Fuck all politics. All I'm saying is this - Ripper Owen's screams and Jon Schaffer's riffs is an ultimate deadly combination, that can probably destroy the whole world in the blink of an eye.
@Hornsup999 Wait... you didn't get that I said that I think Ripper is the most awesome screamer ever?? He's not as good as Halford but he's better than Barlow.
@JohannesFrykholm@Johannes Frykholm I do agree with you...fully. Also been a Priest fan for a long time, seen them all through the 80's til present. I also supported Ripper when Halford parted ways with Priest when many didn't. There's no doubt that when Ripper joined Priest they hit the Heavy Metal jackpot with him!
I think its kind of funny (in an ignorant way) that some individuals fly a Rebel flag who live in Northern states. I've actually seen this as I'm a Pa resident, take it down already, I don't care how much of a redneck you are, the Rebels were traders and that's a fact. Thumbs up to Iced Earth and the Union!!!
@Hornsup999 ... really? Thumbs up to Iced Earth and the Union? In the same sentence? Have you not seen Jon Schaffer wearing shirts and bandannas with the southern flag on them?
@JaniWarheart Yeah Really, Not that is makes much of a difference but Jon's a union man, I can tell you how I know this, he says it in the DVD, on the interview portion, very clearly, I own it. He also said that when he made the DVD/CD he didn't want to come off like he was taking sides. If this was 1861 he would thou. Don't know why he wears those bandanna's if he said that, you got me.
@Hornsup999 Maybe it has something to do with Jon learning more things and changing his view points on things after he jumped on he patriotism bandwagon of 9/11? Which, no offense to the guy, but he really did. And, yes, he still claims patriotism, but he does so to the country, not to the government itself. The union, of the time, was in support of the federal government, this is something that I'm damn certain Jon is not in support of these days, just listen to Sons of Liberty.
@JaniWarheart I'll have to listen to that song, until then I obviously can't comment on his view points, I just think he has an interest in the Civil War as a whole.
@Hornsup999 That much is definitely true, yes, Jon has a huge interest in the Civil War as a whole, as well as many other things in history. In terms of his views though, Jon offers rather, conflicting things at times. Or he has over the last decade, anyway. It is hard to tell with some things. From what I've gathered he is very much a patriotic person towards the country, but not so much the federal government (so it appears, I could be wrong).
Is it just me but does it seem like the more country northerners from states like Michigan, Wisconsin ,main, Pennsylvania ect seem to have produced the better soldiers for the union?Like the Iron brigade,20th main, Michigan cavalry ect ??
I'm British: the limit of my knowledge about the US Civil War is "it had something to do with slavery, Britain armed the South". I'm also not a great fan of this kind of music; I don't dislike it, but I wouldn't normally go out of my way to find it.
These videos make me want to know more about both. A lot more. Awesome work, good sir.
Brilliant song. And I don't use that word often. All this bickering negates the point of the music. All war is tragedy and as humans we should do whatever we can to prevent it.
SHUT THE FUCK UP PEOPLE!!! Just enjoy the song. It honors both sides for having the courage to fight and die for what they believed in. Something 99% of you would NEVER have the heart to do.
@artymeyer- Please explain considering no Canadians faught to my understanding. Although your country did have a big part in the conspiracy to kill Lincoln.
@TheLostIdea Tons of Canadians fought for the Union. During the winter of 1863/1864, tens of thousands flocked to Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Michigan etc. The main reason.....$500 dollar bounty money. Think about this, the average private was making 11-13 bucks a month, even if he served the entire war, the $500 dollar bounty was equal to that whole time. It is hard to guess, at how many Canadians went for the money. But many deserted at Petersburg and ruined great regiments.
@rebel2276- Thanks for the info. I get pissed when Canadians say they beat us in the war of 1812 and burned down the white house because they were British slaves. So I got even more pissed at his comment that they won our civil war.
@TheLostIdea Just like those 20 year old kids that claim, we were not fighting in Bosnia in 1992, were a mere baby at the time, lol. (I read your comment you left 4 months ago on this subject). I have a bullet scar on my left thigh, proving that not only were we in Bosnia, but we fought as well. Not till late 1995 did the U.N and American regular units then move into Bosnia and by then, the killings were over.
