Right you are, Will, in your statements. I know of at least one black Confederate. He was a free black, a family friend to my great great grandfather, James Polk Tims. His name was Coleman and he gave himself the last name Tims. They served together as brothers in the 37th Mississippi, both sporting muskets, and shooting at yankees. Both were captured at the battle of Nashville. Only by luck did they survive their imprisonment at Camp Douglas and when James and Coleman and James' brothers refused to make an oath of allegiance to the United States, all three were told to walk home.
I have hundreds of written accounts by Confederates, white and black concerning black Confederate combat veterans, including several photographs of black Confederate veterans who served from 1861-1865. Their role was vital in keeping the Confederacy alive as long as it did. Historians today try to shrug off the fact that African Americans served for the Confederacy by saying it is a myth stewed up by "neo-Confederates." They attempt to dilute their patriotic service by claiming that their only role was trench digging, body servants, cooking, and teamsters. In the latest issue of Civil War Times, there is even a column which writes that Lee did not take communion with a black citizen after the war. (At the end of April, 1865, when the minister at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Richmond offered communion, for the first time in the church's history, a black citizen came forward and kneeled at the altar to take the communion. For a few moments nobody moved. Then, Robert E. Lee rose up and walked alone to kneel beside the African American to also receive his communion. This was one of the first steps in the history of the civil rights movement.) But fearing the editor would be called on his lie by historical evidence, the he wrote that if Lee had in fact knelt to take communion with the African American, he had simply ignored the fellow worshiper. Only facts and historical data will dispel these attacks on our heritage.
As for Lincoln and his Proclamation, both were neither genius or honest.

What you call unified, I call being beaten and held down with a boot on the neck. By unified do you mean being held in place by sword, bayonet, and gun? This was not our fore father's notion of unity, but it was your dear Lincoln's idea of Union.
Had the states of the South not seceded, you are correct, there would have been no war. If the South had kneeled down and said, "yessuh massa Lincoln, whatever you says," then there would have been no conflict. If the South chose not to practice her constitutional right, or choosen not to be free from an unbalanced government, then you are correct, their would have been no civil war.
What I find very interesting is that Lincoln KNEW that the South would leave the Union if he was elected. If he loved the Union so much, then why did he risk secession to be elected? He was the first American president to be motivated by self interest, to hell with the cost. THAT is his legacy. The South chose freedom. It was denied. The South chose peace, it was given none.
"I wish those people would go home."-Robert E Lee.
"All we want is to be left alone."-Jefferson Davis.
"We propose no invasion of the North, no attack on them, and only ask to be left alone." -Patrick Cleburne
History and its makers speak for themselves.
Laid to ruins you say? Still the Southern spirit burns, passed from generation to generation from Confederate veterans to Confederate reenactors. The only thing laid to waste was a dream of independence and the innocent America before the Civil War. You mention the minorities who resolved their second class citizenship through the war. True, but not exactly the side you imagine. Judah Benjamin was a Jewish member of the Confederate cabinet. The United States did not have a Jewish cabinet member or leading role in government until after the civil war. In the war where Lincoln ordered the bloodiest massacre of Indians in history (His mass murder of over 600 Sioux Indians in Minnesota) The Confederacy promoted the highest ranking Native American on either side of the conflict. Brig. General Stand Watie. The Confederacy did not put its Indians on a reservation. It gave them a state. The first woman officer in American history, Captain Sally Tompkins was promoted by Jefferson Davis himself. I have learned, also that Will Cotton and his wife are researching a Confederate unit in the civil war consisting of patriotic women. Rose O Neil and La Belle Rebel were famed Confederate spies. And the list goes on. The Confederacy had opened the first chapters in civil rights history. The first African American unit ever on this continent's history was the 1st Louisiana infantry. Thousands of other African Americans served within integrated ranks of hundreds of Southern units and ships of war. This was something that had not happened since the Revolutionary war and did not happen again until the Truman administration.

The Emancipation proclamation did not have, as you said, the intent of resolving the slavery issue. It only confused it.
And lastly, you hint that Mexico sided with the South because it's peons were treated no better than slaves. I am aware of a population who had it even worse than both the slaves and the peons. The factory workers in several Northern cities. No matter what age, gender, or infirmity, they were made to work at least twelve hours a day in the frigid cold of the textile mills or the crushing heat of the steel mills. They were given just enough money to survive on cabbage and potatoes and to rent out a flat consisting of several other families.
I have much respect for the North. Its fighting men are some of the best in history. It's generals were an able match to any Southern general. But Lincoln, his thugs, and his cause command no respect of mine.

