Ah. And now you're putting the words in my mouth, Greg. ;-) The same deal either way.

Look, if you promise not to make all kinds of glib assumptions about what I'm supposedly thinking, and I promise not to do the same thing to you, we might actually get free of this little squabble here and get on with the rest of the possibilities the day offers.

It isn't necessary for either one of us to prove that the other guy is "wrong". And what prize would we get even if we did? ;-)

See what I mean? I just want you to be a bit friendlier to other people when you talk to them here. I don't need you to agree about every issue that comes up...just don't be so hostile about it. Is that too much to ask?

Yes, I have been in the South. I usually disagree radically with their general views on society and politics, so I avoid talking to them about it if I can. I just nod and say as little as possible when they get on that kind of subject.

One of my favorite movies is "In The Heat of the Night" with Rod Steiger and Sidney Poitier. Have you seen it? It was a brilliant depiction of racism in a small southern town, with a really intelligent script and great acting from the whole cast.

Nope. Haven't read the Ordinances of Secession. I think I'd probably agree with you anyway about what they say and what it implies. I doubt we'd see that any differently.

Don't stretch a point I make to an absurd extreme. Try to think in shades of gray. I was certainly not saying that "no-one is responsible for anything- they're all hapless victims of societal influences and things beyond their control"

No. That would be taking what I said to the absurd extreme. I was saying only one thing. One very simple thing. That when a country goes to war, specially if it is facing an invasion, virtually all the citizens will support the war effort. That's just a natural reaction of people in a country at war. They seldom understand all the complex issues that are in play, and their politicians and leaders don't tell them the truth about that stuff anyway. But they do understand that the nation is under a foreign threat, and they are mostly willing to support the war effort.

Why did northerners go to war? Because the South fired on Fort Sumter. Why did souutherners go to war? To preserve their independence from the North. The war was inevitable, and it was just a question of where the first shots would be fired. The moment the first shots were fired, Pandora's box was opened, and what happens after that? Loyal citizens on both sides volunteer to fight, and the whole tragedy unfolds. I don't judge northerners for that. I don't judge southerners for that. It just happens. People get swept along in the whirlwind.

The only people I would judge harshly for it are the small number of hardheaded political leaders at the top who weren't willing to compromise and find a better way. It was they who made that war inevitable...and the ones in the South bear the greater responsibility for it. They should not have seceded. Secession virtually always results in war, and they should have known that. They also should have known that they couldn't win it, because they didn't have enough money and industry in the South to win it.

But I don't blame the ordinary people who carried rifles or supported the war on either side. I blame the political leaders in Congress who were too proud and arrogant to compromise and find a peaceful solution to their differences.