BLOG: UNPROVOKED WAR!

Tom Jackson
Apr 15, 2011

The Civil War began 150 years ago, on Tuesday.

The Sandusky Register carried articles on the war's beginning in its April 15, 1861, issue. The "News by Telegraph" section inside the newspaper, carrying dispatches from around the country, had a series of articles on the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter and the responses to it. In the style of the time, the paper has a series of headlines. The one on top says UNPROVOKED WAR!

The New York Times has a wonderful new blog, Disunion, that's providing a day-by-day account of the events of 150 years ago. It's addictive.

We're going to have many articles in this paper on the Civil War and Erie County's connection to it. Two of them will run Sunday.

My home state, Oklahoma, didn't play a big role in the Civil War. It wasn't a state then, it was Indian Territory, but it nonetheless was a Civil War battleground, too. The biggest battle in Oklahoma, Honey Springs, featured white soldiers, American Indian warriors and black soldiers. 

The battle was an interesting moment in black history. It was possibly the first Civil War battle in which black troops played a major role.

In fact, the 1st Kansas Colored Infantry won the battle, driving back a Confederate charge. The  Union commander, Maj. Gen. James G. Blunt, wrote, "Their coolness and bravery I have never seen surpassed; they were in the hottest of the fight, and opposed to Texas troops twice their number, whom they completely routed."

 

Comments

BW1's picture
BW1

Brutus, you're welcome to point out specific places where I'm incorrect - you're the one repeating yourself, with the litany of unsubstantiated, one line naked assertions.

I've already demonstrated that references are available at non-right wing sites.

 

BW1's picture
BW1

Wow buckeye15.  Did Mississippi, the ONLY state declaration that mentions the issue of slavery happen to be the first one you read, and you ran with it, or or did you happen to read THE OTHER TWELVE, and conveniently skip them because they contained no mention of the issue of slavery?  Based on your logic, the Unabomber's manifesto speaks for all the environmentalists in the world.

It's notable that THE OTHER TWELVE declarations mentioned ongoing and pre-existing federal oppression and abuse, years before the anyone lifted a finger to end slavery.  Arkansas declaration cites as its sole motivation the Union's military response to other states' secession.

Captain Gutz

Here's an easy question for all readers , do you believe the US Civil War would have occured had slavery not existed in the US?

Yes or no?

brutus smith

 b w, it's funny you sight quotes from Congressmen who thought like you. Fast forward modern day to Sen. Jon Kyl from Arizona saying that abortions are 90% of what Planned Parenthood does when its only 3%. Someone like you 150 years from now will use that quote to support their position.

glassman

 Proud to sport my bloodstripes for the U.S.A.

6079 Smith W
@ CG:   No, the War Between the States would more than likely not have occurred had NC secessionists not fired on Ft. Sumter.   If war came, most in both the North and South expected it to be short with both sides eventually going their own way.   The nation had the deeply divisive issue of slavery since it’s founding. This country almost ended before it began.   Study Geo. Washington and his acts of diplomacy between the Northern colonies and the Southern ones over the issue of slavery.   For one: Slaves were expensive in the North because they were essentially useless during the cold months. Hence it was never a popular institution in those climes.   We in the 21st Century have our own issues. For one, big govt. which is a direct outgrown of the loss of state sovereignty byway of the direct outgrowth of that terrible conflict and it’s aftermath.     BTW: Railroads took adventurers out to shoot buffalo, which helped starve the Plains Indians, and eventually forced them onto the reservations. Gen. Sherman knew in GA and later in TX that cutting off the enemy's food supply leads to their annihilation.

 

brutus smith

 Fired on Ft. Sumter=states rights=SLAVERY! Why so intent on re-writing history now?

6079 Smith W
After the demise of slavery, sharecropping was the alternative livelihood for many blacks.   In many ways, sharecropping was a far worse institution because blacks were now free to starve on their own.   The North may have “freed the slaves,” but they largely dropped the ball after the conflict. The North made promises but for the most part failed to deliver.   “Forty acres and a mule” was a myth that persists to this day.   What about the millions of the Earth’s inhabitants who live in oppressive societies who are virtual slaves to their govts.?   Perhaps the ignorant self-righteous in America should seek to help free them through armed conflict?   Let’s attack Iran, N. Korea and Cuba or maybe Libya or Serbia????   History may not repeat, but it rhymes; fools tend to repeat the folly incessantly with their simplistic thinking and their search for easy answers and quick solutions.         
BW1's picture
BW1

Brutus said "b w, it's funny you sight quotes from Congressmen who thought like you"

Brutus, you seem confused. I have not CITED any quotes from any Congressmen. Do you perhaps refer to me CITING **EVENTS** surrounding certain Congressmen at the time of the war? If so, then what exactly is supposed to be the relevance of their thoughts or ideals? Take your time and think it through - I mentioned that members of Congress and draft opponents were arrested/deported/killed FOR SPEAKING OUT. Do you honestly now mean to claim that the First Amendment only applies to those who agree with you?