"The yankees didn't beat us, we was starved out."-Gus Brown, Richmond Virginia (black Confederate)
"If the rough element from the North had stayed out of the South the trouble of reconstruction would not have happened...they tried to excite the colored against their white friends. I always say that if the South should of been left to adjust itself both white and colored would have been better off."-Gora Gillam, Little Rock AR. (African American)
"I suppose those yankees were right in there place, but they never belonged in the South. And as for them setting me free? We was free as soon as we was born. I always been free!" Hannah Irwin, Alabama(African American)

Will and Steve Henry, excellent posts. I've learned a lot from them and would like your permission to include your posts into the hundreds of records I own concerning black Confederates.

As for the other Steve, he does not seem to be reading our posts. He is rehashing the same argument over and over with no regard of the evidence against his case. True Linconite! But I do respect you. For you refrain of any name calling and are not loosing your temper. I enjoy this debate and am gaining much knowledge from it.

You stated,
"Right, for Lincoln believed and was right that the Union had to be preserved, that no nation so divided can rise to greatness. His presidency was a tragic one, no doubt. And right from the very beginning he was spurned by the South."
The United States would have not been divided. A chunk taken away, but the whole government and the states left would still be intact. Is Britain a split government because we left them? Is Mexico a split government because Texas left them?
Many say The South wanted to dissolve the Union, destroy the Union. The Union must stand, preserve the Union! A Gettysburg pamphlet reads, "Pennsylvania, where a nation was born, Gettysburg, where a nation was saved."
If the South had won, there still would have been a Union. Washington would still be the capital of that Union. The United States of America would continue through history. However there would be two differences.
One-The United States' southern border would have been the Ohio River rather than the Rio Grande. And Two-There would be thirteen less stars on the Stars and Stripes.

Some say that if the Confederates had won then the two countries would have been easy pickings for Hitler in 1941. "As a divided land" we would have been easily conquered. However, you must look to history to find the best answer to a what if historical question. If the South had won then there would have been four countries on the North American Continent.
It is true that for a few years or so there would be tension between the Confederacy and the United States because of recent blood letting and bad feelings. Perhaps there would have been conflict over who would take over some of the unclaimed frontiers.
It took about thirty years for America and Britain to become allies after the revolution. It took about fifteen years for Texas and Mexico to become friendly with each other after Texas left Mexico.
By World War I and for sure by World War II, the two nations, the Confederacy and the U.S. would have been allies. The two countries would send their own armies and naves to Europe to help with the allied forces. The wounds of the war eighty years passed would have been healed. Americans are very good at compromising and forgetting their past. Life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness have always been our goal rather than revenge. By World War II there would have been trade between the two countries.
If you think this wouldn't happen then look at Canada. We used to be a part of Canada/Britian until we had a war to separate from them. Yet, we trade with Canada and we fought along side them on D Day. We also fought along side the British in all the battles of WWII. So if we separated from Britain but became allies later, what would keep the Confederacy, who split from the Union from becoming allies with the U.S?

I make this prediction based on historical events. You may come to a different conclusion but it would be based on opinion and imagination.

Another argument people make is that the Confederacy would not have been able to survive on its own. It would eventually request to rejoin the Union. Not so.
If the Confederacy had won then the blockade would have lifted. Wartime inflation would decrease and economic production would boost again in peacetime.
The League of the South has a wonderful page of statistics concerning this scenario. Visit http://leagueofthesouth.net/static/homepage/intro_articles/csatoday.html

You may dismiss this research as well but it was made by several professors of higher education.

I know Will does enjoy the what if scenarios too much so I will cut it short. But I thought that it would be useful to explain those arguments before they were brought up.
Steve, I noticed that you argued with everything Will said except his mention of black Confederates. I know that's a hard pill to swallow for you, but it is true. History itself will back it up even if most history books do not.

I am really not sure why I continue this debate. I might as well be a dog chasing his tail. You refuse to acknowledge points of evidence that others stack on your plate and your morals have nothing to do with the civil war or its causes. But I will continue this debate if only for a little while. But I really feel as if I'm loosing sleep for nothing.

Steve wrote
If the South had won the Union would have been dissolved. There would be two nations divided by geography and ideals. One with people of another color owned by those like they own farm animals. And the other with freedom and the promise thereof for all.
Not a very good solution at all.

Do you honestly think that the Union thought of blacks any better than the South did? Did you not read my past two posts that included how OPPRESSED the Northern factory workers were or did you NOT read the quotes from the black Southerners who were proud to be from the South and who were free?? Like I said, I'm loosing sleep for nothing. But let me share with you some of your North's idea of freedom and promise thereof for all.
"Mr. Pelton reported that a Union soldier (of the 16th Indiana Mounted) had shot and killed a little girl and had fired at a negro man on his plantation. I proceeded to the place where I have a black girl about twelve or thirteen years old lying dead in a field. I learned from the negro man...that the girl had been shot by a drunken Union soldier who had first fired at one of the men who had witnessed the killing...I heard that one of Capt. Columbus Moore's men had attempted to rape the black girl and had shot and killed her for resisting."-General Robert A. Cameron, US November 20th, Bayou Grande Cailou, Louisiana
I beg of you, Steve to reread that story and dare you to give blessings to your hopeless cause. If you refuse to reread it, which I don't blame you, it is horrible, then here is another one.

