Lincoln was president during the civil war?

Question

Does that mean he loved war? Bush gets blamed for loving war How about Big Daddy George Washington Did he love war.

Nobody loves war but it is sometimes necessary

Washington later became president because he and others "fought" for freedom Think then answer

So Chi by your answer you supported Saddams rule Right See the difference

Answer 1

Amen. To those that have fought for it, freedom has a taste the free will never know.

Answer 2

It's amazing how ppl allow their emotion to overshadow logic, reason, reality & facts.
Some ppl have answered that President Lincoln took preventive messures...really? What? There were w/o 'diplomatic talks'. If anything it can be said that Pres. Lincoln provoked the attack on Ft. Sumter (if you know your history).
Some ppl say Pres. Lincoln 'didn't have a choice' yes he did. He could have let the South succeed. Personally I am glad he fought for the idea of a UNITED STATES. The American Civil War has taken more American lives than any other war (and all others combined).

I think ppl don't realize that Pres. Bush has a lot more information than the rest of us (the mixed up media included).

Here are a few quotes I find interesting. I hope you do also.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.
--Thomas Jefferson

We are discreet sheep, we wait to see how the drove is going, and the go with the drove.
--Mark Twain

When Hitler came for the Jews... I was not a Jew, therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the Catholics, I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned. And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists, I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned. Then, Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church -- and there was nobody left to be concerned.
-- Pastor Martin Niemoller, Congressional Record, October 14, 1968

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it.
--Thomas Paine

The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender, or submission.
--John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
--John Fitzgerald Kennedy

No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation.
--Douglas MacArthur

Answer 3

He was not going to stand by and let the Union Dissolve either. He meaning the Repulbican party was supported by the Northern industrialist which made up the Republican Party. he had never been in combat so was not inclined to compromise to stop the South from succeeding from the union either.
One of the problems of having Presidents who have never been in combat. They are too quick to pull the trigger instead of talk as a rule.
That is why there needs to be a constitutional amendment passed which does not allow any one to be president unless they have been in actual combat.
Anyone who has been in combat hates war with a passion.
The South was facing crippling import taxes on farm machinery from Europe to force them to buy American made machines at much higher prices:
The South was also facing crippling export taxes on their cotton to force them to sell their cotton to the Northern Textile mills at pennies on the dollar compared to what the European markets were paying for their cotton.
The net result was the South knew it was facing financial ruin under Lincoln and Republicans if they stayed in the union.
That was the reason for the Civil war! Not to free the slaves like is taught in schools.
In Fact Lincoln was a de-facto member of the planter class by marriage since his wife's family owned a large plantation in Maryland with around a hundred and twenty four slaves. Another little tid bit over looked or changed in the American history books.
There is always two reasons for a war: The real reason which is always economic and power where power translates to economic power.
Then the popular reason: The reason given to the people for fighting the war. Which in the case of the Civil war, was to free the slaves. It did not happen until after the Battle of Gettysburg two years into the war. That was because the union army had to split it's forces and force march to New York to put down Pro Confederate riots and the threat of New York also succeeding from the union.
Now that said: We have been given the sabre rattling band wagon popular reasons for going to war with Saddam and Iraq.
Anybody who had been reading any thing at all but what was happening in the middle East knew that Saddam was like he was because Iraq was like it was which is being proved out daily between the Shites and Sunni, between the Sunni and the Sunni, between the Shites and the Shites.
And our men are caught in the middle of all that getting shot at from all sides.
The bad part is we are between the rock and hard place because we can't just pull out. We do there will be a BLOOD BATH THAT WILL MAKE THE NAZI HOLOCAUST LOOK LIKE A SUNDAY SCHOOL PICNIC.
What I want to know is what is the real reason?

Answer 4

Until Vietnam, the media coverage wasn't as extensive as it is now. That's why so many people are against the war in Iraq. Unfortunately the media doesn't tell of the good things happening in Iraq.

For all you war haters, Fallujah was once a hotbed of insurgent activity. After Operation Phanton Fury, the city has become a more peaceful place.

Fallujah then:
No True Glory by Bing West
Fallujah, with Honor; First Battalion, Eighth Marine's Role in Operation Phantom Fury by Gary Livingston

Fallujah now:
http://www.iimefpublic.usmc.mil/public/iimefpublic.nsf/sites/2bn6mar

Read up.

There are many other great books and articles telling of the good that is going on in Iraq, you just have to search for them.

Answer 5

This IS an excellent question, and referenced examples.
WAR IS- IS the ultimate atrocity man can set against another man( not gender specific)!!!
No SANE human has ever set out to slay another, "WITHOUT A CAUSE, GOAL, OBJECTIVE, MISSION, "DREAM" !!! NOTE the definitive word SANE !!!
History is a time in the future, and viewed by looking back to the referenced time. History is recorded, "through the eyes and mental mind set" of the recorder!!!!! At least 90% of the history studied in our educational system is slanted by the writers of the accounts occuring at the referenced time/s!
ONLY time, perhaps as soon as 40 YEARS into the future, can determine how President Bush's Presidency will be graded.
Today, "WE CAN NOT SEE THE FOREST BECAUSE, THE TREES ARE IN THE WAY"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 6

Is this a question or a political statement? GW Bush, daddy Bush, and Lincoln were war presidents. Washington was not a war president he was a war general. When he was president there was no war.

Answer 7

In my opinion it means that these particular men you mentioned had the guts and knowledge to know that war was necessary. Not everyone has the ability to make the tough and sometimes unpopular decisions. Lincoln and Bush both knew that our country was in mortal danger, they acted in a way that history alone can judge them for.

Answer 8

But what if Lincoln had listened to the anti-war types?
What if Washington had listened to the anti-war types?
Worse yet what if FDR had listened to Teddy's dad?

Answer 9

Bush should do what Lincoln did. He locked up seditious Democrats. Put them in prison, without a trial.

Answer 10

You are so correct. The problem is our left wing Liberal media that continues to pound every day and night that Bush is to blame. I would say it is the terrorists that are to blame. If we wouldn't have gone to war, we don't know what would have happened here then. Maybe they would have dropped a nuke on us. Who knows?

Answer 11

Are you kidding by comparing Lincoln to "Dumbaya"?

Necessary, yes, but it wasn't necessary to go into Iraq. It was necessary to find the person responsible for killing thousands and counting due to the dust cloud causing diseases in New York City.

Lincoln did everything he could to avoid war. "Dumbaya" refused to do that, and went right in Iraq. Compare him to someone incompetent, not to Lincoln...