I cannot believe how inept the Union army was under Lincoln to trust generals like Ambrose Burnside.
Its absolutely mind boggling on how anyone could waste precious men and matériel in an assault across open ground, going up against heavily entrenched and dug in infantry supported by artillery providing fire across the entire battlefield without obscurity.
@ConstantineJoseph Yeah, Ambrose Burnside did the same thing at the Burnside Bridge at Antietam and at The Battle of the Wilderness, Spotsylvania, and The Battle of the Crater, where he rushed masses of troopes through a funnel or frontal assualt and had them all slaughtered every time.
@AUG351 Well said AUG, Burnside was risking his men all the time in predictable frontal charges.
Actually, Napoleon Bonaparte had quite a similar situation at Austerlitz. However, his guile and trickery made the enemy think he is numerically inferior, resulting in the enemy's decision to attack and that proved to be the decider. Given the high ground advantage, the Russians still lost against the French.
This is the startling difference in generalship. But Napoleon is a genius.
@ConstantineJoseph Exactly, as you said how Napoleon used trickey and deception to win the battle and if the Russians had stayed on the hill they could have had the tactical advantage and could have won if they had done so. Sun Tzu said "All warfare is based on deception" and ""invincibility lies in the defence; posibility of victory in the attack".
@ConstantineJoseph true. but bear in mind tha advances on the union left at fredericksburg came much closer to succeeding in their objectives, while certainly not as dramatic as the action at marye's heights. also consider that lincold had few other options at the time. he HAD to put someone in charge, and burnside was most senior. probably not a decision he would have chosen had another man of equal seniority presented himself. we can say 'what if' til we are blue in the face, but for protocol.
@Putaspellonyou Yeah, allot of people don't know about the flanks where Meade and Gibbon broke through where Jackson was positioned on a wooded ridge with trenches in a different area than the wall that most people think was where the whole battle was fought but on the flank Meade broke through but Gibbon didn't get there in time to support it and help push through so they retreated.
I think that the first 2 minutes, 29 seconds of General Lee's counsel of war with his top commanders is one of the finer scenes in Gods and Generals. I could watch it (and do) over and over again. So resolute were their roles prior to the battle.
northerners had slaves for decades before freeing them. so if the war had started earlier no on today would ever say slavery was the cause. people just lean on that issue to make themselves feel better for the half million dead. not counting the citizens dead and raped by yankees. wherever blue coats showed up, folks died. Mexicans, Indians, Southerners, and then Indians again! and 5 slave states fought for the north... but it was bout slavery???
If the union had enough soldiers to fight by firing in line against a fortified enemy why couldn't they charge the walls in melee combat to force the enemy into a close quarter battle? Unless this movie scene is incorrect and they did do that.
You would lose many less men by making the enemy lose the option of firing behind a wall.
PS. I play "Empire Total War" so this whole shoot at a enemy behind a wall thing makes no sense to me.
@AUG351 Oh ok, I was just wondering if they did charge the wall in real life because it would make no sense to line up against dug in defenders. Glad to hear they didn't.
@oddersisadog it makes perfect sense if you are looking for cover fire. The confederates had soliders lined up on the rear of the wall and alot of casualites were prevented because of it. The Union army was eaten up by artillary fire across the plain. Gen. Hancock advised weeks prior to send a small brigade to prevent artillary foundations to be set up along the ridge; however, Gen Burside was too stubborn and made the fool hardy mistake of attacking Gen. Lee's brigade head on. Alot of men died
@oddersisadog you try charging across open field with rifles and cannon raining hell on you. i very highly doubt youed make it half way across before losing the majority of your force.
“General, we cover that ground now so well that we comb it as with a fine-tooth comb. A chicken could not live in that field when we open on it.”
A Confederate artillerist, to Gen. James Longstreet
Lee: “General, they are massing very heavily and will break your line, I am afraid.”
Longstreet: “General, if you put every man on the other side of the Potomac on that field to approach me over the same line, and give me plenty of ammunition, I will kill them all before they reach my line.”
@theCuno100 It wasn't the physical destruction caused by Sherman's march that signaled the end of the Confederacy, as much as it was the knowledge that Sherman could do it without a supply line and with barely any resistance by Confederate armies.
Is it truth that prostitution caused the Battle of Fredricksburg? A war of madams soon broke out? I think history in Bulgaria isn't what it used to be.
The Battle Scenes and visuals in this movie are excellent. However, I think the movie is just shot too dramatically. Too many soliloquies and dramatic face shots. I feel Gettysburg got the "tone" so to speak of the civil down better.
Bobby Duvall played a great Robert E. Lee. Better than Martin Sheen's portrayal in "Gettysburg", in my opinion. Nothing against Martin, he's a fine actor.
Yeah, these guys are about to get their nuts shot off and they're being forced to stand there and be bored to death listening to the boss show off his knowledge of Roman history. Somehow I doubt that actually happened.
@WarEagle8055 if it was a British army, someone would have shouted out "alright Shakespeare - that's enough of that! My bollocks are freezing - let's go kill some rebels"
my great great grandfather was behind the wall on the far left during the battle. what an incredible bloodbath he must have seen. nightmares for years i would imagine.
Adolf Hitler spoke very fondly about Abraham Lincoln in his Mein Kampf. He respected his subjugation of the states and his war tactics (e.g. besieging civilian centers in cities). Sherman's March is one of the greatest war crimes committed in US history.... more than 50,000 Southern civilians were killed from siege and relocation.
@Hapafull Are these Generals and people of Scotch-Irish dscent and English dscent? because they mention yankees so that means they must be Scotch-Irish/Germans right? cuz if they were of English heritage then it's like saying English bstrds. Did they really have that accent during that time? I thought it might have still been somewhat British. Also how did this accent come about? Spanish/Ulster mixed together? So are they english dscent or scotch-irish? thanks!
@easynowww that accent is called "piedmont virginian" IIRC. You'll have the answers to your questions by looking that up. Keep in mind these generals were very educated men with a large portion of them comming from the artisocratic plantation classes. Im sure they sounded a lot different than the farmers on the front line. As a born and raised northerner i cant help but get swept up at how flat out beautiful their speech sounds (no homo)
@Hapafull Then you must think that every one of our bombing raids from WW2 were even worse war crimes yes? And therefore those men in the USAAF were what? War criminals? Sherman's march ended the war much quicker than it would have otherwise. That is what total war is. The term "war crime" itself is an oxymoron.
@Shafeone Shermans was a shocking physcopath, As for those raids Churchill knew it was nasty but had to be done like the atom bomb. Whereas Sherman enjoyed it.
@Colton8646 Sherman had lived and worked in the south before the Civil War. He loved the southern people. But Sherman, like Grant, knew that to win the war would take bringing the conflict to the civilian population as well as to the Confederate armies
@Steve17010 Then how come Quatrills raid on Lawrence gets so much criticism?. Lawrence wasn't full of innocent people, instead it was the headquarters of the Redlegs, the Union guerillas who had attacked and slaughtered innocents, who refused to join the Union. The Lawrence raid was a revenge attack for this and acheived the objective of pretty much destroying the Union guerilas.
@Steve17010 I agree with you about Sherman bringing the war to the Civilian population. You have to break the will of the Country's people to continue fighting not just the Army. No greater evidence of that then Vietnam we won most of the battles but the will of the people at home was not there. The same thing happened to Japan when we dropped the atom bomb on civilians.
LMAO. The psychopaths were the Southern politicians. All of the ones who supported secession were slaveholders. They didn't care about "States Rights", they just didn't want to lose their fortunes. They had no chance of success but they forced their young men to die for them (the Confederacy started drafting men before the North did). They are the most evil Americans of all time.
@KayBeeEee1983 Thats a generalisation and a lie. "No chance of sucess". What about Fredericksburg 60,00 CSA 130,00 Union soldiers, CSA victory. Also what else do you call someone who watches his soldiers rape a black woman like Sherman did other than a physcopath? Oh Kaybee your niave filth and not worth talking to.
@Colton8646 I meant no chance to win the war, retard. Sherman didn't watch any rapes. What proof is there that ANYONE was raped? Confederates aren't trustworthy (they believed slavery was moral for God's sake), especially not one who just got his ass kicked by Sherman. Of course they're going to lie to make Sherman look bad.
