The correct analogy would be if you shoot at me (Fort Sumpter) and declare yourself immune from reprisal, you would be wrong. Moreover, you shoot at me as a pre-emptive act to escape the perceived impending abolition of slavery. Nothing worthy in it.
The cause of the South had nothing to do with Cherokees, so far as I am aware.
The union army was at a southern fort and backup was coming.
So I guess a correct analogy is, if I'm in your house and refuse to leave, and more of my friends start coming, and you start shooting, are you starting a war ..
Yeah you could be aware of more outside of prejudice, possibly.
Straight from the state of Oklahoma's government website:
The Union Army (not a "Union" army at that point, but only "the" national army) was at Fort Sumpter, a national fort, which was bombarded by South Carolina militia artillery in an act of rebellion. It fell and remained in Confederate hands until war's end.
The Fort was the "house" and it did not belong to the State of South Carolina. The South started the shooting.
If you cannot get your facts straight, you cannot get your thoughts straight.
And you are still glossing over their intent to preserve slavery against possible abolition by democratic government process. I find it very curious that people seek to defend the South by all these secondary issues and fail to face the fact that, for the South, it was all about the continuation of slavery.
It was an army representing the union, taking over the fort.
I sure don't know why those Cherokees fought longer than everyone else for whites to own slaves.
You can think, or you can not think, that is up to you.
Edit: one thing is for sure, we wouldn't have a central bank messing everything up in the whole world if States kept their rights, and Abe lost. States were united, but like their own countries then.
And, luckily, it looks like we're getting back to that.
If I come into your house, refuse to leave, and you shoot at me, are you starting a war...
Why were the Cherokee Indians the last to surrender....
Abe created the issue Trump is fixing.
The correct analogy would be if you shoot at me (Fort Sumpter) and declare yourself immune from reprisal, you would be wrong. Moreover, you shoot at me as a pre-emptive act to escape the perceived impending abolition of slavery. Nothing worthy in it.
The cause of the South had nothing to do with Cherokees, so far as I am aware.
The union army was at a southern fort and backup was coming.
So I guess a correct analogy is, if I'm in your house and refuse to leave, and more of my friends start coming, and you start shooting, are you starting a war ..
Yeah you could be aware of more outside of prejudice, possibly.
Straight from the state of Oklahoma's government website:
https://oksenate.gov/education/senate-artwork/surrender-general-stand-watie#:~:text=Stand%20Watie%20was%20the%20only,born%20in%20Georgia%20in%201806.
Just for some unbiased reading. I know what I see out of it but.
https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/education/failures.htm
The Union Army (not a "Union" army at that point, but only "the" national army) was at Fort Sumpter, a national fort, which was bombarded by South Carolina militia artillery in an act of rebellion. It fell and remained in Confederate hands until war's end.
The Fort was the "house" and it did not belong to the State of South Carolina. The South started the shooting.
If you cannot get your facts straight, you cannot get your thoughts straight.
And you are still glossing over their intent to preserve slavery against possible abolition by democratic government process. I find it very curious that people seek to defend the South by all these secondary issues and fail to face the fact that, for the South, it was all about the continuation of slavery.
It was an army representing the union, taking over the fort.
I sure don't know why those Cherokees fought longer than everyone else for whites to own slaves.
You can think, or you can not think, that is up to you.
Edit: one thing is for sure, we wouldn't have a central bank messing everything up in the whole world if States kept their rights, and Abe lost. States were united, but like their own countries then.
And, luckily, it looks like we're getting back to that.