough trouble moving and supplying troops while fighting a defensive war.
 


Similar Topics
Army's Logistics Branch Is Inaugurated At Fort Lee
Lee Myong-bak, Korea's new President
Navy Chaplain Pleads Guilty
Astros sign Carlos Lee, Woody Williams
Was Lee Whi-So killed by the U.S Government?