Why would they want to rape a black woman anyway? They were all racist, both North and South, and there were plenty of white women.
@KayBeeEee1983 All whites were by our standards racist... so why would you say southerners arent "trustworthy" but northerners are??? Many northerners believed that blacks should be deported after emancipation because they were SOO INFERIOR THEY CANT LIVE WITH WHITES.. It cant be disputed that Southerners had much more honor and etiquette/manners than northerners. There are plenty of cases of rape by federal troops while in Georgia. My point is 1 side is no worse/better than the other
@23mbtx23 "so why would you say southerners arent "trustworthy" but northerners are?"
Because the south were traitors and they believed slavery was moral.
"Many northerners believed that blacks should be deported after emancipation because they were SOO INFERIOR THEY CANT LIVE WITH WHITES.."
That's not true at all. There weren't any slaves in the north. Nothing changed in the north after emancipation. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts and Rhode Island even allowed blacks to vote.
@23mbtx23 "It cant be disputed that Southerners had much more honor and etiquette/manners than northerners."
Of course that can be disputed. How would anyone prove that?
"There are plenty of cases of rape by federal troops while in Georgia."
There's no proof of any of that.
"My point is 1 side is no worse/better than the other"
The South is much worse. Their leaders were willing to decimate the population and let the south be laid waste because they didn't want their slaves to lose value.
@KayBeeEee1983 We agree on alot. I am not like many of my southern brethren who refuse to look at facts and refuse to believe slavery had ANYTHING to do with all of this. But i believe that the war had MANY causes, slavery, economical, political, cultural, international manipulation, and others caused the war. I believe that both sides had their "good men" and "bad men". Would you not say the same? both sides had flaws, bad people,etc but also had good men and noble ideals
@23mbtx23 "I believe that both sides had their "good men" and "bad men". Would you not say the same? both sides had flaws, bad people,etc but also had good men and noble ideals"
Yes, I agree with that. I think the southern army had noble ideals, but they were manipulated by their politicians into thinking the war was about rights and liberty, when it was really just about keeping slaveholders rich.
@23mbtx23 i can honestly agree with you...slavery had an issue in this war but it wasnt the only issue... most slave owners didnt treat their slaves bad, but some did.... lee had slaves at arlington but he didnt treat them that way...they were more like family members...and yes south had good men (stonewall, lee, longstreet, etc...) and bad (Joe Johnston, etc..)...and of course the north had good men (Grant, Chamberlain, Hooker, etc...) and bad men (sherman, Lincoln, etc...)
sherman was a psychopath? no, he was a genious. lee just wouldnt give up, despite the fact that the south was outmatched in every aspect - numbers, supplies, production, etc.
so, sherman started burning down the south. sherman wouldnt send his troops into frontal assaults like you see here. he simply burned everything, ripping the heart out of the south. he was the BEST union general.
from frederciksburg....find civil war bullets in my back yard...had a friend tht found an old pistol jus chillen on a rock in the woods still find trench lines if u look hard enough in random patches of woods...love it
@haynes1776 Actually, the AOP lost more then "12,000" men at Fredericksburg. Lincoln wrote to Burnside to "Trim down the casualty list". Guess what was about to come out....Emancipation Proclamation. It would not look to good to lose another "15,000" Union soldiers. Past historians have claimed "15,000" and up to "20,000" but I lean more on "15,000".
Lee's side lost fewer men then was reported. Several hundred Confederates faked sickness to go home for Christmas.
@rebel2276 And the fighting at the southern end of Fredericksburg at the slaugter pen farm was bloody as well. and the union almost broke the confederate line there.
@haynes1776 Lee, Jackson, A.P Hill all agreed that the 600 yard wide "Swamp" could not permit any Union soldiers to get through it. Thus BG. Gregg pulled his South Carolina brigade back and now there was a huge hole in the defenses. Meade took his division into that 600 yard hole. Meade and Gibbon attacked but had no support and they were both furious with MG. Franklin (Commanding the 6th Corps) Franklin did nothing and lost only 404 men. Franklin would be sent out West after that.
Burnside also made furher delays by waiting for the poontoon bridges to arrive and confederates of General Barksdale's Mississippi brigade made it hectic on the union bridge builders to do their job. Then came Burnside's biggest blunder by attacking the fortified confederate strongholds at the Stone wall and Mayre's heights. Despite the brave efforts of the union troops, every assault was thrown off with heavy losses.
@haynes1776 Never ever get involved in the "Numbers game". I personally do not believe any strength's or losses in any battle. The bigger the battle the less accurate it was. Brian Pohanka and I worked several years on that and we were just frustrated. I will continue to search for missing regimental strength and losses, Union and Confederate. John Michael Priest did a great job on his 1989 "Soldiers' Battle" book on Antietam. He could not find the missing Union/CSA regiments either.
@haynes1776 John spent Eight years working on that book, pretty much the entire 80's. But he did not have the internet available back then. I have filled in many of the missing regiments, but some are still unknown. The battle of Chickamauga is missing several Union/CSA regimental strength and losses as well. Longstreet's regiments are largely unknown. So I have to go back to Gettysburg and judge the losses there and add say 50 men (wounded and recovered) to get a ball park estimate.
@haynes1776 My associates and I work on the "Unknown". We are hoping to come out with the first ever, two book series on "Captured Union and Confederate Colors". I work on the Union Colors, because not to many experts wanted to take that on. It was very very rare, that a Union regimental commander admitted to losing a color. An example, only two regimental commanders at Gettysburg reported in the Official Records they lost a flag. The 3rd Maine (National) and 11th US Regulars (Regimental Flag).
@rebel2276 Ive been reading your comments. Very interesting. You are right about actual numbers on casualties. I know all units, union and confederate, have kept records of dead,wounded,missing,presumed dead or captured.
@haynes1776 I worked on the "Numbers game" for Seven long years. Three of them with the late Brian Pohanka. I personally do not believe any of these numbers at all. At the regimental level it will be accurate, but the higher up, it will become more inaccurate.
MG. Hancock during the "Overland Campaign" ordered his division commander's NOT to fill out any paperwork out. Not till February 1865, did they finally fill that out. MG. Warren was known to "Cut some of his losses" at the Wilderness.
@rebel2276 true, but by the human carnage of these battles the losses were just appalling. Even worst the commanders not making proper paperwork of the actual casualties
@haynes1776 I agree with you 110%. While my associates and I read all the Union, Confederate and U.S.C.T, regimental histories, we found something very strange. On the average, the "Wounded" listed, about 85% were "Wounded and Recovered". So does that mean they returned to duty? Does that mean they were on light detail?? Were they sent home?
Check out the New York regimental website, the only one that shows "Wounded" and "Wounded Recovered".
@haynes1776 "Burnside also made furher delays by waiting for the poontoon bridges to arrive"
How were they supposed to cross a river without a bridge? Lincoln and the War Department's principal responsibility was keeping the Army supplied, and they failed miserably.
@haynes1776 the delays of the pontoons were really not his fault. had he had them in time, he might have been able to cross over before such strong defenses were in place to meet him. that said, making multiple brigade-front attacks on such a strong position like cobb had was suicidally stupid and arrogant. just proves that just because you are an excellent corps commander doesn't mean you can lead an entire army. hood proved that maxim on the southern side...
General Burnside should had resigned after Fredericksburg. he should had taken General Hancock's advice to occupy the town sooner rather than waiting for the whole union army to assemble at the river to cross and advance on Richmond in force. His delay gave Lee time to prepare and block his advance.
A great movie. It gets slightly disillusioned in our modern "politically correct" day when it is so much more convenient to label anything to do with the confederacy as racist.
In my estimation, accurate portrayals of history will continue to dissipate in favor of political correctness.
@forty8r And look at all those yankee thieves about to be slaughtered. Lee actually knew the yankee scum would loot the town and took advantage of the time given him to build up his defenses on Marye's Heights. Stupid yankee fucks got what they deserved.
@baanjoguy I am from southeast Virginia and never lived in the big city ,some say my accent is old Virginian,we pronounce house ,out and about different than Northern and western Virginians ,but some people on Maryland's Eastern shore speak the same as we do ? Anyway I perfer a Virginian accent where ever we may be from ! You should hear Manteo NC (Old English)
I have heard them in fact I married a Manteo guy. I lived in Virginia many years as well , and love the way they all talk, Is "Southern".... It could be that Manteo was one place the first ship from England came ashore, with their strong "Old English", accents as well as up around the Eastern Shore , Jamestown, and Gloucester, Virginia. Many of those first settlers stayed in that area. I'm sure you have heard the term "There's a mouse in the house..get it out"! with the strong OU emphasis.