"The colored citizens wander around at all hours of the night, and many in consequence have been robbed and abused by United States soldiers. The conduct of the 4th Iowa cavalry was such as reflects disgrace on both officers and men...firing so as to cause a colored woman to lose her arm, likewise, committing robberies."-Augusta, Georgia

"...some of the men of the 2nd Illinois cavalry behaved more like brigands than soldiers. They robbed an old negro man."-offical report, Covington, Tennessee

"The colored people became suspicious of the presence of the companies of Union soldiers...On some plantations the wailing and screaming were loud and the women threw themselves in despair on the ground. On some plantations the blacks took to the woods and were hunted up by the Union soldiers. "-May 12, 1862 U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Hilton Head, SC

"The negroes will not go voluntarily so I am obliged to force them...The matter of collecting the colored men for laborers has been one of some difficulty but I hope to send up a respectable force...They will not go willingly...They must be forced to go. This may be considered a harsh measure, but we must not stop at trifles. "-General Benjamin "beast" Butler New Bern, North Carolina

Steve, here is a report of what happened when your glorious army of liberators marched into Beaufort South Carolina,
"The Major General commanding ordered an indiscriminate conscription of every able bodied colored man in the department. The order spread universal confusion and terror. The negroes fled to the woods and swamps. They were hunted. Men have been seized and forced to enlist who had large families. Three boys, one only fourteen years of age, were seized in a field where they were at work and sent to a regiment without the knowledge of their parents."-General Rufus A. Saxton, US December 30, 1864
Not exactly Uncle Tom's Cabin is it? Well, here is some news. Uncle Tom's cabin was a work of fiction. These reports are nonfiction accounts from the highest levels of command and witnesses

These are reports from the war, Steve. I have been posting them throughout the debate. I have yet to see anything but opinions from your side. I am saddened by your loyalty to a phantom, a myth, a fabrication that was preached to you and read to you through out your life. Most of us have heard the same. But some of us have actually refused to listen to what Hollywood, the media, and what the middle school history book says. Some of us have gone to the diaries, official reports, and the letters of the time to find a whole other war.

Steve wrote:
Not really, Mexico had hard feelings against Texas for generations.
Britain, probably 60 or so years after, and even then they did not side with either the South or the North in our civil war.

Steve, I am a Texan. I know Texas History. Texas won her independence in 1836. By 1850 Texas was selling valuable cotton and beef to Mexico and Mexico was in turn sending Texas precious metals and ores.
Britain's neutrality did not mean she was at odds with either the Confederacy or the Union. She just didn't get involved. The two countries were trading and friendly well before the turn of the century.

Steve wrote:
Nice to speculate, but considering the enormous losses that we sustained in the Civil War such a scenario is hard for me to swallow. I don't think so. Just look at the aftermath of it. It took nearly 100 years for the ex-slaves to attain full civil rights. I remember once when I traveled from NY to CA in a car we went through the Deep South. There was a restaurant that we went to, and it had a sign "We reserve the right to refuse service too..." Well, that was put there to deny blacks. And also us Northerners. I could hardly believe it. 1961 Mississippi or Alabama I think. I was only 10 then.
The North is just as guilty as the South when it comes to slavery. Which state not only has the most KKK members but also almost elected a KKK member for governor? Indiana! I don't remember Indiana seceding. Every week here in Augusta, Maine, where I live, there is a KKK rally about a mile from here. In all my many years in living in Texas, I never met one KKK member. The South integrated their schools in the 50s and 60s. Boston did not integrate its public school until the 70s.
I am sorry, but I will not carry your burden of Southern shame and guilt that north has been passing to the South for over 140 years.

Steve wrote:
We had to put our differences aside because we were all threatened by Hitler and his world wide aims. We had no other choice.

And your point?? Do not think that the Confederacy and the U.S. would put aside their differences to fight off Hitler? Any more argument of that point would be naive.

Steve wrote:
I think that you have made a logical jump without any basis. First off, what would happen if Hitler decided to attack ONLY the Northern states, and sided with the South because of their "racial superiority" views?

You have hit low with that one Steve. I am speaking for myself, but doubt that I am alone in this feeling from all who read this. That was very, very offending toward, my Southern family, my Southern ancestors, and my Southern friends and fellow reenactors. Comparing the South with Hitler's Germany. Under what flag did thousands and thousands of INNOCENT Indians get slaughtered and placed into concentration camps uh I mean reservations? Under what flag was thousands of Japanese Americans shipped to concentration and holding camps in the West during world war 2? What happened when Hitler attacked Britain? Did America not eventually side with her?
Ask your self this. Why did Hitler not side with the U.S? After all most of America back then had segregated schools (north and south) had racist points of view (north and south) and had a SEGREGATED ARMY AND NAVY. Eat your own words, Steve.

