Why was the Civil War Fought

[jfssms]

And do you REALLY believe states are capable of existing on their own, without the Federal government.

And frankly, I am an American first and an Oklahoman second.

And you think a smaller group of states couldn't exist and prosper without our current central government?

I'm really sorry,but supporting the nuts on both coast isn't appealing to this Okie.

 

[JB Books]

And you think a smaller group of states couldn't exist and prosper without our current central government?

I'm really sorry,but supporting the nuts on both coast isn't appealing to this Okie.

No. I don't think they could make it and we still live in the manner in which we do now.

 

[WhiteyMacD]

And you think a smaller group of states couldn't exist and prosper without our current central government?

I'm really sorry,but supporting the nuts on both coast isn't appealing to this Okie.

Yikes. You do realize, when concerned with socialized programs, Oklahoma benefits more than those costal states,... right?

Im not saying I advocate ALL social programs, but your lower income states are the ones leeching off of the higher population/higher per capita income states.

 

[poopgiggle]

(EDIT ******* whitey and lawyer typing faster than me.)

I'm really sorry,but supporting the nuts on both coast isn't appealing to this Okie.

They're also supporting you, Okie.

Do you have any idea how much of your day-to-day life depends on federal funding, especially in poorer states like Oklahoma?

 

[jfssms]

Fair enough,are we gonna talk about the expense of these social programs at some point?

 

[PFXD 45]

Ugh. I'm going to give ONE EXAMPLE of why this is false.

We have this thing called division of labor. It's pretty great. It lets some areas specialize in certain industries for greater efficiency in production, like steel used to be in Pittsburgh, PA and Gary, IN. Ease of transportation allows people from New York to Los Angeles to buy steel from these places and it's far more efficient than every state to have their own steel mill.

However, you need to transport that steel, typically using railroads or the interstate system. Big inter-state transport systems are a big job, however, and to build them they need capital and coordination from some higher authority. The First Transcontinental Railroad was federally funded, as was the Interstate highway system. I submit that it's unlikely that all 50 states could individually negotiate with each other to put this system in place in a manner as efficient as the Federal government doing it.




[citation needed]

On that other hand they could of, maybe would of taken longer to build waiting for other states to get on board, but when the had seen the more thriving states enjoying those examples you gave then they would of got on board. All that would of taken would been a few thousand people screaming at the lawmakers to make it happen... Plus the later states would of benifited from the mistakes the first ones made.... Example if you will...

Texas and Oklahoma were the first.. Highway system... Later on Ark and Kanas follow suit seeing OK and Tex has now merged their system together..( sorry for spelling I am getting tired...LOL) Sooner or later other states follow them and so on so forth....

My point is that we as Americans and Oklahomans are a team.. And if your a defense(Federal Gov) and your team mates are Offense(States) and one starts telling the other how to do their job, you have conflict in the ranks and they start fighting each other instead of working on how to make the game win.....Neither are better than the other...

 

[Cue]

The reason President Abraham Lincoln ordered the invasion was he wanted to control the oil in the Southern region of America.

Knowing that the American people would never buy this he devised the back story of wanting to bring an end to slavery in the south, and bring democracy to the Southern people.

"This is a significant discovery for Historians everywhere," said Joanas Carter Director of the Center for Unity among Nations Teachers. "No longer do we have to place blame on the slaves for causing division among our country we can blame our President."

The entry went on to say that "this war was necessary for the safety of the people of this nation."

It is also believed that President Lincoln never had an exit plan as to how to leave the South without losing the war, his Secretary of War William Seward was once overheard saying that "we could be in the South for the next hundred years or so."

"Can you imagine if a President invaded a region on false pretenses just to control the oil in that region?" Carter said when asked what he thought about the recent discovery.

 

[PFXD 45]

The reason President Abraham Lincoln ordered the invasion was he wanted to control the oil in the Southern region of America.

Knowing that the American people would never buy this he devised the back story of wanting to bring an end to slavery in the south, and bring democracy to the Southern people.

"This is a significant discovery for Historians everywhere," said Joanas Carter Director of the Center for Unity among Nations Teachers. "No longer do we have to place blame on the slaves for causing division among our country we can blame our President."

The entry went on to say that "this war was necessary for the safety of the people of this nation."

It is also believed that President Lincoln never had an exit plan as to how to leave the South without losing the war, his Secretary of War William Seward was once overheard saying that "we could be in the South for the next hundred years or so."

"Can you imagine if a President invaded a region on false pretenses just to control the oil in that region?" Carter said when asked what he thought about the recent discovery.

 

[shootingbuff]

There is a lot I would like to say, but to keep those that are almighty on their pedestal without getting butt hurt I will not.

First many that have came into this country actually have learned more about how this country governs then those that are locals(Americans),

Second look at the dates of the events that have been brought up. President Lincoln freed zero slaves. President Lincoln also stated something to the effect that he would not free any slaves if he could keep the Union whole. Which leads to the question of was it his position or want that made him want to keep the Union whole?

AFA Who fired the first shot or what lead up to the first shot, I don't recall finding prof either way of which side is to blame.

Reference can a state separate from the Union - read the constitution(U.S and TX)

Back to what the War was fought over - that is going to be what one wants to believe and or the research they do.

Better question that has not been discussed is the Alamo (some will call it the TX Revo)

 

[sigsilly]

The Civil War was simply an economic war. One of the rural, and agricultural South vs the more populated and industrialized North who had a majority in Congress.
The rich in the South wanted more beneficial policies for economic gain and they didn't get it so they went to war.