(03-05-2014 01:46 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 01:32 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  So, does that mean Texas can secede from the union without having another civil war? Great!

What I could never understand is I "thought" there was a fine print where it said that states could secede from the union. But what I can't understand either is why are posters here agonizing because the south couldn't keep slaves. Two wrongs do not make a right and in my opinion for what ever reason we went into a civil war is unimportant as it did free the slaves. Period.

Another thing, why were so many southerners willing to risk/give their lives for the wealthy southern land owners? Hey, if those owners couldn't find anyone to fight for their interests who's going to do the fighting for them?

So many questions. So many answers...here.

Regional identity. Up until the very last minute, the citizens of NC didn't want to join the Confederacy even though the members of the state legislature (wealthy land owners) did. The thought of having to fight against the rest of the south didn't sit well in the end though.

IMO, if the south were just allowed to secede, it would've had just SC, GA, FL, AL, MS, LA, and TX. The Confederacy would've fallen on its own. They weren't necessarily getting along at any point in its existence.

Don't believe a word a black man (nomad in this case) tells you about Civil War history. Even as it happened, they didn't know what was happening. To this day, they twist it into "regional identity".

The war had absolutely nothing to do with slavery until it's 2nd year when Lincoln signed the emancipation proc. Fact. Look it up.