Mine too. I grew up there from the time I was 5 until I moved to Richmond at 18 for college. I walked those hills and the stone wall many times. Even as a boy I was stunned at the brilliance of Lee's positioning and the folly of Burnside's attack. A killing field unequalled in war.
Yeah, that is forever a mystery. Lee watched at the Union was cut to pieces attacking strong high ground wall defensive positions yet tried to do the same at Gettysburg. Lee's hubris got the best of him, he really should have listened to Longstreet. I tend to believe had he been alive Jackson would have agreed with Longstreet's plan at Gettysburg.
That is correct. But Byrd was a member of the Klan, which supported murders and lynchings that kep the Democratic party in power through the imposition and reimposition of segregation.
Originally called Kanawha district, yes it was a territory of NW Virginia where the federals roamed at will. It actually was the only section of the confederacy that seceded from it, becoming West Virginia in 1863.
W V really wasn't a state then.. it was all VA but they broke away to the Union.. mountainous regions typically were pro union Easten Tenn was the same way.
i wish this movie where a bit shorter and done a bit better cause it isin't that bad. but sadly it in no way looks at the meanings of the war and it is 3 and a half hours long
The length is one of the reasons it bombed at the box office. I agree it has it's moments but it gets way too preachy and times with irrational, dull soliloquies. This would have worked better as a TV mini-series. I think there is actually over 6 hours of film but it had to be trimmed for a theatrical release. The entire battle of Antietam was filmed but left out completely. That I would like to have seen. A lot of the story wound up on the edit room floor. Too bad.
I check around from time to time and there isn't one. Probably not a big enough demand to justify the cost. With all the deleted scenes it's a practically another movie unto itself.
@Turnback Actually it isn't too preachy. Men like Gerneral Lee, and Jackson were God fearing men who believed the Bible. What I appreciate about this movie is that it shows that unlike many hollywood films. Also I apreciate the fact that they give an even depiction of the Civil War.
@Joshjeff1611 I am not doubting they were pious men, Jackson was a what many historians view as a religious fanatic. But one of the biggest complaints about this film is all the drawn out, snoozy, soliloquoys. They didn't speak like that anymore than 17th c. men spoke in Shakespeare's english. And even depiction? Are you kidding? This film is laughably pro CSA. No issues, no mention of slavery, all Union are drunks and thieves all CSA virtuous, polite, and god fearing. Total BS.
@Turnback Yes it is a Pro-Confederate movie, first time actually showing that Lee actually won a battle, as if he never did. For the AOP, the only major battle they won on an open field, was at Gettysburg.
The source of the war was not slavery, the source of the war was the Jesuits"
@rebel2276 Lincoln never said anything about Jesuits. That's a long debunked conspiracy theory which I have not heard anyone bring up in years. The war not about freeing the slaves. It was however about competing systems of commerce, culture, and regional autonomy; at the root of which was the long standing slave question. Also Antietam, 9 months earlier, was not a Union defeat.
@Turnback Go to the National Archives, we do all of our deep searching there. My associates and I could spend the rest of our lives there and still not find everything. They have hid tons of stuff and some we have found.
Antietam was a "Tie" neither side won nor loss. Lee held his ground the very next day, just as he had done on July 4th, 1863 at Gettysburg. Lee and his men did not feel they lost Gettysburg. Even if Lee won Gettysburg, he still had to return to Virginia.
@rebel2276 Tactically it was a tie, strategically it was a victory in that it ended Lee's Maryland campaign. It SHOULD have been an overwhelming victory given the lopsided forces and the intelligence learned, but since McClellan was such an incompetant, cautious, twit, it was what it was.
@Turnback Lee actually wanted to go into Pennsylvania. McClellan was cautious and given horrible intelligence reports. He believed Lee had "200,000" men. We know from books that Lee had around 35,000 men. When A.P. Hill showed up with his "Light Division" he had only "1,900" men with him. A long nine hour march shred so many stragglers that they came in at night and the following morning. So it is very difficult to determine just how many men Lee had on the field and fought.
@rebel2276 McClellan was also handed a copy of the Confederate battle plans for Antietam. Special Order 191 which was found in a filed wrapped around three cigars. It showed lee split his forces in three. McClellan waited nearly 2 days to act on this and that gave Lee time to entrench,reinforce, and consolidate. Probably the most inexcusable and ridiculous screw up of the war. McClellan was a terrible general. A Grant or Sherman would have crushed them.
@Turnback McClellan was just in the wrong line of work, he was a great siege engineer and organizer. McClellan put the AOP Corps together and after the 1st Bull defeat, reorganized the entire army.
McClellan should have just dug in at Harrison's Landing and at least keep the attention of some of Lee's forces. Lee had detached, D.H. Hill's division, McLaw's division and Walker's division to guard Richmond. Once McClellan left for good, those three divisions joined Lee after 2nd Bull Run.
@Turnback Pettigrew's North Carolina Brigade stayed at Richmond and thus Walker had a two brigade division at Sharpsburg. It is said Lee had "41,500" men, but we have worked on the numbers game and Lee had in action "25,000-35,000" men. Reason being, not all of Stuart's cavalry fought, some regiments guard the flanks and Potomac River crossings. Nor was all of Lee's artillery there either. Thomas' Georgia Brigade and the 5th Alabama Battalion remained at Harper's Ferry as well.
@Turnback The Confederates captured very valuable artillery pieces, including a huge 50 pound Parrott Rifle, two (9 Inch naval Dahlgren rifles), 3 inch rifles and several other pieces. The Confederates exchanged worn out pieces for the new pieces. I suspect, the 50 pound Parrott rifle piece took days to get to Richmond. It was later recaptured when Richmond fell.
Antietam ended Lee's invasion and put a fourth of his army in hospital or in the ground. It should have been the day the war ended...McClellan never knew how close he was. By mid afternoon Lee's center had effectively disintegrated. Mac had 30,000 fresh troops he never used. A shame. Sept. 17, 1862 should have been the day the rebellion died...fitting as it was the 75th anniversary of the siging of the Consitution.
@Shafeone Hellow Safeone, good to see you on here, I have been away the last Three months. Lee asked way to much from his men buy going into Maryland. Lee should have been happy with the captured of Harper's Ferry and then fall back to Winchester and call the campaign over. I agree with you, Mac had Lee, but thought Lee had "200,000" men. Lee had around "30,000-35,000", only "20,000" made it back out. At least "5,000" stragglers came in that night and the next morning/day.
@hrothgleas Gettysburg was originally intended as a TBS miniseries but Ted Turner, who financed it, decided it would work better as a feature length film. It got ok results but it was loooong, over 4 hours with an intermission. GAG was intended as a film release but that was a mistake. It was sloppy, all over the place, and left out too much. THAT should have been a series. Now the final film, The Last Full Measure, will never be filmed after the GAG fiasco.
Jackson was one of Lee's best officers (the other two were Longstreet---with the beard---and brash Hood). Had Jackson lived, the outcome at Gettysburg may well have been very very different.
Well the "bigger the breads, the bigger the balls" theory don't work. I mean look at the french! (joke, they only surrendered it one war. But unguided racism is fun)
gotta give the yankees credit. that took such balls to charge maries heights. it was even worse than pickett's charge. gotta give them credit. i take my hat off to all who fought that day.
@refuckulate420 Better yet I would have Brunside go on the open field for himself to see the height behind the town are strong and let him get killed out there.
don't throw god into this cause he didn't do anything. The confederates were situated on high hills, brick walls and thick forests while the federals marched in open land.
Nonsense, most of the Confederate General's were fairly average...very average in fact. The biggest factor at Fredericksburg was the lovely stone wall the Rebs could stand behind.
EVERY BATTLE that the confederates won they were outnumbered. they were always out numbered and still whipped the blue-bellies. southern generals were the best an that's a fact. the union had hancock and renolds. they were good. and chamberlain.
