Get facts on what was behind Civil War

Restraints of space prevent a thorough debunking of columnist E.J. Dionne's shallow insights of our most tragic conflict, the Civil War. To cut to the chase, here are a few of the more striking (and airbrushed) omissions:

“The contest is really for empire on the side of the North, and for independence on that of the South, and in this respect we recognize an exact analogy between the North and the Government of George III, and the South and the Thirteen Revolted Provinces. These opinions . . . are the general opinions of the English nation.” — London Times, Nov. 7, 1861

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. — Lincoln to Horace Greeley, Aug. 22, 1862.

“The sole object of this war is to restore the union. Should I become convinced it has any other object, or that the government designs using its soldiers to execute the wishes of the Abolitionists, I pledge you my honor as a man and a soldier I would resign my commission and carry my sword to the other side.” — Ulysses S. Grant

This is not even the tip of the iceberg, but I would venture to add the majority of readers have never even been exposed to these quotes. The 150th anniversary of the American Civil War is already shaping up to be as vitriolic and jaundiced as the original conflict itself. Mr. Dionne, sir, you are no historian!

Steve Quick

Arlington Heights