@TheLostIdea You typed nothing different, no harm or foul. I enjoy everyone on YouTube, if your for the North or South, I am deeply happy that all of you are interested in the Civil War. We are a very small group, that remembers the sacrifice our country made. Rather it was right or wrong. The majority of Americans just drive by battlefields everyday, not interested. The real war now is fighting land developers that could care less about our ancestors that fought and died.
Really good reenactments? Sure, I can see it as being few and when compared to, say, the World Wars but I don't think it's fair to say that people interested in the Civil War are in a minority (there are even less who know or think about the Korean War).
Nor do I believe that land developers reflect some greater majority. It's definitely a tragedy that they want to build over these sites, however, and unfortunately in this day and age, people are just too distracted.
@TheLostIdea If Canadians believe they helped the Union win the war, they are misinformed big time. Lets take the 5th New Hampshire infantry regiment for a prime example. After the battle of Gettysburg, Colonel Cross was killed and the regiment had barely 100 men standing. They left the AOP to guard prisoners at Point Lookout, MD. Then during the winter of 1863/1864 they recruited hundreds of Canadians.
@TheLostIdea By the time of the Petersburg siege/campaign. So many Canadians deserted to the Confederate line, that the Confederates put up a sing on their breastworks, "We have the regiment, send over the Colonel and Colors." Some of those SOB, actually gave up positions and what regiments were to the left and right and even time frames of guard changes. Well the Confederates attacked and gobbled up most of the 69th NY, 111th NY and 5th NH.
As you can read, they did more help for the CSA. lol
For those who chose to rant and rave about which region is better, are you fucking serious? This was the most tragic event in our history, we are one nation, did the people in the south cheer when the towers on 9/11 get hit??Fuck no! its because we are all one nation, General Lee's family fought in the Revolution, all these guys served in Mexico together, it fucking tragic these men had to raise arms against one another, and they knew that to. Learn from the mistakes of the past.
@donnieD20 Thank you. Finally, someone who sees this as it actually is. While I consider this album and the movie to be wonderful pieces of art, the actual events are the most tragic in America's history.
Quite right. Brother against brother, friend against friend. Culp dying on the hill named for his family is tragic indeed. The sad thing is that, going into the war, people thought it would be a gentlemanly thing of honor and so forth and so people came to spectate. . only to be horrified by the truths of war.
Some of the derision arising is based off of what is known as "The Lost Cause", I think. Which is odd that it still persists to this day.
@donnieD20 9/11 was an inside job, we know that now. It should be people of the north and south both against Washington D.C. and the treasonous Federal Government!
Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln also served together in short lived Black Hawk War. These were men of one nation, a torn nation, but one nation in the end.
@donnieD20 the outh was an independent nation which had legal precedent to leave the Union, only to be invade by the north. history is written by the victor.
Not sure why most kids even friends of mine when I was in school did not get into history,I loved anything to with the subject be it world history,US history or history of my state(Michigan)History is what made who we are and we must learn from past mistakes,just think what would be if the south had won??
Knasterreal1 is right. Everyone only thinks of slavery which was such a tiny part of the South and this war. The war was all about the restrictions that were put on the southern states in pricing and threatening our way of life. I am a southerner and had relatives way back then that were in Picketts Charge. Thinking about the Civil War and how states rights were threatened by the north reminds me much like what is going on now. Think about it.
@joconc- I wouldn't say that slavery was a small part of this war. For a couple of years leading up to the war the territories were being flooded with people from the North and the South who were already at war killing eachother over weather the territories would be free or slave. Lincoln made it clear that they would be free and that slavery should be contained to where it existed. He was against the war with Mexico because he didn't want slavery to expand. I am not happy with the way cont.----
@joconc- cont.- I am not happy with the way things are now, but if the South won the Civil War the 20th century would have been a disater for not only us, but the whole world. And by now we would be under a German or a Soviet rule along with the rest of the planet.
@bashenbrian =- Oh, OK so you couldn't win a civil war in your own country and you are convinced you could defeat an enemy that concurred all of Europe or all of Asia.
The confederates would probably have freed the slaves. The war wasnt about slaves but the trade laws and union centralisation which made the southern loose their rights and sovereign of their states.
@Knasterreal1- If it was about trade then why didn't the South wait till Lincoln took office to see what his trade rules would be like. The Confederates left as soon as Lincoln was elected and before he took office when all they knew about him was he was against slavery. They weren't interested in even talking to him. I wonder what issue they could have so much passion over. Also most of the presidents up till that moment had been from the South, so they weren't oppressed.