Fredericksburg was the education of the Army of the Potomac. After that battle, the Northern troops lost the final vestiges of their condescending attitude towards the Southern armies and realized that they would have to fight with brutality to defeat the South.
On the plus side of this movie, I was very pleasently surprised by Stephen Langs performance. I must admit when I first read the news (back before the movie was released) that Stephen Lang was to play Jackson I became skeptical. He did a great job though..I think he made the best of the material he was given and did it much better then other of the actors in the movie.
Lee actually forbid his artillery from firing on the city of Fredericksburg. His artillery did fire on the Union soldiers once the moved out, past the city.
Guess what, They are actors. and also, those are pretty good replicas of the uniforms.. how are they not BDUs. Other than the fact that a lot of them are not dirty. AND, a bunch of them where yanks.
Yes this was a slaughter, but so what the horrible invasion set forth by the Union aggressor. The stonewall at Fredericksburg was the symbol of the Glorious Souths' determination to push back the Yankee. I have several ancestors who served gloriously for the Confederacy in Mississippi and Georgia and Tennessee. I have nothing but pride in my heart for my relatives that fought for their beliefs. No, I do not support slavery, and much to everyones knowledge and teachings, nor did most Southerners!
I loved the Gettysburg movie. They did a great job on it..But G & G feels like hours long worth of preaching and stiff speeches. No humans, just marble statues of men & women making speeches. If they do make the final movie in the trilogy I hope they'll learn from the mistakes made in G & G.
I agree. This one had some great battle scenes and a good soundtrack, but every bit of dialouge did not need to be some lofty statement about the meaning of the war or something else.
IMHO, the rebs were never stronger than during this battle...their army was at it's largest (nearly 80,000 troops), and they had an impregnable, well prepared defensive position along those heights, all of their best generals were still alive: Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Hood, McLaws, Hill, etc. And the Yankees came right at them...they probably knew what was going to happen before it even started.
And General Sherman shall rise again to punch it down like he did the first time. And it will be just as funny. And yes, I assure you anti-americanpatriot, I was born in Alabama and I live in South Carolina.
Apparently you aren't one of them. Wait what happened? Ooooh yea, the South seceeded from the United States because their candidate lost in a fair election and they though their "right" to slaves would be abridged by Lincoln. Evil Lincoln, how dare he claim all men were created equal! Then what happened? oh yea the United States BEAT DOWN the little rebels at a cost of 600,000 lives. Thats what happened.
Let me ask you a question. I'm an Iraq vet. I've been to Iraq. That war is bull shit. Only 4,000 military have died and the entire country is ready to pull out. We the people know that that it's not about the Iraqi people. It's about profits. So, that being a given, with only 6% of the South owning slaves, do you honestly think that the South really wanted to commit 300,000 people to their deaths so the 6% could maintain profits? It doesn't make economical sense. I'm raising the Bullshit flag.
I really can't comprehend any of those gung-ho "I wanna burn down the North" ignorant hicks, who claim aimlessly they "will never forget what happened", blah blah (insert more bullsh*t).
What happened was that a bunch of souther states declared themselves a separate nation, and attacked the Union at Frt. Sumters. Result: 4 years of bloody, total war, culminating in the destruction of the Southern secessionist army (as well as the economy, but that was inevitable).
The Rebs were never stronger than at this moment.
sargeanb 1 month ago
these guys are the same guys in the movie gettysburg, was gettysburg suppose to be a sequel to this movie
tenirpaslager 1 month ago
Rotten Tomados gave this movie a bad score. F*** Rotten Tomados.
RebelSoldat1 2 months ago
Please put up the entire battle.
360Nomad 2 months ago
I cannot believe how inept the Union army was under Lincoln to trust generals like Ambrose Burnside.
Its absolutely mind boggling on how anyone could waste precious men and matériel in an assault across open ground, going up against heavily entrenched and dug in infantry supported by artillery providing fire across the entire battlefield without obscurity.
Its a suicide assault at Frederickburg
ConstantineJoseph 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph Yeah, Ambrose Burnside did the same thing at the Burnside Bridge at Antietam and at The Battle of the Wilderness, Spotsylvania, and The Battle of the Crater, where he rushed masses of troopes through a funnel or frontal assualt and had them all slaughtered every time.
AUG351 3 months ago
@AUG351 Well said AUG, Burnside was risking his men all the time in predictable frontal charges.
Actually, Napoleon Bonaparte had quite a similar situation at Austerlitz. However, his guile and trickery made the enemy think he is numerically inferior, resulting in the enemy's decision to attack and that proved to be the decider. Given the high ground advantage, the Russians still lost against the French.
This is the startling difference in generalship. But Napoleon is a genius.
ConstantineJoseph 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph Exactly, as you said how Napoleon used trickey and deception to win the battle and if the Russians had stayed on the hill they could have had the tactical advantage and could have won if they had done so. Sun Tzu said "All warfare is based on deception" and ""invincibility lies in the defence; posibility of victory in the attack".
AUG351 3 months ago
@ConstantineJoseph true. but bear in mind tha advances on the union left at fredericksburg came much closer to succeeding in their objectives, while certainly not as dramatic as the action at marye's heights. also consider that lincold had few other options at the time. he HAD to put someone in charge, and burnside was most senior. probably not a decision he would have chosen had another man of equal seniority presented himself. we can say 'what if' til we are blue in the face, but for protocol.
Putaspellonyou 2 months ago
@Putaspellonyou Yeah, allot of people don't know about the flanks where Meade and Gibbon broke through where Jackson was positioned on a wooded ridge with trenches in a different area than the wall that most people think was where the whole battle was fought but on the flank Meade broke through but Gibbon didn't get there in time to support it and help push through so they retreated.
AUG351 1 month ago
@AUG351 Except for the fact that Early came up and whipped all the breakthroughs....
sargeanb 1 month ago
The text said colonel zook, but they called him geneal zook...wtf?
njdevil281 3 months ago
I think that the first 2 minutes, 29 seconds of General Lee's counsel of war with his top commanders is one of the finer scenes in Gods and Generals. I could watch it (and do) over and over again. So resolute were their roles prior to the battle.
Great scene. Thank you for posting.
82LUFT 5 months ago
northerners had slaves for decades before freeing them. so if the war had started earlier no on today would ever say slavery was the cause. people just lean on that issue to make themselves feel better for the half million dead. not counting the citizens dead and raped by yankees. wherever blue coats showed up, folks died. Mexicans, Indians, Southerners, and then Indians again! and 5 slave states fought for the north... but it was bout slavery???
bluegrassreb1 5 months ago
If the union had enough soldiers to fight by firing in line against a fortified enemy why couldn't they charge the walls in melee combat to force the enemy into a close quarter battle? Unless this movie scene is incorrect and they did do that.
You would lose many less men by making the enemy lose the option of firing behind a wall.
PS. I play "Empire Total War" so this whole shoot at a enemy behind a wall thing makes no sense to me.
oddersisadog 6 months ago
@oddersisadog They did charge at the wall but basically got cut down because there
was so much bullets and artillery coming at them before they could make it to the wall.
AUG351 5 months ago
@AUG351 Oh ok, I was just wondering if they did charge the wall in real life because it would make no sense to line up against dug in defenders. Glad to hear they didn't.
oddersisadog 5 months ago
@oddersisadog it makes perfect sense if you are looking for cover fire. The confederates had soliders lined up on the rear of the wall and alot of casualites were prevented because of it. The Union army was eaten up by artillary fire across the plain. Gen. Hancock advised weeks prior to send a small brigade to prevent artillary foundations to be set up along the ridge; however, Gen Burside was too stubborn and made the fool hardy mistake of attacking Gen. Lee's brigade head on. Alot of men died
AZsportshut 5 months ago
@oddersisadog you try charging across open field with rifles and cannon raining hell on you. i very highly doubt youed make it half way across before losing the majority of your force.
SargeSouth 5 months ago
picket: pickets chaargee!!..
jackson: you have to wait couple more years
NoobSnoopy 6 months ago
“General, we cover that ground now so well that we comb it as with a fine-tooth comb. A chicken could not live in that field when we open on it.”
A Confederate artillerist, to Gen. James Longstreet
Lee: “General, they are massing very heavily and will break your line, I am afraid.”
Longstreet: “General, if you put every man on the other side of the Potomac on that field to approach me over the same line, and give me plenty of ammunition, I will kill them all before they reach my line.”
