--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Julia wrote: > > > Dan Minette wrote: > > > >> Its true that you can find some historian on any side of an issue. That > >> doesn't mean that there is not a good way to determine what is likely, > >> unlikely, and very very unlikely. For example, its quite unlikely that > >> the > >> Civil War was fought over states rights. > > > > The Civil War was *waged* over slavery. > > > > Some of those doing the fighting were fighting for states' rights, so > > arguably it was *fought* over that. > > > > A lot of those in the South put their state above the nation. Lee > > wouldn't fight for the Union because his Virginia was part of the > > Confederacy. And this putting the state before the nation was probably > > one of the major factors that lost the war for the South. > > But that's personal loyalty, not really a stand in favor of states' > rights, don't you think?
So you think that the average foot soldire in the civil war , fighting for the confederacy thought "states rights" was just an excuse for slavery? _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