@TheLostIdea They knew full well what Lincoln was about they first and foremost did not like hime since he was an abolitionist and they had been attacking the southerners in every turn using politics to threaten southern trade prices and shipping. Since they werent about to be pushed into freeing the slaves.
The southern cotton was the lifeblood for a large part of USA and any restrictions put on the cotton states were seen as a threat to their way of life.
This song was completely out of place it would seem for iced earth and obviously a project at the time, but it seriously is epic in its own, and though Barlow is easily the greatest clean vocalist in metal, I think only Ripper could have pulled THIS one off. I remember him live right next to the stage doin this shit live and he fuckin kills with this album.
@G0RThauRTheCruEL Greatest clean vocalist? I think you should listen to "Bridge of Death" by Manowar. Eric Adams is THE greatest singer I have EVER heard.
the way they just stand there shooting at eachother is amazing. i don't know how u just sit there and take it. they should have relied on more ambush and gurilla tatics not pure numbers and force. if you think about it if they would have used bow and arrows instead of muskets (which took like 2-3 minutes to reload) they could have killed more of em close up. its amazing what those people did for our country. God bless them and may they rest in peace.
@BloodJunkie11 Not possible, that was considered dishonorable. that doesn't mean much now, but back then most of those men would rather die then commit dishonor.
@badism what the fuck are you talkin about. i understand honor AND there is NO honor in defeat and having your armies decimated by foolish military tactics. WAR is WAR and you win it at any cost butttt minimizing those costs along the way as much as possible. its only COMMON SENSE.
wow, this is awesome, now i can show everybody what I always see in my head while listening to this great songs.
But is there maybe a way to put this video up in better quality, like 720p, it would be awesome to watch it on the hd tv after downloading it. Thanks a lot to all the work spent to do this, great job
States' rights? look at the record: slave states had their will over Congress and S Court, and in most cases president through 1860. Congress passed legislation that emphasized a national approach to slavery, that is a return of runaways to the south with the jailing of those in opposition. Northern states started passing freedom laws for runaway slaves in response to Congress.
I just want to say, I can't believe my little project would produce this level of debate on the topic of the Civil War, thanks to everyone who has commented or viewed my videos.
I don't believe in slavery because I was brought up in a time period where there was no slavery. That was almost 150 years ago. We find it simply appalling in our time period.
It was just the law, nothing I made up or anyone else on Youtube.
@rebel2276 you realize the civil war had nothing to do with slavery. thats just propaganda to cover up the fact that the confederacy was only doing what it was allowed to do by the constitution. nothing more.
@rebel2276 - Slavery exists. It's just changed. The finance system is a system of slavery. The Debtor is slave to the lender to quote the bible. You know anyone who actually OWNS land and doesn't pay tax on it aka to 'own in allodial title' ?
They abolished one form for another. And liberation is at hand brother.
No, not all. There is not one single historian past and present that knows the true loss. Many of the "wounded" came back to duty after a day to a year of recovering.
If both armies really lost that many men, both would have been with a corporal's guard in April 1865.
Casualties back then meant KIA, mortally wounded, wounded, POW's and men who simply couldn't be found (either deserters or POW's or whatever). The *estimated* losses at Gettysburg were 53,000 (give or take a few thousand since all estimates on losses in the CW were inaccurate). If I remember correctly the number of men estimated to be KIA at Gettysburg was 10,000.
I actually feel sorry for the Northern civilians. Stripped of their Civil Liberties and rights, no wonder they had to have four drafts during the war.
Draft dates: Sep 1st, 1862, Feb 1st, 1864, Sep 5th, 1864 and April 15th, 1864.
Why in the world would the Union need to draft men? Countless foreigners were forced to join the Union army and fight. Many did not even speak english.
True, but the draft was much more extensive in the South.
Only 6% of the 2.1M Union soldiers were drafted, the rest were volunteers & 75% were American born. Though the CSA kept no records it is estimated a 1/4 to a 1/3 of their 2M soldiers were draftees.
The CSA 's1st draft started Apr 15th, 1862 & required all men ages 18-35 to serve. The age was extended to 45 in Sep 1862 & expanded to 17-50 in Feb 1864. Ironically, any man who owned more than 20 slaves was not required to serve.