SupernalOne 6 months ago 4
What song starts at 5:40???
WR12MSH 6 months ago
@theCuno100 It wasn't the physical destruction caused by Sherman's march that signaled the end of the Confederacy, as much as it was the knowledge that Sherman could do it without a supply line and with barely any resistance by Confederate armies.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago in playlist American Civil War
a yankee general qouting a caesar monologue.. priceless.. fucking idiot..
dljc1979 1 year ago
@dljc1979 Chamberlain was a Colonel and a former teacher if anybody would it would probably be the one to say it
markmason1000 1 year ago
Is it truth that prostitution caused the Battle of Fredricksburg? A war of madams soon broke out? I think history in Bulgaria isn't what it used to be.
parafleet 1 year ago
The Battle Scenes and visuals in this movie are excellent. However, I think the movie is just shot too dramatically. Too many soliloquies and dramatic face shots. I feel Gettysburg got the "tone" so to speak of the civil down better.
Kravis63 1 year ago
@Kravis63 yea you have a point...
sjbaseball6 1 year ago
@Kravis63 i agree completely. I remember seeing this in the theater and I nearly walked out at intermission. Yes... there was an intermission.
topjimmy72 1 year ago
one of the best, if not best, civil war movies ever!
sjbaseball6 1 year ago
Bobby Duvall played a great Robert E. Lee. Better than Martin Sheen's portrayal in "Gettysburg", in my opinion. Nothing against Martin, he's a fine actor.
MrBolas33 1 year ago
@MrBolas33 Well, Robert (not Bobby) Duvall is General Lee's grandson. Not sure how many great's there are.
demeandr121 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
anybody know the name of the song where the Irish Brigade are marching into line at 6:03
markmason1000 1 year ago
anybody know the name of the song where zooks troops are marching forward?
markmason1000 1 year ago
@markmason1000 "VMI will be heard from today"
Proudnewfoundlander1 1 year ago
It was an Army not a rabble a damn good army at that too
markmason1000 1 year ago
Yeah, these guys are about to get their nuts shot off and they're being forced to stand there and be bored to death listening to the boss show off his knowledge of Roman history. Somehow I doubt that actually happened.
WarEagle8055 1 year ago
@WarEagle8055 if it was a British army, someone would have shouted out "alright Shakespeare - that's enough of that! My bollocks are freezing - let's go kill some rebels"
blueray1969 1 year ago 4
hooray for comments
LYinKansas 1 year ago
4:48-5:05, imagine the noise. I would not want to be opposite those defences. Even in modern Warfare.
likojib 1 year ago
my great great grandfather was behind the wall on the far left during the battle. what an incredible bloodbath he must have seen. nightmares for years i would imagine.
jr55ful 1 year ago
Adolf Hitler spoke very fondly about Abraham Lincoln in his Mein Kampf. He respected his subjugation of the states and his war tactics (e.g. besieging civilian centers in cities). Sherman's March is one of the greatest war crimes committed in US history.... more than 50,000 Southern civilians were killed from siege and relocation.
Hapafull 1 year ago
@Hapafull Are these Generals and people of Scotch-Irish dscent and English dscent? because they mention yankees so that means they must be Scotch-Irish/Germans right? cuz if they were of English heritage then it's like saying English bstrds. Did they really have that accent during that time? I thought it might have still been somewhat British. Also how did this accent come about? Spanish/Ulster mixed together? So are they english dscent or scotch-irish? thanks!
easynowww 1 year ago
@easynowww that accent is called "piedmont virginian" IIRC. You'll have the answers to your questions by looking that up. Keep in mind these generals were very educated men with a large portion of them comming from the artisocratic plantation classes. Im sure they sounded a lot different than the farmers on the front line. As a born and raised northerner i cant help but get swept up at how flat out beautiful their speech sounds (no homo)
afrim89383 1 year ago
@Hapafull Then you must think that every one of our bombing raids from WW2 were even worse war crimes yes? And therefore those men in the USAAF were what? War criminals? Sherman's march ended the war much quicker than it would have otherwise. That is what total war is. The term "war crime" itself is an oxymoron.
Shafeone 1 year ago
@Shafeone Shermans was a shocking physcopath, As for those raids Churchill knew it was nasty but had to be done like the atom bomb. Whereas Sherman enjoyed it.
Colton8646 11 months ago
@Colton8646 Sherman had lived and worked in the south before the Civil War. He loved the southern people. But Sherman, like Grant, knew that to win the war would take bringing the conflict to the civilian population as well as to the Confederate armies
Steve17010 10 months ago
@Steve17010 Then how come Quatrills raid on Lawrence gets so much criticism?. Lawrence wasn't full of innocent people, instead it was the headquarters of the Redlegs, the Union guerillas who had attacked and slaughtered innocents, who refused to join the Union. The Lawrence raid was a revenge attack for this and acheived the objective of pretty much destroying the Union guerilas.
Colton8646 10 months ago
@Steve17010 I agree with you about Sherman bringing the war to the Civilian population. You have to break the will of the Country's people to continue fighting not just the Army. No greater evidence of that then Vietnam we won most of the battles but the will of the people at home was not there. The same thing happened to Japan when we dropped the atom bomb on civilians.
686204 10 months ago
@Colton8646 "Shermans was a shocking physcopath"
LMAO. The psychopaths were the Southern politicians. All of the ones who supported secession were slaveholders. They didn't care about "States Rights", they just didn't want to lose their fortunes. They had no chance of success but they forced their young men to die for them (the Confederacy started drafting men before the North did). They are the most evil Americans of all time.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago in playlist American Civil War
@KayBeeEee1983 Thats a generalisation and a lie. "No chance of sucess". What about Fredericksburg 60,00 CSA 130,00 Union soldiers, CSA victory. Also what else do you call someone who watches his soldiers rape a black woman like Sherman did other than a physcopath? Oh Kaybee your niave filth and not worth talking to.
Colton8646 7 months ago
@Colton8646 I meant no chance to win the war, retard. Sherman didn't watch any rapes. What proof is there that ANYONE was raped? Confederates aren't trustworthy (they believed slavery was moral for God's sake), especially not one who just got his ass kicked by Sherman. Of course they're going to lie to make Sherman look bad.
Why would they want to rape a black woman anyway? They were all racist, both North and South, and there were plenty of white women.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 All whites were by our standards racist... so why would you say southerners arent "trustworthy" but northerners are??? Many northerners believed that blacks should be deported after emancipation because they were SOO INFERIOR THEY CANT LIVE WITH WHITES.. It cant be disputed that Southerners had much more honor and etiquette/manners than northerners. There are plenty of cases of rape by federal troops while in Georgia. My point is 1 side is no worse/better than the other
23mbtx23 6 months ago
@23mbtx23 "so why would you say southerners arent "trustworthy" but northerners are?"
Because the south were traitors and they believed slavery was moral.
"Many northerners believed that blacks should be deported after emancipation because they were SOO INFERIOR THEY CANT LIVE WITH WHITES.."
That's not true at all. There weren't any slaves in the north. Nothing changed in the north after emancipation. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts and Rhode Island even allowed blacks to vote.
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago
@23mbtx23 "It cant be disputed that Southerners had much more honor and etiquette/manners than northerners."
Of course that can be disputed. How would anyone prove that?
"There are plenty of cases of rape by federal troops while in Georgia."
There's no proof of any of that.
"My point is 1 side is no worse/better than the other"
The South is much worse. Their leaders were willing to decimate the population and let the south be laid waste because they didn't want their slaves to lose value.
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 We agree on alot. I am not like many of my southern brethren who refuse to look at facts and refuse to believe slavery had ANYTHING to do with all of this. But i believe that the war had MANY causes, slavery, economical, political, cultural, international manipulation, and others caused the war. I believe that both sides had their "good men" and "bad men". Would you not say the same? both sides had flaws, bad people,etc but also had good men and noble ideals
23mbtx23 6 months ago
@23mbtx23 "I believe that both sides had their "good men" and "bad men". Would you not say the same? both sides had flaws, bad people,etc but also had good men and noble ideals"
Yes, I agree with that. I think the southern army had noble ideals, but they were manipulated by their politicians into thinking the war was about rights and liberty, when it was really just about keeping slaveholders rich.
