O/T The Rise and Fall of Nazi Germany vs. The American Confederacy

[BeBop Deluxe]

I have to agree in principal with Mr Meeks and Mr Johnson. Slavery was the underlying cause, but the Southern States leaving the Union was the trigger. I believe the Constitution gives that right to the States,but with the victory by the North, States Rights as they were viewed at that time were doomed. But then again, I am not a Constitution Scholor. I blieve that the South should have been allowed to leave. And I think if that had happened they would have been forced to give up slavery because of International pressure to do so. Remember, slavery was on its way out, Britain being the leader in that cause.It would have taken time though. But, the changes that would have occured in history because of the split............who knows. Its possible that the CSA may have come back to the Union. That there may have been some sort of reconciliation over time. But think of the lives that would have been saved! BTW, what does this have to do with CM?

[Guest Mirage2k]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>But, the changes that would have occured in history because of the split............who knows. Its possible that the CSA may have come back to the Union. That there may have been some sort of reconciliation over time. But think of the lives that would have been saved! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I doubt it. As time passed, the situation between the USA and CSA would have looked very similar to that of the DPRK and ROK. Multiple wars between the USA and CSA would probably have occured, especially when one considers what might have happened during an alternate WWI and WWII.

-Andrew

------------------

Throw me a frickin' smiley, people!

Your one-stop-shop for gaming news is www.SiegersPost.com ! Hit it!

[Formerly Babra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aacooper:

...usually missed, ignored, or glossed over by friends of the Confederacy (or however you'd like to describe 'em)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I prefer "Southern Apologist"

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aacooper:

2) The second thing lost in the clamor for "state's rights" is HUMAN rights. Which right is more important? Southerners wanted the right to live like they wanted, but what about the human rights of the slaves<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obviously human rights are more important, but that's a modern view, not an 1850s one, where negroes were barely considered "human" at all. Sad but true. As far as anyone was concerned, slaves were chattel, nothing more.

Missed in this whole conversation, though alluded to by Mirage, is "The Meteor" -- John Brown. This well-intentioned terrorist scared the bejesus out of the Southern aristocracy. His abortive attempt to seize the arsenal at Harper's Ferry and march south, arming the slave population in a popular uprising, happened very close on the heels of the extremely violent slave revolt in Haiti, which saw the wholesale murder of white plantation owners. White southerners were justifiably concerned, and began the raising of local militias to quash any such servile insurrection. It was these militias which formed the foundation of the Confederate army -- without them, secession would not have been possible.

Without the catalyst of vocal militants such as Brown, it is likely that the issue of slavery would have remained where it had always been -- in debate, until eventually it passed away as the anachronistic institution it was.

------------------

Sounds like 100% weapons-grade bolonium to me.

[This message has been edited by Formerly Babra (edited 08-27-2000).]

[Hamstersss]

I'm going to wind down my side of the debate, as we have moved into semantics and crystalized the major issues. As I do, I would like to make two points.

First, I want to make it clear that I think Abraham Lincoln is the best president OUR country has ever had, and I'd wager ever will. The man was brilliant inside politics and out and he held malice toward none. I think one Lincoln was as responsible for victory as all the material output of New York during the war.

Second, I think the people in this discussion are a tribute to America and what American ideals are, especially those not in the US. If the North was made up of the people debating against me, I would have a hard time holding up my vain, weak and mean South in comparison.

Such was not the case, of course. The people of the South were not perfect but by what right did that give the North to sack their cities, kill their sons and act so vindictively in the face of their defeat? Of course we are proud of our showing, just as we are proud of our presidents, our football teams and any other accomplishment we make. We are a proud people. Who here couldn't see the qaulity of Confederate troops and generals, regardless of whether you thought their cause most despicable.

From a political aspect, the Confederacy seemed doomed. From a military aspect, they were outmatched. What did the Confederacy have that the Union did not have a dozen of? Yet they fought for 4 years and came close to winning a couple times.

Yet the North had every advantage. They were more powerful in every field and they did not act noble. They sacked Fredericksburg out of boredom. They slandered Jefferson Davis after his capture. Reconstruction was a joke. The North was the bigger man, yet acted like a scoundrel. Someone said that Lincoln was of one camp and after his assassination the other camp took over, this is untrue. Lincoln was a great man, unlike everyone else in any form of power in the North at the time, put into power by mistake and taken from it by tragedy.

Of course, I'm a native of the first state to secede, so I'm probably a bit biased.

------

History is not was, its is.

-William Faulkner

[Formerly Babra]

Sounds like a fair place to wrap up an off topic debate. I doubt anyone's convictions have changed, so there's no point beating it to death.

I'm thankful such an explosive subject was handled with care by the participants. (Must be that southern hospitality)

------------------

Sounds like 100% weapons-grade bolonium to me.

[Steve Clark]

Boy, this is what I get for rarely being on-line on the weekends - 14,000,000 new posts! I'm shocked, but not surprised, that this debate kept going (probably a welcome diversion from WW2-era debates).

Not to add anything to further this debate and since everyone is winding down, let me add my final say. Much earlier when I talked about the United States of America, I was not using this term as the antithese of the Confederate States of America. Officialy, the Lincoln administration never recognized the CSA government and I believe, wanted to preserve the whole USA more than anything else. He (and I) felt that Georgia was just as important to the nation as Maine. We (with me being a Union sympathizer) felt sadden by the breakup of the USA, including 4 of the original 13 colonies and would do anything, including going to war, to make the USA whole again. And I am glad to this day that we have 50 states in our Union.

To my Southern friend Mr. Meeks - well said.

[Guest Big Time Software]

OK folks, I am going to close this one up. Off Topic stuff is only OK, to some extent, if it has a more direct association with Combat Mission. As interesting, and amazingly polite, as this discussion might be... too off topic.

I would also like to thank those that participated in the discussion. A small bow from the main contributors for outstanding discussion skills. If only all debates could take place with as much thought and listening as this one

And with that, I it Ye Old Close Button with a Rebel Yell and a Yankee Doodle Dandy

Steve