I agree with your post, excellent research. I agree also that the Confederates records are horrible. When Richmond burned, many records were lost to history.
If I had been the President of the South back then, I would have that slave owner and his 20 slaves on the line and given freedom to any Africans that served in the Army. Regardless, if we won or lost. I would have called up all men, regardless of color. 16-50 to serve.
I must be crazy because I actually enjoy war, its in my blood. Had the most family in the Civil War and American Revolution War. I can trace my family as far back to the battle of Hastings, England in 1066.
My family has fought in all wars on this soil, that we hold so dear. If I die in combat, that is how I wish to go. My face to these towel heads. I have four sons that will follow the blood line and they will fight against terrorist.
So you're saying that you're going to get yourself killed because your folks did it, and are going to send your own kids to die because you did it. What a wonderful person you are.
And I find it amusing one can be desperate to fight a an individual of a terminology derived from having no race, gender, or belief. Have fun knowing the fact that you're too pathetic to do anything other than get through life by taking it, pal.
We all owe the G-ds a death. Run away as long as you please, and death will find you anyways. Perhaps death will find you only because you have run off.
if the south had won it would have been a disaster for both sides. it would have set a precedent and after the war other states might have broken away from the union and confederacy. after all even with the confederacy at stake one of confederate president davis's hardest jobs was making the states work together. imagine how hard it would be after the war was over. america could have become like europe. lots of little countrys fighting all over the place.
My parents are long retired, my wife and I are in the Army. She is in Iraq and I am here with her till Wednesday. My oldest son and I will then fly to Afghanistan and see my men for the first time since the IED injury to my right foot.
No need to pray, I always look forward to a honorable death on a battlefield. I just live in the wrong century. I rather have the enemy and my men put down rifles and bombs and planes and lets fight like the old times, eye to eye with swords.
Good strategy and good tactics are bullshit through political ideology and statistics. The South royally screwed themselves and everyone around them for 80 years, turning even the Constitution itself into something to justify slavery. Even now they remain a plague of worthless trash who depend on the economics of other countries.
Neither side won the cavalry battle at Gettysburg. I will give the Union cavalry a tactical victory, because they did stop Stuart's cavalry from getting in the rear of the AOP.
The reason that Custer was successful was the 5th and 6th Michigan cavalry were armed with 7 Shot Spencer rifles. No other Union or Confederate cavalry regiment had that firepower.
America was never in need to be saved. Lincoln did not want to obey the laws that the Supreme Court had judged in 1857 "Dred Scott ruling". All laws sided with the South. They made that crystal clear in 1857.
Yes the ANV Artillery did aim for one spot and then launch a massive, three division attack, which was suppose to split the AOP in half. The Artillery bombardment did not work, 80% of the shells either did not explode or sailed way over the 2nd Corps.
You think I am crazy on here, you should watch me in combat with my men. I am suppose to be in the rear directing, but I like it right up front well ahead of my men. I make sure my men eat first and sleep first.
I ask none of my men to do something I would not do myself. I will not send some 18 year old private to scout for me, that kid is young and has a life ahead of him. I want something done, I do it myself. I whoop and yell when I attack, just like the Indians. I bet they think I am crazy
The Dred Scott ruling was blatantly partial towards the racist trash that made up the country at the time. Dred Scott sued his owner over his rights in property out of his initial state bounds when they were traveling. It was technically legal that, since he was property, those sort of laws didn't necessarily apply in other states.
I only find it sad we couldn't go to war with the the traitorous Southerners as early as the Constitutional Convention, where we had a lot of internal pressure.
The Supreme Court was not "Racist Trash" and the Constitution clearly has on it "All other peoples are Three-Fifth's of a person. Thus, Since Dred Scott was a slave, he was NOT an American citizen.
We went war because Lincoln did not want to obey the law.
The court tried to reconcile the law, and couldn't so they denied Dred Scott had the standing to ask them the question.
The war came anyways, brought by the southerners who fought to extend and protect human slavery. The southern whites were slaves themselves to the slave owners, they were forced to serve by the 1792 militia act which was extended to perform "patrol for runaway slaves".
Dred Scott was a slave and he had no rights nor was he an American citizen.
The war came because Lincoln and the Republicans did not want to obey the law handed down by the Supreme Court.
American citizens could take their "Private Property" anywhere they wanted to go. The Missouri Compromise (1820) was illegal and unconstitutional. All pacts and compromises were illegal as well.
