posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 01:52 PM
I study military history, as it is something I am greatly interested in, and I tend to stick to pre-WWII conflicts for the most part. And I am
convinced that Lincoln freed the slaves mainly in an attempt to hurt the South. But he did NOT want it to be seen that way, thus why he waited until
the victory at Gettysburg to deliver the speech. I think he was worried that overseas powers could come to the aid of the South, given that until
Gettysburg, the Union was losing the war from a military perspective. They were getting either outmaneuvered at every turn, or the incompetence of
their leaders gave the Southern forces something to exploit.
So once Lincoln delivered the Emancipation Proclomation, there was virtually no chance that any other nation could endorse the Confederacy, as
Lincoln's address had virtually drug slavery into the war immediately. Of course it was an issue before, but not the sole issue. There was all the
commotion about free states vs slave states, states' rights, etc. The war had been brewing for a long time.
So when I think about Lincoln, I see him as the right man for the job, in the right place at the right time to win the war, but I also see him as a
person who only freed the slaves because it was convenient. He had said himself, many times, that he would allow the slave states to remain slave
states. He didn't want to upset the balance it seemed. But I am convinced that anyone else being president at that time could have resulted in an
earlier end to the war, possibly through compromise.
We also must remember that Lincoln broke the Constitution as well, assuming powers he was not vested with. So I definitely do not view him as a hero
from a moral perspective, because he was not freeing the slaves out of a sense of moral obligation, but rather because it was convenient for his
cause, as well as highly inconvenient for his enemy. But that is not to say he supported slavery by any means. I don't think he really did.