The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Retirement Discussions / Retire Early Liberal Edition
|Subject: Re: Civil War||Date: 4/5/2011 12:19 PM|
|Author: SeattlePioneer||Number: 32164 of 85608|
<<Was there a strategy that would have won for the south?
not that i can thing of ... not really.>>
My theory is that the Missouri Compromise and such delayed a decisive showdown over "states rights" for ten or twenty perhaps critical years.
Those years weakened the south on a relative basis and increased railroads, steam ships, iron smelting, population and industry in ways that greatly strengthened the north.
Had secession happened in 1840 or 1850 under a southern President, it might have happened peacefully, avoiding a war over "saving the union."
Of course the south tended to dominate the Federal government during this time and lorded it over the north with the Fugitive Slave Act, Dredd Scott decision and such. Hard to pull out when you are the big cheese.
And I would further speculate that had the Civil War been avoided for ten additional years, it also would not have happened. The strength of the north would have been too obvious.
Pure speculation of course.
|Copyright 1996-2016 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|