Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Kentucky Neutrality

Expand Messages
  • William Gower
    If Polk had not so foolishly invaded Kentucky and broke the neutrality of the state, do you think that the Union army would have honored it throughout the war?
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 29 12:42 PM
    • 0 Attachment

      If Polk had not so foolishly invaded Kentucky and broke the neutrality of the state, do you think that the Union army would have honored it throughout the war?  This would have made the defense of Tennessee much easier.

       

    • juldandar@cox.net
      I agree. Then the confederacy could have concentrated on it s Miss. and Eastern opeations
      Message 2 of 3 , Sep 29 1:04 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree. Then the confederacy could have concentrated on it's Miss. and Eastern opeations
        >
        > From: "William Gower" <billgower@...>
        > Date: 2004/09/29 Wed PM 03:42:46 EDT
        > To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
        > Subject: [civilwarwest] Kentucky Neutrality
        >
        > If Polk had not so foolishly invaded Kentucky and broke the neutrality of
        > the state, do you think that the Union army would have honored it throughout
        > the war? This would have made the defense of Tennessee much easier.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • Ray Todd Knight
        ... neutrality of ... throughout ... Just my opinion, but... I have very little doubt that the Union Army would not have honored Kentucky s neutrality. As far
        Message 3 of 3 , Sep 29 6:20 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "William Gower" <billgower@c...>
          wrote:
          > If Polk had not so foolishly invaded Kentucky and broke the
          neutrality of
          > the state, do you think that the Union army would have honored it
          throughout
          > the war? This would have made the defense of Tennessee much easier.

          Just my opinion, but...
          I have very little doubt that the Union Army would not have honored
          Kentucky's neutrality. As far as they were concerned Kentucky stayed
          in the Union so it was Union territory. Kentucky's "right" to remain
          neutral was the same thing that the Confederate states were fighting
          for. Plus even if both sides had honored Kentucky's neutrality,
          neither could have afforded to leave that border unguarded just in
          case the other decided not to at some point.

          Todd
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.