Talk:Battle of Fort Sumter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | ||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
 |
WikiProject Echo has identified Battle of Fort Sumter as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia. |
This article states that Lincoln ran on the idea of "free-soil" which is true yet free soil did not mean free slaves. This was the term that referred to the disadvantage of farmers who did not use slaves vs. farmers that did. Lincoln did not run on the idea of Emancipation. He only supported this idea later in the war when it was both militarily and politically advantageous for him to do so.
-
- Perhaps, but to Lincoln's credit, he never supported slavery, and personally believed the institution should have been abolished. The only reason he condoned it was to get elected. Politicians have always done this. One seeking public office must always make a compromise on their stances to earn the public's trust despite their own personal beliefs. To support this George Washington and Thomas Jefferson both owned slaves (whether personally or through their families), but came to the eventual conclusion that it was morally wrong. GW wrote in his personal diary that he strongly believed that the institution should be abolished, but knew that the fledgling nation at the time could not be divided by the issue (which it eventually did in 1860). --Acefox 22:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- Also "free-soil" meant that new territory was closed to slavery so your interpretation is a bit misleading. The way I view the ninteenth century support of free-soil, as I believe is the consensus, is that it was a compromise position for those opposed to slavery (for whatever reason) to greatly limit it. This in itself was a controversial issue at the time, as legislation leading up to the Civil War was a continuous argument of whether to allow new territories under the US to be open to slavery. Compare it with the issue of gun-control today. Many supporters of gun-control would like to see an eventual ban on guns altogether, but support gun limitation bills simply because it has a chance of getting passed whereas an extreme stance would not.--Acefox 22:52, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] typo?
"in the autumn of 1861 work was nearly complete" really? but the the battle was in April!
- It says "autumn of 1860."
I've also read that the battle was from april 12th-14th not 12th-13th.
- This is a matter of interpretation, I guess. A truce was called on April 13, so there was no fighting on April 14, the day the fort was evacuated. Hal Jespersen 15:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
this is soooo stupid beeyaaaaaaa
