Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

homestead - Re: [Homestead] Is it serious, or is it not?

homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Homestead mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Clansgian AT wmconnect.com
  • To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Homestead] Is it serious, or is it not?
  • Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 21:29:04 EDT


> >I am Civil War knowledge impaired. Are you saying that in the
> beginning, the South was not fighting?

Sorry, Gene, I was answering the question in reference to Iraq.

The Confederacy established itself as a sovereign nation and thus reasonably
demanded that military instillations within its boundries be turned over to
it. All of the complied except Ft. Sumpter. The commander there agreed to
surrender the fort but, perhaps for appearance's sake, who knows, said he
would do
so when his supplies ran out (the Confederate Navy would not allow the fort
to be resupplied). So the shore batteries fired on the fort,. No Union
soldier was killed, and one Confederate died when a mortar. That is, no one
was
much hurt from enemy fire.

Both sides actually planned it that way. The batteries that would have
inflicted such fire were not used by either side.

Then in 1861 in order to punish the South for its uppitiness, Winfred Scott
orderd Gen Irving McDowell to invade the peaceful sovereign nation of the
CSA.
He was met on Southern ground at Manassas and repulsed.

It was a fight, all right, in response to invaders into a sovereign country,




Deo Vindice!

James, the Unreconstucted </HTML>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page