Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
I know Locke is having some fun but it's not so easy to break up the US.
If you've studied the US Civil War there's always one looming question. When the South seceded to protect slavery, why didn't the North just let them? They instead fought a war to keep the South. Was it nationalistic? The US boasts the longest successful republic experiment and to break it up is unimaginable. Was it economic, the North couldn't afford to lose Southern crops? Can it afford to lose it now?
|
The successionist arguments were about new states, who gets the west essentially, not about the south, the North didnt need cotton and New Orleans, they wanted Kansas and Ohio (the frontier at the time) and the promise of Gold in the Rockies and the great plains