Territorial Governors such as (Kansas and Nebraska) had not powers to stop, prevent or prohibit, slavery.
Lincoln and the Republicans wanted to limit slavery, banning it from the territories, a government power as old as the Northwest Ordinance. The founders voted in the Northwest Ordinance, and so their position on the federal power to do so is clear.
The pact that was illegal was the so called confederate constitution. The south never followed it, and never appointed their counterpart to the US Supreme Court. The south was busy building a lawless society.
Actually they wanted to pass laws or an amemdment to correct the Court. Congress has the authority to set bounds on the court, and the amendment process is over all. only the foolish rebellion gave Lincoln power to free slaves in enemy held areas as a war measure. 13, 14th amendments were passed by the states to correct the Court's error in Dred Scot.
@rebel2276: Reb read the Constitution & the Fed Papers. The Supreme Court was not intended by the Founders to be the final authority on the law.
There is much wrong in the Dred Scott decision. The Court ruled blacks were not citizens yet they were in 5 states & could vote. They ruled they were not persons. Surely based on this alone you must agree the Court was morally wrong. They also ruled Congress had no authority in federal territories wrt slavery. Where does the Constitution say that?
The Constitution protected slavery. "All other peoples were Three-Fifths of a person". Thus, slaves could not be American citizens and were not. Dred Scott was a slave and thus could not sue his former master.
The Supreme Court also judged that the "Missouri 1820 Compromise was illegal and unconstitutional". That all pacts and compromises were illegal and unconstitutional.
American citizens could take "Their Private Property" anywhere they wanted to.
Chief Justice Taney's Scott opinion (Taney was a slave owner) is based on his personal believe that blacks are property & not people. It uses a false premise that blacks were not citizens at ratification (they were in 5 states). One could argue by counting blacks for representation purposes at all acknowledges they are persons. There was no basis for the court to rule on the Missouri Compromise. IMHO, the opinion was a broad interpretation driven by personal believes, not Constitutional law.
That was the law, certainly not everyone on the Supreme Court owned slaves.
The Constitution protected slavery, "All other peoples are Three-Fifth's of a person". So right there they are basically saying, your not a full person and thus not an American Citizen.
The 3/5ths Compromise was intended to achieve ratification, not meant to define the humanity/citizenship of slaves. In it the South traded greater House representation for a promise to end Slavery in 1808. Madison explains this in Federalist Paper #54.
In Scott, Taney & 5 other Southern justices clearly ignored the intent of the Founders to push their agenda using a very broad Constitutional interpretation. So, IMHO the "law" was not on the side of the South, just 6 biased justices.
5 states - means in five states they consider them such n such. those 5 states having it doesn't make it applicable for the whole - in the rest they would conform to the Supreme court's decision. That's how it works. - unless those states decided they wanted to implement law otherwise - that's the southern 'aka states rights' position. States can do as they please - but a state doing something doesn't mean shit for another state.
My point was the legal precedence for treating blacks as citizens as 5 states recognized them as such, the court ignored this. As to all states having to conform to the Supreme Court's decision, read the 10th Amendment, the basis of state's rights. You can't have it both ways & say the Court is the final word on the law & then claim state's rights.
This is 1 problem with the South's logic on Scott. They insisted Scott should be the law of the land, but ignored the Fed govt when convenient.
@rebel2276: Lincoln didn't want war, he wanted to preserve the Union & was willing to fight to do so. He believed that the idea of a Constitutional Republic would die if secession succeeded. Amble evidence exists that Lincoln tried very hard to stop secession by peaceful means, e.g. the Corwin amendment.
On the other hand, there were more in the South who wanted war, hence the attack on Ft. Sumter. There aim was to provoke war so as to force the fence sitting states to pick sides. It worked
Ft sumpter laid not any longer in US terr the us wouldnt leave terr that wasn't theirs so it got attacked for occupying foreign terr
the north fought to preserve the Revolution by holding the Union together. The South fought to preserve the Revolution by defending their rights.
A union that is not voluntary is not a union. It is slavery. Marriage is voluntary marriage is a union. One can join and one can leave. Thats a union. Lincoln lost his authority by infringing upon the constitution.
Ft. Sumter was a Federal installation & the point of the South attacking was to provoke a war.
We do agree that both sides were right. Constitutionally the concept of state's right IMHO was corrected. However, Lincoln was also right that had the South been allowed to leave the union the dream of the Revolution would have died.