"Fast forward modern day to Sen. Jon Kyl from Arizona saying that abortions are 90% of what Planned Parenthood does when its only 3%. Someone like you 150 years from now will use that quote to support their position."

Again, you seem confused. Let me spell it out. There is no parallel to anything regarding Sen. Kyl, and what he said is completely irrelevant to the point at hand, unless he was arrested and sent to Gitmo for saying it, which would be a parallel to what I CITED. I used no quotes from any member of Congress. I wrote about actions taken by the Federal government against a congressman for what he said, but I didn't mention what he actually said, because it's not relevant.

To clarify my point, I'll outline what would, unlike your Kyl example, represent an actual relevant parallel, and perhaps it will better illustrate for you what my objections are to the actions in question. A parallel would be if, when Kucinich spoke out against the war in Iraq, Bush had declared him an enemy combatant, had him arrested and shipped off to Gitmo, and then subsequently dropped in the middle of Afghanistan with no ID. If that happened, do you think there would be any validity to defending Bush's actions by expressing disagreement with Kucinich's point of view? Because that's the tack you're taking here.

brutus smith

 Anyhow, slavery was the reason for the war, end of story.

BW1's picture
BW1

Thus spake brutus, and so it MUST be true.  Bless his heart.

Brutus, didn't you say something about repetition not establishing proof?  Do you ever have anything of substance to offer, or is this repeated naked assertion the extent of your abilities? 

 

 

brutus smith

 Like I said, I can feed you right wingnuts FACTS all day long, and still all you do is vomit.

6079 Smith W

@ bs:

Only the simple minded and uneducated would conclude that slavery was the "reason" for Northern aggression against the Southern states - EOS.

 

brutus smith

 winnie, for your viewing pleasure. ayn rand in her own words:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7zwO88nRH8

 

This is the cold hearted, selfish, un-Christian woman the tea baggers and Rethugs adore. Reminds me of a couple of women who post on here.

6079 Smith W

@ bs:

Thanks.

AR was a Russian émigré who knew first hand the slavery and death of Marxism that you ignorantly embrace.

Here's one for you to enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cSsB_jvk6U

 

brutus smith

 I am a little confused, because you subscribe to most of the things depicted in your video. I bet you play that 24/7 wishing you could have that here.

BW1's picture
BW1

brutus said "I am a little confused,"

THAT is the most coherent thing you've said in this thread

"because you subscribe to most of the things depicted in your video. I bet you play that 24/7 wishing you could have that here"

And then lucidity slips through your fingers.  This makes no sense, since most of what the video depicted were speeches, articles and posters, and most of those were directly from the Marxists whose ideas YOU have espoused in comments too numerous to count.

brutus smith

 bw, when you say something of substance I will respond. Your comprehension of things is childlike. Read the posts to see what I was reponding to.

6079 Smith W
brutus smith writes:   “This is the cold hearted, selfish, un-Christian woman the tea baggers and Rethugs adore.”   "Actually a bunch (of) Stone Age right wingnuts wrote the Old Testament." (brutus smith, Sept. 10, 2010)   “Those of us born and raised Catholic,” (brutus smith, Nov. 25, 2010)   So you hate Jews and defend the brutalilty of the Inquistion?    

So were you an adult at the beginning of the Civil War, would we have seen you down at the recruiting station signing up to help "free the slaves" ? There were few if any age limits.

 

 

6079 Smith W

brutus smith writes:

"I am a little confused,"

You're just now realizing that Cupcake? ROFLMAO!!!

 

patriot5

Why was it ok for free blacks to own slaves, we never hear of that. The last US census report circa 1860 Showed about 8 million whites lived in slave states. It list fewer than 385k owned slaves, even if all those were white owners that’s about 4.8% that owned one or more slaves for the south.

 

High school history show you that free blacks bought slaves only to free them, not usually the case though according to the country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city alone. That’s more than the whole 4.8% of white owners. This is a truer picture of the Old South, one never presented by the nation's mind molders. Statistics from the time prove that when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.

He goes on to say In 1860 there were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more slaves The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards.. Another Negro slave magnate in Louisiana, with over 100 slaves, was Antoine Dubuclet, a sugar planter whose estate was valued at (in 1860 dollars) $264,000 (3). That year, the mean wealth of southern white men was $3,978 (4). Average number were 5 slaves, only the top 1% owned over 50 slaves.

In Charleston, South Carolina in 1860 125 free Negroes owned slaves; six of them owning 10 or more. Of the $1.5 million in taxable property owned by free Negroes in Charleston, more than $300,000 represented slave holdings (5). In North Carolina 69 free Negroes were slave owners (6).

A black who was born a slave, later became one of the biggest cotton farmers, William Ellison, he perfected cheap slave labor. He was a known slave breeder, who sold slaves and hired slave hunters when his ran away, figures show he had more wealth, more slaves than most any white holders. His family went on to be one the largest producers for the confederates.

