MUH TARIFFS

[bore]

If you don't think that slavery was the cause of the war, [ur=http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html]you could read what the south themselves had to say about it.[/url]

Then, you should read these excellent posts by gully.

Then, you should stop talking about the civil war.

[bore]

Consider this excerpt from Lincoln's First Inaugural Address (emphasis mine):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Lincoln plainly stated that the ONLY reason he would invade the South would be to enforce the tariff laws. Thus, unless one is an extremely passionate proponent of protectionism, it makes no sense to allow the destruction of one's hearth and home rather than attempt to repel Lincoln's invading forces.

Except it doesn't even say that.

It clearly says that Lincoln would also invade if the federal government's property (such as, say, Fort Sumter) was tampered with.

Quite apart from that, the first inaugural address had an important role as propaganda in convincing the border states to remain in the union, so shouldn't be taken as summing up all of Lincoln's war aims.

Though, if you do want to selectively quote from Lincoln's speeches, you could read this, from his first inaugural:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Or, maybe this one from his second inaugural:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The question of whether slavery was the main cause of the war is not one serious historians debate.

[bore]

Except it doesn't even say that.

It clearly says that Lincoln would also invade if the federal government's property (such as, say, Fort Sumter) was tampered with.

Sorry, should've addressed that. First of all, even if the Federal government was rightfully pursuing the return of its properties, that still has nothing to do with slavery and hardly justified the all-out invasion of the South. There is clearly nothing wrong with attempting to defend one's home against an invading army attempting to occupy and destroy it, even if that army has the end goal of reclaiming its rightful property miles away.

Lincoln was less interested in actually reclaiming Federal property than he was in using it as a pretext to provoke war. For weeks prior to that incident, the Lincoln administration had assured South Carolina that the fort would be evacuated. However, instead of evacuating, Lincoln chose to send a convoy of warships to Charleston harbor and refused to meet with Confederate diplomats to discuss peaceful purchase or transfer of the installation, despite the fact that the Confederates were willing to fully pay the Union in full for all Federal installations. He successfully provoked the South Carolinian militias in the area to fire the first shot, thus serving as a pretext for invasion.

Lincoln's main aim after his inauguration was keeping the border states in the union. That's why he didn't actually make any moves to regain federal property. He did, as he had to do, try to hold onto what the Federal Government did hold, namely Fort Pickens and Fort Sumter.

The warships sent to Fort Sumter were purely to re enforce the fort, not to launch an invasion of Charleston Harbor.

Lincoln never said he was going to withdraw from Fort Sumter. Seward said something along those lines but Lincoln overruled him.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not initially, no, but that's irrelevant. Whether Lincoln wanted to abolish all slavery immediately does not impact whether the war was about slavery.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Lincoln's war aims are irrelevant- although after Antietam he was very much an immediate abolitionist . The war was about slavery from the start.