Terminator: How could Lincoln have provoked war by raising taxes? By the time he was inaugurated on Mar 4, 1861 7 southern states had succeeded. Ft. Sumter was attacked on April 12th, hardly enough time for any taxes to cause succession.
@rjbaun if the federals had just let the confederacy secede, like it says they had the right to do in the constitution, there would never have been any shots fired at fort sumter or a civil war.
@rjbaun I would disagree with your evaluation. If the South would have had success at Gettysburg, Lincoln would not have been re-elected to president, or at most would have come to an agreement with the South about the real purpose of the Union, or specifically the role the Federal Government can involve itself in State Policies. The real war was about Wall Street domination of the Nation.
@willyrobinson South Carolinians attacked Fort Sumter *because* it would result in a the federal government marching an army to restore it.
At that time, Virginia was split. So were the other border states. By forcing an army across Virginia, they ensured the secessionists in that state government possessed the political capital to drive the vote towards secession.
Virginia was the most important state in those days. Once they had that, the secession was the real deal.
Look-- if the Confederates had one, there'd either be a nation of slaves, and one of freedom, or the Union would've joined into the confederates. What happened happened. No changing that. People are free. That's what counts. What also counts, is how epic this song is. Too bad youtube makes it so it must be cut short. Jon Schaffer is an amazing composer.
excellent mix of video to kick ass music from ICED EARTH!!! OUTSTANDING!!!
AttilaThe1 1 month ago
Man, our forefathers were dumpy.
TheSeveredArm 2 months ago
Darkmoon363654 if there was no war we all be taken over by towel heads
MrYankeefan9 2 months ago
LOL I love movie clips, did anyone else notice how clean those confederate uniforms look?
I wish I could like your video twice, even thrice. Well done.
SirPumpernickle 3 months ago
War is the utmost disgusting thing man is capable of.
darkmoon363654 3 months ago
@darkmoon363654 You're an idiot.
FireRainxX 2 months ago
@darkmoon363654 how exactly would you have stopped hitler
Warcorpse666 1 month ago
Iced Earth really need to make more songs like these. It makes the rest of the album look pretty average in comparison.
Bangell99 4 months ago 2
Fuck all politics. All I'm saying is this - Ripper Owen's screams and Jon Schaffer's riffs is an ultimate deadly combination, that can probably destroy the whole world in the blink of an eye.
JohannesFrykholm 4 months ago
@Johannes Frykholm I saw Ripper a few times in Priest, he was & is Awesome. At least we all can agree on that.
Hornsup999 4 months ago
@Hornsup999 Wait... you didn't get that I said that I think Ripper is the most awesome screamer ever?? He's not as good as Halford but he's better than Barlow.
JohannesFrykholm 4 months ago
Comment removed
Hornsup999 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JohannesFrykholm @Johannes Frykholm I do agree with you...fully. Also been a Priest fan for a long time, seen them all through the 80's til present. I also supported Ripper when Halford parted ways with Priest when many didn't. There's no doubt that when Ripper joined Priest they hit the Heavy Metal jackpot with him!
Hornsup999 4 months ago
Great job! Thank you for posting!
englundus 8 months ago
I think its kind of funny (in an ignorant way) that some individuals fly a Rebel flag who live in Northern states. I've actually seen this as I'm a Pa resident, take it down already, I don't care how much of a redneck you are, the Rebels were traders and that's a fact. Thumbs up to Iced Earth and the Union!!!
Hornsup999 8 months ago
@Hornsup999 ... really? Thumbs up to Iced Earth and the Union? In the same sentence? Have you not seen Jon Schaffer wearing shirts and bandannas with the southern flag on them?
JaniWarheart 4 months ago
@JaniWarheart Yeah Really, Not that is makes much of a difference but Jon's a union man, I can tell you how I know this, he says it in the DVD, on the interview portion, very clearly, I own it. He also said that when he made the DVD/CD he didn't want to come off like he was taking sides. If this was 1861 he would thou. Don't know why he wears those bandanna's if he said that, you got me.
Hornsup999 4 months ago
@Hornsup999 Maybe it has something to do with Jon learning more things and changing his view points on things after he jumped on he patriotism bandwagon of 9/11? Which, no offense to the guy, but he really did. And, yes, he still claims patriotism, but he does so to the country, not to the government itself. The union, of the time, was in support of the federal government, this is something that I'm damn certain Jon is not in support of these days, just listen to Sons of Liberty.
