by Jack
When Fort Sumter was attacked on April 12, 1861, the battle raged for 3 days and nights until the fort fell into rebel hands. Lincoln was a new president, untested in crisis, but he had a clear vision of what his duty was, for it was spelled out in his oath of office. He understood he must protect the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. Therefore, he took the position that the attack on Fort Sumter was an attack on the United States and an act of war.
And Congress did declare war on the 27th against South Carolina and those Southern states that seceded from the union. Lincoln agonized over the deaths from war for 4 long years, until he thought it would lead to his own death. People who knew him said Lincoln appeared to age 20 years during the war, yet he stayed the course and never wavered. Appeasement was never a consideration – an apology never an option.
Can you imagine Lincoln calling for a Congressional commission to look into the the attack on Ft. Sumter while showing some sympathy for Southern extremists anger? Do you think that the civil war might have been averted if he took Obama’s approach? Or do you think the South would have become even more embolden and would have had more time to weaken the North and to be better prepared in the South when the war they sought finally came?
In 1904 the kidnapping of an American businessman (Lon Perdicaris and his stepson) were taken from their home in Tangiers by the pirate Raisuli and held for $70,000 ransom along with other demands. President Roosevelt (a progressive) sent seven battleships to Morocco and a message: “This government wants Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead.” Perdicaris was released in a few days.
Presidents of the past knew their duty and had a clear vision of America’s place in the world. Acts of aggression against America and American interests were never deflected, they were responded to swiftly, forcefully and yes, painfully, when absolutely necessary.
What would Lincoln do if American embassies were attacked on his watch and our Ambassador was killed along with other American personnel?
I’m pretty sure that at the very least President Lincoln would have served notice on the world, that if any government, of any nation, fails to take action to protect the U.S. Embassy and its personnel from harm, it will be held responsible and in a case of gross acts of aggression, where their soldiers actually aided the attackers, it would be deemed an act of war! But, Lincoln would also have been smart enough not to locate unprotected American Embassies in uncivilized, unfriendly nations, where such attacks would be inevitable.
“But, Lincoln would also have been smart enough not to locate unprotected American Embassies in uncivilized, unfriendly nations, where such attacks would be inevitable.”
Well he did, it was Fort Sumter.
More importantly Lincoln’s response to the attack cost the lives of 750,000 soldiers. There were better options, or at lest there should have been.
So Jack, what do you think is the appropriate response to the Embassy attack? I agree with the approach President Obama is taking. That is to find out exactly who was responsible, before we respond.
Jim, the best way for us to find out who the responsible’s are is to ask the government of the host nation to find out and we could offer our help (Obama did this part weakly, but he did it). The host nation has a legal duty by a signed diplomatic treaty and a moral duty under international law and failure to protect a nation’s embassy on their soil is their problem. I would make sure they understand their obligation…with very firm language.
IF they were the ones being attacked on our soil you know they would be screaming bloody murder in the press and the mobs would be in the street. If it was their government building was being attacked in their country I’m sure they would have responded with a good deal of force and the outcome would have been totally different than what we got. That part really ticks me off.
So what should we do? First, I would call for a joint investigation and expect free and open access and cooperation. A failure to do that would result in a cut off of all foreign aide immediately and I would severe diplomatic relations and any trade. I would impose this until such time until they make a good faith effort to apprehend those responsible and mend relations with us.
If our investigations determine the government itself was in any way complicit or responsible, then we have two options: 1. Strike back at a time of our choosing to make a meaningful statement. Do it in a way that takes out key figures of interest and causes costly mass destruction 2. Go public and ask the UN for trade sanctions, and seize any of their assets we can. We should hold open the possibility for military action, if circumstances ultimately show that to be appropriate, and then make it very targeted and quick. Give them a 9/11 to remember and let them know exactly why they got it and their behavior is uncivilized and intolerable. Other nations would join us, they are as fed up with them as we are.
I would like to see us respond against the perpetrators of this attack, obviously anti-American, probably Gaddafi loyalists, or al-Qaeda.
Insisting that the host nation find them is a good place to start. Looks like that is already happening, as the Libyan authorities have arrested 50 people in connection with the attack. However obviously there are others.
Attacking innocent people is counter to American values and out best interest.
“Can you imagine Lincoln calling for a Congressional commission to look into the the attack on Ft. Sumter while showing some sympathy for Southern extremists anger?”
I can actually easily imagine Lincoln expressing sympathy for Southern extremist anger, but I don’t have any quotes on me to prove that he did.