KayBeeEee1983 6 months ago
@23mbtx23 i can honestly agree with you...slavery had an issue in this war but it wasnt the only issue... most slave owners didnt treat their slaves bad, but some did.... lee had slaves at arlington but he didnt treat them that way...they were more like family members...and yes south had good men (stonewall, lee, longstreet, etc...) and bad (Joe Johnston, etc..)...and of course the north had good men (Grant, Chamberlain, Hooker, etc...) and bad men (sherman, Lincoln, etc...)
sjbaseball6 6 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983
sherman was a psychopath? no, he was a genious. lee just wouldnt give up, despite the fact that the south was outmatched in every aspect - numbers, supplies, production, etc.
so, sherman started burning down the south. sherman wouldnt send his troops into frontal assaults like you see here. he simply burned everything, ripping the heart out of the south. he was the BEST union general.
parfitt21 7 months ago
@parfitt21 I didn't say he was a psychopath.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago
from frederciksburg....find civil war bullets in my back yard...had a friend tht found an old pistol jus chillen on a rock in the woods still find trench lines if u look hard enough in random patches of woods...love it
itsjohnnyb 1 year ago
what is the name of this movie ?
teod1112 1 year ago
@teod1112 Gods and Generals.
haynes1776 1 year ago
"Hail Ceaser! We who are about to die, salute you!!"
demeandr121 1 year ago 20
So, the result: 12,000 union casualties. A needless waist of human lives and military resources. A great embarrassment. Burnside should had resigned.
haynes1776 1 year ago 2
@haynes1776 Actually, the AOP lost more then "12,000" men at Fredericksburg. Lincoln wrote to Burnside to "Trim down the casualty list". Guess what was about to come out....Emancipation Proclamation. It would not look to good to lose another "15,000" Union soldiers. Past historians have claimed "15,000" and up to "20,000" but I lean more on "15,000".
Lee's side lost fewer men then was reported. Several hundred Confederates faked sickness to go home for Christmas.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 And the fighting at the southern end of Fredericksburg at the slaugter pen farm was bloody as well. and the union almost broke the confederate line there.
haynes1776 1 year ago
@haynes1776 Lee, Jackson, A.P Hill all agreed that the 600 yard wide "Swamp" could not permit any Union soldiers to get through it. Thus BG. Gregg pulled his South Carolina brigade back and now there was a huge hole in the defenses. Meade took his division into that 600 yard hole. Meade and Gibbon attacked but had no support and they were both furious with MG. Franklin (Commanding the 6th Corps) Franklin did nothing and lost only 404 men. Franklin would be sent out West after that.
rebel2276 1 year ago
Burnside also made furher delays by waiting for the poontoon bridges to arrive and confederates of General Barksdale's Mississippi brigade made it hectic on the union bridge builders to do their job. Then came Burnside's biggest blunder by attacking the fortified confederate strongholds at the Stone wall and Mayre's heights. Despite the brave efforts of the union troops, every assault was thrown off with heavy losses.
haynes1776 1 year ago 9
@haynes1776 Great post, someone who knows their history on the Fredericksburg battle.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 Thank you for your complement. Its good to chat with fellow civil war buffs.
haynes1776 1 year ago
@haynes1776 Never ever get involved in the "Numbers game". I personally do not believe any strength's or losses in any battle. The bigger the battle the less accurate it was. Brian Pohanka and I worked several years on that and we were just frustrated. I will continue to search for missing regimental strength and losses, Union and Confederate. John Michael Priest did a great job on his 1989 "Soldiers' Battle" book on Antietam. He could not find the missing Union/CSA regiments either.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@haynes1776 John spent Eight years working on that book, pretty much the entire 80's. But he did not have the internet available back then. I have filled in many of the missing regiments, but some are still unknown. The battle of Chickamauga is missing several Union/CSA regimental strength and losses as well. Longstreet's regiments are largely unknown. So I have to go back to Gettysburg and judge the losses there and add say 50 men (wounded and recovered) to get a ball park estimate.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@haynes1776 My associates and I work on the "Unknown". We are hoping to come out with the first ever, two book series on "Captured Union and Confederate Colors". I work on the Union Colors, because not to many experts wanted to take that on. It was very very rare, that a Union regimental commander admitted to losing a color. An example, only two regimental commanders at Gettysburg reported in the Official Records they lost a flag. The 3rd Maine (National) and 11th US Regulars (Regimental Flag).
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 Ive been reading your comments. Very interesting. You are right about actual numbers on casualties. I know all units, union and confederate, have kept records of dead,wounded,missing,presumed dead or captured.
haynes1776 1 year ago
@haynes1776 I worked on the "Numbers game" for Seven long years. Three of them with the late Brian Pohanka. I personally do not believe any of these numbers at all. At the regimental level it will be accurate, but the higher up, it will become more inaccurate.
MG. Hancock during the "Overland Campaign" ordered his division commander's NOT to fill out any paperwork out. Not till February 1865, did they finally fill that out. MG. Warren was known to "Cut some of his losses" at the Wilderness.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 true, but by the human carnage of these battles the losses were just appalling. Even worst the commanders not making proper paperwork of the actual casualties
haynes1776 1 year ago
@haynes1776 I agree with you 110%. While my associates and I read all the Union, Confederate and U.S.C.T, regimental histories, we found something very strange. On the average, the "Wounded" listed, about 85% were "Wounded and Recovered". So does that mean they returned to duty? Does that mean they were on light detail?? Were they sent home?
Check out the New York regimental website, the only one that shows "Wounded" and "Wounded Recovered".
Have a good morning, Haynes!
rebel2276 1 year ago
@haynes1776 "Burnside also made furher delays by waiting for the poontoon bridges to arrive"
How were they supposed to cross a river without a bridge? Lincoln and the War Department's principal responsibility was keeping the Army supplied, and they failed miserably.
KayBeeEee1983 7 months ago in playlist American Civil War
@haynes1776 the delays of the pontoons were really not his fault. had he had them in time, he might have been able to cross over before such strong defenses were in place to meet him. that said, making multiple brigade-front attacks on such a strong position like cobb had was suicidally stupid and arrogant. just proves that just because you are an excellent corps commander doesn't mean you can lead an entire army. hood proved that maxim on the southern side...
Putaspellonyou 5 months ago
General Burnside should had resigned after Fredericksburg. he should had taken General Hancock's advice to occupy the town sooner rather than waiting for the whole union army to assemble at the river to cross and advance on Richmond in force. His delay gave Lee time to prepare and block his advance.
haynes1776 1 year ago 2
A great movie. It gets slightly disillusioned in our modern "politically correct" day when it is so much more convenient to label anything to do with the confederacy as racist.
In my estimation, accurate portrayals of history will continue to dissipate in favor of political correctness.
supaflyrobby 1 year ago
They were only stealing from the stealers so that isn't stealing worthless Southern boy.
forty8r 1 year ago
Look at all those slavebarons.
forty8r 1 year ago
@forty8r And look at all those yankee thieves about to be slaughtered. Lee actually knew the yankee scum would loot the town and took advantage of the time given him to build up his defenses on Marye's Heights. Stupid yankee fucks got what they deserved.
TheRebrouser23 1 year ago
Don't you Virginians think the accents were off ? But I don't know how they sounded in 1863 ?
Hiramab1 2 years ago
Depends on what part of Virginia you're from.
baanjoguy 2 years ago
@baanjoguy I am from southeast Virginia and never lived in the big city ,some say my accent is old Virginian,we pronounce house ,out and about different than Northern and western Virginians ,but some people on Maryland's Eastern shore speak the same as we do ? Anyway I perfer a Virginian accent where ever we may be from ! You should hear Manteo NC (Old English)
Hiramab1 2 years ago
I have heard them in fact I married a Manteo guy. I lived in Virginia many years as well , and love the way they all talk, Is "Southern".... It could be that Manteo was one place the first ship from England came ashore, with their strong "Old English", accents as well as up around the Eastern Shore , Jamestown, and Gloucester, Virginia. Many of those first settlers stayed in that area. I'm sure you have heard the term "There's a mouse in the house..get it out"! with the strong OU emphasis.
SoBelleofTN 2 years ago
Bruce Boxleitner should've played General Sheridan.
slashingraven 2 years ago
@slashingraven Yeh he is from Elgin , Illinois near Chicago. I guess most actors like playing evil parts in their careers.
forty8r 1 year ago
Fredricksburg V.A. My hometown..