Steve wrote
We can speculate one way or the other, but the past is our teacher. The events that happened cannot be changed, but we can change the future. That is the legacy of the Civil War. We stand now as the last great hope for mankind-- just as Lincoln said, and our current president, a Texan believes.

I really am laughing right now. GEORGE BUSH IS NOT A TEXAN. HE WAS BORN IN NEW HAVEN CONNECTICUT.
Steve Wrote:
No it is not, I did not argue because I knew that that is what the South did. In fact I read that in Richmond that a black regiment was formed to defend the South. But for the most part of the Civil War, any Black Union soldier faced immediate execution if captured. Ft. Pillow remember?

In the reports of several Union prison officers at Camp Douglas Chicago, it was not uncommon for Union guards to execute any free black Confederate. What was it you said about Fort Pillow again? General Forrest had just finished a miserable campaign that ended in the bloodletting of many of his men. When he found out that Fort Pillow was being held by mainly Tennessee Unionists this was insult to injury. Tennessee was his native state. Alas, he did give EVERY soldier in the fort a choice to surrender and LIVE. Yet they refused. Lesson one-never call Forrest on a bluff. He gave them a chance. When he stormed the walls he ordered the deaths of EVERY soldier, white or black. He was a ruthless general who knew that war meant killing. He was perhaps the most genius man in the Civil War. Who's the racist? Lincoln or Forrest? Lets see...
Here is a speech that Forest gave to a black crowd in Memphis Tennessee on July 6, 1875:
"I take this occasion to say that I am your friend. I am here as the representative of the Southern people - one that has been more maligned than any other. I assure you that every man who was in the Confederate army is your friend. We were born on same soil, breathe the same air, live in the same land, and why should we not be brothers and sisters.
When the war broke out I believed it to be my duty to fight for my country, and I did so. I came here with the jeers and sneers of a few white people, who did not think it right. I think it is right, and will do all I can to bring about harmony, peace and unity. I want to elevate every man, and to see you take your places in your shops, stores and but I want you to do as I do - go to the polls and select the best men to vote for. I feel that you are free men, I am a free man, and we can do as we please. I came here as a friend and whenever I can serve any of you I will do so. Let us stand together. Although we differ in color, we should not differ in sentiment. Many things have been said in regard to myself, and many reports circulated, which may perhaps be believed by some of you, but there are many around me who can contradict them. I have been many times in the heat of battle - oftener, perhaps, than any within the sound of my voice. Men have come to me to ask for quarter, both black and white, and I have shielded them. Do your duty as citizens, and if any are oppressed, I will be your friend. I thank you for the flowers, and assure you that I am with you in heart and hand.'"
Now it's Lincoln's turn to speak.
"I will say, then, that I am not, nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not nor ever been in favor of making voters of the free Negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office, or having them to marry with white people. I will say in addition, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which, I suppose, will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality, and inasmuch as they cannot so live, that while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other white man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man." Let that be your president, not mine. I vote for Forrest!

I doubt that you have taken away any of the evidence from this post, the actual letters and official reports of the men who served. I predict another post from you telling us how Lincoln freed all the slaves his proclamation, the South was a racist slave whipping society that was doomed from its birth as morally inferior to the North's liberating and God fearing Union loving and peace loving president and army.
My reply will be simply keep studying, my friend.
http://www.37thtexas.org/html/Regnews.html

Having no idea of Texas history or its background, Steve, you have no idea what Texans consider Texans to be. Historically Texas only considers persons to be Texans as those who are not only born in Texas but know it's rich history, those who can cook the best chili in the world (without beans), and those who's first word out of their mouth was y'all. Bush neither was born in Texas nor was he raised there. He went to Yale. No real Texan goes to Yale. He is a yank, so y'all got to live with that. Sorry!

You quoted, "Civil Rights had 100 years to go before the blacks had any real "civil rights"-- such as Lincoln envisioned."

Will was right. You use neither facts, data, or historical evidence to boast your claims. Nothing you are debating is being taken seriously by serious historians. Though you could make a great cheerleader on the North's side of the ball field.

As Lincoln envisioned it? Let's review what Lincoln envisioned...

"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."-Abe Lincoln 1861
"I will say, then, that I am not, nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not nor ever been in favor of making voters of the free Negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office, or having them to marry with white people. I will say in addition, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which, I suppose, will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality, and inasmuch as they cannot so live, that while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other white man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man."-Abraham Lincoln. 1858

Eliminating slavery would be, "“a greater evil, even to the cause of human liberty itself;