View single post by naakke
 Posted: Thu Aug 17th, 2006 04:35 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
naakke
Member


Joined: Mon Jul 17th, 2006
Location: Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 22
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Excellent points, Indy.  So many questions involved.  To answer why they fought, you have to look at why the war was started, to answer that you have to think about why the South secedded in the first place.  To answer that you have to come back to the broader question of why was their animosity and division to begin with.

As a preface, let me point out that I am no supporter of slavery.  But think about this relationship.

Israel for the most part wants to be left in peace to live in what it feels is its sacred land.  Hizbollah, Hamas, and all the others want to kill all Jews and destroy the existence of a Jewish state.  Their perspective is that the Jews stole the land, regardless of the reason, the status quo is a peaceful (debateable) Israel trying to coexist amongst very hostile peoples.  Who has the problem with status quo?  Who picks the fights?

Look back at 1860, who had the problem with status quo?  The radical abolitionists of New England.  Who was the aggressor in pushing an agenda?  I would say it was the same.  I do not think I can blame the plantation owners for being reactionary.  Their way of life was under threat, they were having to face a very different life than that of their fathers and grandfathers.  I am not saying their way of life was right or acceptable, I am saying they felt threatened and reacted the way they saw fit.

 

 Close Window