JaniWarheart 4 months ago
@JaniWarheart I'll have to listen to that song, until then I obviously can't comment on his view points, I just think he has an interest in the Civil War as a whole.
Hornsup999 4 months ago
@Hornsup999 That much is definitely true, yes, Jon has a huge interest in the Civil War as a whole, as well as many other things in history. In terms of his views though, Jon offers rather, conflicting things at times. Or he has over the last decade, anyway. It is hard to tell with some things. From what I've gathered he is very much a patriotic person towards the country, but not so much the federal government (so it appears, I could be wrong).
JaniWarheart 4 months ago
@Hornsup999 Oh, and on a side note. All the founding fathers were traders, and that's a fact.
JaniWarheart 4 months ago
Is it just me but does it seem like the more country northerners from states like Michigan, Wisconsin ,main, Pennsylvania ect seem to have produced the better soldiers for the union?Like the Iron brigade,20th main, Michigan cavalry ect ??
mtpj9654 9 months ago
Let's put an end to this trollfest and dick measuring
The West is best. It was nearly 150 years ago. The country has moved on. Why don't you?
AquaPhoenix2006 9 months ago
AWsome freind good job
TheAmeader 9 months ago
These videos are amazing, Mojobytes. I love!
MsDogben 9 months ago
At the union camp part there's a car with it's light on
For4TwenTe20 10 months ago
Buford and Chamberlain actions are responsible for winning the battle.
Modey3 10 months ago
Great video. It really shows the devastation of the war bravo good sir.
LTColDB3001 10 months ago
I'm British: the limit of my knowledge about the US Civil War is "it had something to do with slavery, Britain armed the South". I'm also not a great fan of this kind of music; I don't dislike it, but I wouldn't normally go out of my way to find it.
These videos make me want to know more about both. A lot more. Awesome work, good sir.
Madpossum 11 months ago
Balls to you sir for making an awsome video like this!
TheAmeader 11 months ago
good job bro
deathmetalhippy 11 months ago
@donnieD20 There you go. You hit it right on the dot.
Gaurdsman221 11 months ago
Brilliant song. And I don't use that word often. All this bickering negates the point of the music. All war is tragedy and as humans we should do whatever we can to prevent it.
humanpixel 1 year ago
SHUT THE FUCK UP PEOPLE!!! Just enjoy the song. It honors both sides for having the courage to fight and die for what they believed in. Something 99% of you would NEVER have the heart to do.
OzzyFan87 1 year ago 13
@OzzyFan87 No reason to die for no reason...
"This tragedy and what it brings... all the devastation..."
Peace.
MrBirdieG 11 months ago
@MrBirdieG How do you know there is no reason until its all done?
OzzyFan87 10 months ago
My SS teacher let us listen to this xD
5dsTv 1 year ago
im pretty sure the canadians won this war, huurah!
artymeyer 1 year ago
@artymeyer
I woundering if you know howe rigth you are?
tjallew 1 year ago
@artymeyer- Please explain considering no Canadians faught to my understanding. Although your country did have a big part in the conspiracy to kill Lincoln.
TheLostIdea 1 year ago
@TheLostIdea Tons of Canadians fought for the Union. During the winter of 1863/1864, tens of thousands flocked to Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Michigan etc. The main reason.....$500 dollar bounty money. Think about this, the average private was making 11-13 bucks a month, even if he served the entire war, the $500 dollar bounty was equal to that whole time. It is hard to guess, at how many Canadians went for the money. But many deserted at Petersburg and ruined great regiments.
rebel2276 10 months ago
@rebel2276- Thanks for the info. I get pissed when Canadians say they beat us in the war of 1812 and burned down the white house because they were British slaves. So I got even more pissed at his comment that they won our civil war.
TheLostIdea 10 months ago
@TheLostIdea Just like those 20 year old kids that claim, we were not fighting in Bosnia in 1992, were a mere baby at the time, lol. (I read your comment you left 4 months ago on this subject). I have a bullet scar on my left thigh, proving that not only were we in Bosnia, but we fought as well. Not till late 1995 did the U.N and American regular units then move into Bosnia and by then, the killings were over.
rebel2276 10 months ago
@rebel2276- I know we were fighting in Bosnia and apologize for sounding like saying something different.