So theres two sides to the whole slave issue, black slave owners, but we never hear or them, had as much to fight for as their white counterparts.

 

 

 

 

KURTje

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained personal attacks. Discussion Guidelines

no planb

kURTje, says:" Another reason I  F with people displaying a rebel flag.    They deserved the @ss whipping handed   2them." from these posts I gather Kurt did his time in the service. Imagine being extracted out of sh%% and the slick that taxis you has a nice big confederate flag painted on it. Numerous cc's and hp's had those painted onto their "ships", as well as the official insignias. Either on the cowling, nose, tail, doors if had any. Think they were racist? That was long before the pc police got involved in the military. 

BW1's picture
BW1

 

 

 

 

 brutus smith said "Like I said, I can feed you right wingnuts FACTS all day long, and still all you do is vomit."

You CAN?  Well then, when are you going to start?  We're all waiting. You've yet to offer anything relevant or meaningful.  You have two posts in this thread that amount to more than  just one-liners of naked assertion or ad hominems, and neither of them addresses any aspect of the issue.   What facts have you offered?  All I've seen is one quote from a current Senator that is so unrelated to the issue at hand it has me wondering if you even know what we're discussing. 

A good start would be to look beyond your high school history class and realize that it only taught you the official, currently and locally fashionable view of things.  If you have any doubts about that, a good way to dispel them would be to have a discussion about the causes and results of the War of 1812 with a Canadian or a British person.  That will be an eye opener.
 

I have another question for you, Brutus.  Why do you think we went into Iraq?   I doubt you believe the official reasons given any more than I do.   So the question is, do you think lying was invented in your lifetime, or maybe that it's been a common practice for longer than that?
 

Henry Ford said "History is a lie agreed upon" - to which I add "by those who manage to hold onto power."
 

KURTje

Plan b you are right. Never said much said  much about about it on the "block".  Being from here and raised on a farm.   Then after my Parris Island education & other events saw 1rst hand those that displayed stars & bars & their  thought process along with their speech.   See  my linage is German & I wouldn't insult people with a swaticka.  It is wrong.   Both symbols represent hate .   Maybe you'll  enjoy flying it on your mountain.   I love my America & the North.  She needs celebrated for all the good that was done.

6079 Smith W

The majority of the "race riots" in the 1960s occurred in the North - few in the South.

Northern cities like Detroit and Cleveland are crumbling under the weights of poverty and taxation. The South as a whole is booming economically and socially.

Educated blacks are returning to the South due to the increasing lack of job opportunities and high unemployment in the North.

Seems like Mr. Lincoln helped the North get what they asked for a long time ago.

Misplaced pride in the failing North and hatred of the South reads like Yankee ignorance regarding the true nature of past and current events.

I may be a born and bred Buckeye - but I LOVE the South and West.

 

brutus smith

 Gee, I wonder why the blacks fled the south? Wouldn't be because of all the hangings going on? Naw.

6079 Smith W
"Confused" writes:   "Gee, I wonder why the blacks fled the south?"   Easy - jobs. It was called the Great Migration.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Migration_(African_American)   The poor sharecroppers of the South came North during the Twentieth Century to work in the good paying Northern factories.   Now that Northern industry has been on a fast decline due primarily to heavy govt. regulation and high taxation; the North is now stuck with high levels of black unemployment as well as excessive expenses for taxpayer funded health and welfare benefits.   The Northern educated blacks are returning to the South in what has been called "The Reverse Migration."   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Great_Migration   In the 2010 Census, Atlanta became the #2 city with the largest black population and Chicago dropped to #3.  

The dumb Yankees paid to educated 'em and the South gets the benefits.   Funny how the mostly liberal North never stops paying for its hubris. :)    

brutus smith

 winnie, you and ayn rand seem to have a lot in common.

Ayn Rand, Hugely Popular Author and Inspiration to Right-Wing Leaders, Was a Big Admirer of Serial Killer 

So what, and who, was Ayn Rand for and against? The best way to get to the bottom of it is to take a look at how she developed the superhero of her novel,Atlas Shrugged, John Galt. Back in the late 1920s, as Ayn Rand was working out her philosophy, she became enthralled by a real-life American serial killer, William Edward Hickman, whose gruesome, sadistic dismemberment of 12-year-old girl named Marion Parker in 1927 shocked the nation. Rand filled her early notebooks with worshipful praise of Hickman. According to biographer Jennifer Burns, author of Goddess of the Market, Rand was so smitten by Hickman that she modeled her first literary creation — Danny Renahan, the protagonist of her unfinished first novel, The Little Street — on him.

You liked a famous German serial killer of the late 30's, early 40's.

6079 Smith W

Happy Texas Independence Day!

Battle of San Jacinto: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_San_Jacinto

 

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

@ "Confused":

AR is highly irrelevant when considering that you have and do support Obama's slaughter of innocent women and children in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Libya.

 

 

Pages