Love it!
Spyronortex89 2 years ago
Mine too. I grew up there from the time I was 5 until I moved to Richmond at 18 for college. I walked those hills and the stone wall many times. Even as a boy I was stunned at the brilliance of Lee's positioning and the folly of Burnside's attack. A killing field unequalled in war.
eddybaby58 2 years ago 3
well it was reversed at Gettysburg.
MisterGage77 2 years ago
Yeah, that is forever a mystery. Lee watched at the Union was cut to pieces attacking strong high ground wall defensive positions yet tried to do the same at Gettysburg. Lee's hubris got the best of him, he really should have listened to Longstreet. I tend to believe had he been alive Jackson would have agreed with Longstreet's plan at Gettysburg.
Kravis63 2 years ago 3
Hey it's Senator Robert Byrd (of W-VA)
at 2:25.
cripplehawk 2 years ago
I` ll bet he pulled that uniform out of his closet. By the way wasn`t WV a union state?
gmaqwert 2 years ago
Yep in fact WV was part of VA. But they seceded from VA because VA seceded from the Union.
cripplehawk 2 years ago
That is correct. But Byrd was a member of the Klan, which supported murders and lynchings that kep the Democratic party in power through the imposition and reimposition of segregation.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Originally called Kanawha district, yes it was a territory of NW Virginia where the federals roamed at will. It actually was the only section of the confederacy that seceded from it, becoming West Virginia in 1863.
Evocati2008 2 years ago
W V really wasn't a state then.. it was all VA but they broke away to the Union.. mountainous regions typically were pro union Easten Tenn was the same way.
woobstoob 2 years ago
hey do you guys notice the little green leafs in the union troops' hats? i think only the irish brigade has them 6:27
parfitt21 2 years ago
i wish this movie where a bit shorter and done a bit better cause it isin't that bad. but sadly it in no way looks at the meanings of the war and it is 3 and a half hours long
xspartan617 3 years ago
The length is one of the reasons it bombed at the box office. I agree it has it's moments but it gets way too preachy and times with irrational, dull soliloquies. This would have worked better as a TV mini-series. I think there is actually over 6 hours of film but it had to be trimmed for a theatrical release. The entire battle of Antietam was filmed but left out completely. That I would like to have seen. A lot of the story wound up on the edit room floor. Too bad.
Turnback 3 years ago
Oh, that's interesting... do you know if there's a director's cut or something that would include the Antietam scene?
Zappiss 2 years ago
I check around from time to time and there isn't one. Probably not a big enough demand to justify the cost. With all the deleted scenes it's a practically another movie unto itself.
Turnback 2 years ago 3
@Zappiss I heard there was one. I don't know really.
TheLegolasguy 1 year ago
@Turnback Actually it isn't too preachy. Men like Gerneral Lee, and Jackson were God fearing men who believed the Bible. What I appreciate about this movie is that it shows that unlike many hollywood films. Also I apreciate the fact that they give an even depiction of the Civil War.
Joshjeff1611 1 year ago
@Joshjeff1611 I am not doubting they were pious men, Jackson was a what many historians view as a religious fanatic. But one of the biggest complaints about this film is all the drawn out, snoozy, soliloquoys. They didn't speak like that anymore than 17th c. men spoke in Shakespeare's english. And even depiction? Are you kidding? This film is laughably pro CSA. No issues, no mention of slavery, all Union are drunks and thieves all CSA virtuous, polite, and god fearing. Total BS.
Turnback 1 year ago
@Turnback Yes it is a Pro-Confederate movie, first time actually showing that Lee actually won a battle, as if he never did. For the AOP, the only major battle they won on an open field, was at Gettysburg.
The source of the war was not slavery, the source of the war was the Jesuits"
Abraham Lincoln.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 Lincoln never said anything about Jesuits. That's a long debunked conspiracy theory which I have not heard anyone bring up in years. The war not about freeing the slaves. It was however about competing systems of commerce, culture, and regional autonomy; at the root of which was the long standing slave question. Also Antietam, 9 months earlier, was not a Union defeat.
Turnback 1 year ago
@Turnback Go to the National Archives, we do all of our deep searching there. My associates and I could spend the rest of our lives there and still not find everything. They have hid tons of stuff and some we have found.
Antietam was a "Tie" neither side won nor loss. Lee held his ground the very next day, just as he had done on July 4th, 1863 at Gettysburg. Lee and his men did not feel they lost Gettysburg. Even if Lee won Gettysburg, he still had to return to Virginia.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 Tactically it was a tie, strategically it was a victory in that it ended Lee's Maryland campaign. It SHOULD have been an overwhelming victory given the lopsided forces and the intelligence learned, but since McClellan was such an incompetant, cautious, twit, it was what it was.
Turnback 1 year ago
@Turnback Lee actually wanted to go into Pennsylvania. McClellan was cautious and given horrible intelligence reports. He believed Lee had "200,000" men. We know from books that Lee had around 35,000 men. When A.P. Hill showed up with his "Light Division" he had only "1,900" men with him. A long nine hour march shred so many stragglers that they came in at night and the following morning. So it is very difficult to determine just how many men Lee had on the field and fought.
Have a good night
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 McClellan was also handed a copy of the Confederate battle plans for Antietam. Special Order 191 which was found in a filed wrapped around three cigars. It showed lee split his forces in three. McClellan waited nearly 2 days to act on this and that gave Lee time to entrench,reinforce, and consolidate. Probably the most inexcusable and ridiculous screw up of the war. McClellan was a terrible general. A Grant or Sherman would have crushed them.
Turnback 1 year ago
@Turnback McClellan was just in the wrong line of work, he was a great siege engineer and organizer. McClellan put the AOP Corps together and after the 1st Bull defeat, reorganized the entire army.
McClellan should have just dug in at Harrison's Landing and at least keep the attention of some of Lee's forces. Lee had detached, D.H. Hill's division, McLaw's division and Walker's division to guard Richmond. Once McClellan left for good, those three divisions joined Lee after 2nd Bull Run.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@Turnback Pettigrew's North Carolina Brigade stayed at Richmond and thus Walker had a two brigade division at Sharpsburg. It is said Lee had "41,500" men, but we have worked on the numbers game and Lee had in action "25,000-35,000" men. Reason being, not all of Stuart's cavalry fought, some regiments guard the flanks and Potomac River crossings. Nor was all of Lee's artillery there either. Thomas' Georgia Brigade and the 5th Alabama Battalion remained at Harper's Ferry as well.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@Turnback The Confederates captured very valuable artillery pieces, including a huge 50 pound Parrott Rifle, two (9 Inch naval Dahlgren rifles), 3 inch rifles and several other pieces. The Confederates exchanged worn out pieces for the new pieces. I suspect, the 50 pound Parrott rifle piece took days to get to Richmond. It was later recaptured when Richmond fell.
rebel2276 1 year ago
Antietam ended Lee's invasion and put a fourth of his army in hospital or in the ground. It should have been the day the war ended...McClellan never knew how close he was. By mid afternoon Lee's center had effectively disintegrated. Mac had 30,000 fresh troops he never used. A shame. Sept. 17, 1862 should have been the day the rebellion died...fitting as it was the 75th anniversary of the siging of the Consitution.
Shafeone 1 year ago
@Shafeone Hellow Safeone, good to see you on here, I have been away the last Three months. Lee asked way to much from his men buy going into Maryland. Lee should have been happy with the captured of Harper's Ferry and then fall back to Winchester and call the campaign over. I agree with you, Mac had Lee, but thought Lee had "200,000" men. Lee had around "30,000-35,000", only "20,000" made it back out. At least "5,000" stragglers came in that night and the next morning/day.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@Turnback Miniseries would have been a great idea.
hrothgleas 1 year ago
@hrothgleas Gettysburg was originally intended as a TBS miniseries but Ted Turner, who financed it, decided it would work better as a feature length film. It got ok results but it was loooong, over 4 hours with an intermission. GAG was intended as a film release but that was a mistake. It was sloppy, all over the place, and left out too much. THAT should have been a series. Now the final film, The Last Full Measure, will never be filmed after the GAG fiasco.
