and here's your navy: http://tasteofcountry.com/files/2013/05/Redneck-States.jpg

the Presidential motorcade: https://www.roadsnacks.net/images/2015/08/redneck-virginia/7.JPG

and here's your president stepping out of the motorcade: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/8F4C/production/_92348663_mediaitem92348660.jpg

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34741451)

we'd have lower taxes because we wouldn't have to subsidize the pitiful south.

we'd have a better economy, more sane laws.

major concern would be way less internal vacation spots. but it would be well worth it to not be associated with southern folk.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34741755)

If they had succeeded in '64 after much of their economy was destroyed and incurring the war debt, The South probably doesn't end up quite as well, but still much better than having to suffer through 30 years of military occupation, disenfranchisement, and reconstruction.

If we succeeded today, 180x180.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34741924)

the South would probably be thriving now, while the North became a dead husk.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34742368)

lol, tyft

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34742682)

The South was dirt poor when it started the War. They couldn't even afford to give their Soldiers SHOES TO WEAR INTO BATTLE, let alone sustain their own population.

The South thought that Europe would have their back in the War because they thought "Cotton was King".

Europe said, "DINGFAG!" and got their cotton elsewhere, thus significantly decreasing the importance the region had.

You think the North would allow the South to just "peacefully" walk away with all of their shit still within their borders?

Then you still have the unresolved issue of expansion into the West. Would the North "peacefully" allow the South to expand its territory into the West without any fight?

What about global issues? Would the North & South agreed to support the same sides in WWI/WWII? What about the territories and bases the US gained as a result of the various global conflicts? Would the North just say, You can take the Philippines and all the oil it has! NBD"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34742723)

"The proof that this reason was not sincere is that the abolitionists spent millions in order to incite insurrections among the slaves, or to induce them to flee from their masters, but let them die of hunger because they were free, and gave them no opportunity for moral advancement."

Millions to incite insurrections?

So abolitionist spent millions on John Brown and Nat Turner?

lol!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3804905&forum_id=2#34742773)