Reviewing the Civil War

I occasionally check out this website www.strangetalk.net where I post some things when I feel so inclined. Recently in the politics section someone raised a question about the civil war in relation to the south. "Was it a mistake? Should we just have let em go?"

Interesting question. Assuming he means that Iowa is part of the union and The union wouldn't have fought to restore the south into the union. It's an interesting idea. What were the major reasons for going down south and kicking some slavedriver ass? Keeping the states together? Economic reasons? and at the end emancipation?

It's kind of a boggling idea. I mean, morally, we did the right thing. Who knows how long the south would have enslaved blacks but now the North is truly paying for their ignorance and unwillingness to change with the social flow. Could you imagine The boundary lines? I dont even know which states were part of the south. Were Ohio and Indiana? I don't think so.

WAIT! Two seconds of internet searching turned up this like beauty http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/Map_Of_Confederate_States.htm

So Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Kansas, Iowa you are all part of the union, good work boys, hit the showers. So let's say that in 1861 The confederation keeps it northern/western boundaries confined to Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas. Everything else that hits after that turns union. What kind of election and government would be formed? Interesting ideas... No idea what could have been but we do know what is and I think generally I am glad we did what we did just to liberate the opressed slaves and show their "masters" that slavery is evil. talk to you kids later