Turnback 1 year ago
@Turnback Darn, I sat through the movie originally just for Antietam.
khamulshadow 1 year ago
@khamulshadow Oh My God they are dicks!
easynowww 1 year ago
God Bless the Confederacy and her fallen soldiers! May they be with God in heaven
crazycuntryboy2 3 years ago
Jackson was one of Lee's best officers (the other two were Longstreet---with the beard---and brash Hood). Had Jackson lived, the outcome at Gettysburg may well have been very very different.
zenithomega19 3 years ago
Is that Bruce Boxleitner?????
zenithomega19 3 years ago
Isnt it Robert Duvall ?
when is that fiolm from ? year ? name ?
nightravenonline 3 years ago
I dont care what anyone says, that is no Stonewall Jackson...he will always be Pickett in my book...
omega856 3 years ago
I think the confederates probably won this battle because their generals had such impressive beards. The bigger the beard, the bigger the balls.
subscooby 3 years ago 3
I say around 2060 impressive breads will start becoming fashionable again.
sweetwater88 3 years ago
Impressive breads? Like really long baguettes?
subscooby 3 years ago
Well the "bigger the breads, the bigger the balls" theory don't work. I mean look at the french! (joke, they only surrendered it one war. But unguided racism is fun)
leonleonceur 3 years ago
It certainly is sir. The Germans are quite into big sausages, I don't know what that says about them.
subscooby 3 years ago
gotta give the yankees credit. that took such balls to charge maries heights. it was even worse than pickett's charge. gotta give them credit. i take my hat off to all who fought that day.
shiroisan87 3 years ago
yea but I wish I could go back in time just so I can punch General Burnside in the balls
refuckulate420 3 years ago 13
lol
shiroisan87 3 years ago
like burnside had any...
Spartanz1170 3 years ago 2
im with you to id rather have a dumb ass horse than be with Genral Burnside or id try to be a deserter
Irish8594 3 years ago
@refuckulate420 Better yet I would have Brunside go on the open field for himself to see the height behind the town are strong and let him get killed out there.
TheRapper10000 1 year ago
@refuckulate420 lol
TsumeBeta038 11 months ago
Great movie, too bad no one wanted to make the third movie, Last Full Measure.
joshjhutton 3 years ago 2
the confederates won this battle even if they had less men. Pretty cool and strange at the same time.
IndyJones95 3 years ago 3
God was on their side
klined 3 years ago 3
It had nothing to do with God. that collection of confederate officers contained the most brilliant military minds the world has ever known.
robertellis3 3 years ago 3
don't throw god into this cause he didn't do anything. The confederates were situated on high hills, brick walls and thick forests while the federals marched in open land.
alexiaNBC 3 years ago
Nonsense, most of the Confederate General's were fairly average...very average in fact. The biggest factor at Fredericksburg was the lovely stone wall the Rebs could stand behind.
digglyda 3 years ago
where do you think they got those gifts? lol * looks up*
shiroisan87 3 years ago
God let them loose eventually? does he often change his mind mid-game?
digglyda 3 years ago
EVERY BATTLE that the confederates won they were outnumbered. they were always out numbered and still whipped the blue-bellies. southern generals were the best an that's a fact. the union had hancock and renolds. they were good. and chamberlain.
shiroisan87 3 years ago 2
Fredericksburg was the education of the Army of the Potomac. After that battle, the Northern troops lost the final vestiges of their condescending attitude towards the Southern armies and realized that they would have to fight with brutality to defeat the South.
radio187 3 years ago
Thx man..Too bad Ron Maxwell didnt eh? :/
On the plus side of this movie, I was very pleasently surprised by Stephen Langs performance. I must admit when I first read the news (back before the movie was released) that Stephen Lang was to play Jackson I became skeptical. He did a great job though..I think he made the best of the material he was given and did it much better then other of the actors in the movie.
FredDude27 3 years ago
Maxwell sold the rights to "Last Full Measure"
i forgot where i found it, but it's long gone. Anyway the movie was cancelled as far as I know
Spartanz1170 3 years ago
Yeh..Thats what I heard too. Maxwells greatest sponsor of the two earlier movies pulled out.
FredDude27 3 years ago
the most ironic connection between Fredericksburg and Gettysburg is the 'stone wall' held by both sides during either battle
stevo03lw 3 years ago 2
Lee actually forbid his artillery from firing on the city of Fredericksburg. His artillery did fire on the Union soldiers once the moved out, past the city.
Great video!
rebel2276 3 years ago
The clothes look like costumes, not battle dress uniforms. The men look like actors, not soldiers and sound like yankees and not Southerners.
7111nailuj 3 years ago
Guess what, They are actors. and also, those are pretty good replicas of the uniforms.. how are they not BDUs. Other than the fact that a lot of them are not dirty. AND, a bunch of them where yanks.
Octavion555 3 years ago
Yes this was a slaughter, but so what the horrible invasion set forth by the Union aggressor. The stonewall at Fredericksburg was the symbol of the Glorious Souths' determination to push back the Yankee. I have several ancestors who served gloriously for the Confederacy in Mississippi and Georgia and Tennessee. I have nothing but pride in my heart for my relatives that fought for their beliefs. No, I do not support slavery, and much to everyones knowledge and teachings, nor did most Southerners!
mesquiteboy 3 years ago
I loved the Gettysburg movie. They did a great job on it..But G & G feels like hours long worth of preaching and stiff speeches. No humans, just marble statues of men & women making speeches. If they do make the final movie in the trilogy I hope they'll learn from the mistakes made in G & G.
FredDude27 3 years ago 2
I agree. This one had some great battle scenes and a good soundtrack, but every bit of dialouge did not need to be some lofty statement about the meaning of the war or something else.
cadetcap 3 years ago 2
IMHO, the rebs were never stronger than during this battle...their army was at it's largest (nearly 80,000 troops), and they had an impregnable, well prepared defensive position along those heights, all of their best generals were still alive: Longstreet, Jackson, Pickett, Hood, McLaws, Hill, etc. And the Yankees came right at them...they probably knew what was going to happen before it even started.
sargeanb 3 years ago
30,000 Union soldiers went up that hill and 8,000 were casualties. Not one ever reached the stonewall at Marye's Heights. What a slaughter.
rebel2276 3 years ago
Spare me the freedom speech while your troops pillage my beloved Fredericksburg and get on with it Yankee! Sic Semper Tyrannis! Deo Vindice!
What goes around comes around and finally, the South will rise again!
1AnonymousPatriot 3 years ago
And General Sherman shall rise again to punch it down like he did the first time. And it will be just as funny. And yes, I assure you anti-americanpatriot, I was born in Alabama and I live in South Carolina.
HarbingerRomanus 3 years ago
Wow- happy for you. You were born in the South. Just remember there's an entire generation of us Southerner that haven't forgotten what happened.
1AnonymousPatriot 3 years ago
Apparently you aren't one of them. Wait what happened? Ooooh yea, the South seceeded from the United States because their candidate lost in a fair election and they though their "right" to slaves would be abridged by Lincoln. Evil Lincoln, how dare he claim all men were created equal! Then what happened? oh yea the United States BEAT DOWN the little rebels at a cost of 600,000 lives. Thats what happened.
HarbingerRomanus 3 years ago 2
Let me ask you a question. I'm an Iraq vet. I've been to Iraq. That war is bull shit. Only 4,000 military have died and the entire country is ready to pull out. We the people know that that it's not about the Iraqi people. It's about profits. So, that being a given, with only 6% of the South owning slaves, do you honestly think that the South really wanted to commit 300,000 people to their deaths so the 6% could maintain profits? It doesn't make economical sense. I'm raising the Bullshit flag.
1AnonymousPatriot 3 years ago
I really can't comprehend any of those gung-ho "I wanna burn down the North" ignorant hicks, who claim aimlessly they "will never forget what happened", blah blah (insert more bullsh*t).
What happened was that a bunch of souther states declared themselves a separate nation, and attacked the Union at Frt. Sumters. Result: 4 years of bloody, total war, culminating in the destruction of the Southern secessionist army (as well as the economy, but that was inevitable).
PrUnEJuIcEtHeThIrD 3 years ago 2
the south shall rise agian!!!
Deo Vindice
Antipumkins 3 years ago
no it wont
rawnation147 3 years ago
youll see
Antipumkins 3 years ago 3