TheLostIdea 10 months ago
@TheLostIdea You typed nothing different, no harm or foul. I enjoy everyone on YouTube, if your for the North or South, I am deeply happy that all of you are interested in the Civil War. We are a very small group, that remembers the sacrifice our country made. Rather it was right or wrong. The majority of Americans just drive by battlefields everyday, not interested. The real war now is fighting land developers that could care less about our ancestors that fought and died.
Have a good day!
rebel2276 10 months ago
@rebel2276
Really good reenactments? Sure, I can see it as being few and when compared to, say, the World Wars but I don't think it's fair to say that people interested in the Civil War are in a minority (there are even less who know or think about the Korean War).
Nor do I believe that land developers reflect some greater majority. It's definitely a tragedy that they want to build over these sites, however, and unfortunately in this day and age, people are just too distracted.
Mahbu 9 months ago 3
@Mahbu I 110% agree with your post! Thumbs up!
rebel2276 9 months ago
Comment removed
mtpj9654 9 months ago
@TheLostIdea If Canadians believe they helped the Union win the war, they are misinformed big time. Lets take the 5th New Hampshire infantry regiment for a prime example. After the battle of Gettysburg, Colonel Cross was killed and the regiment had barely 100 men standing. They left the AOP to guard prisoners at Point Lookout, MD. Then during the winter of 1863/1864 they recruited hundreds of Canadians.
rebel2276 10 months ago
@TheLostIdea By the time of the Petersburg siege/campaign. So many Canadians deserted to the Confederate line, that the Confederates put up a sing on their breastworks, "We have the regiment, send over the Colonel and Colors." Some of those SOB, actually gave up positions and what regiments were to the left and right and even time frames of guard changes. Well the Confederates attacked and gobbled up most of the 69th NY, 111th NY and 5th NH.
As you can read, they did more help for the CSA. lol
rebel2276 10 months ago
For those who chose to rant and rave about which region is better, are you fucking serious? This was the most tragic event in our history, we are one nation, did the people in the south cheer when the towers on 9/11 get hit??Fuck no! its because we are all one nation, General Lee's family fought in the Revolution, all these guys served in Mexico together, it fucking tragic these men had to raise arms against one another, and they knew that to. Learn from the mistakes of the past.
donnieD20 1 year ago 48
@donnieD20 Thank you. Finally, someone who sees this as it actually is. While I consider this album and the movie to be wonderful pieces of art, the actual events are the most tragic in America's history.
Kruezoraxe 1 year ago
@donnieD20
Quite right. Brother against brother, friend against friend. Culp dying on the hill named for his family is tragic indeed. The sad thing is that, going into the war, people thought it would be a gentlemanly thing of honor and so forth and so people came to spectate. . only to be horrified by the truths of war.
Some of the derision arising is based off of what is known as "The Lost Cause", I think. Which is odd that it still persists to this day.
Mahbu 1 year ago
@donnieD20 9/11 was an inside job, we know that now. It should be people of the north and south both against Washington D.C. and the treasonous Federal Government!
TheSilencer1313 1 year ago
@donnieD20
True facts.
Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln also served together in short lived Black Hawk War. These were men of one nation, a torn nation, but one nation in the end.
Vincent12157 11 months ago
@donnieD20 You are so right
TheAmeader 9 months ago
@donnieD20 Bravo.
roijas 5 months ago
@donnieD20 the outh was an independent nation which had legal precedent to leave the Union, only to be invade by the north. history is written by the victor.
EvanMcMillan 1 month ago
this could be official IE video
ddbbzz 1 year ago
the south will rise again!!!
bashenbrian 1 year ago
any1 know were to get any mp3 for free?
bombbrigade13 1 year ago
@bombbrigade13 beemp3?
AquaPhoenix2006 1 year ago
4:38 BEST PART
hollywoodFallout 1 year ago
Not sure why most kids even friends of mine when I was in school did not get into history,I loved anything to with the subject be it world history,US history or history of my state(Michigan)History is what made who we are and we must learn from past mistakes,just think what would be if the south had won??
TNSmith37 1 year ago
@TNSmith37 i dont think it would be that bad..... excluding the slave part.... it would sure be a different US History class woulnt it?
AlakimSirrah 1 year ago
@TNSmith37 Cause at my school our history classes were only focusing on the geography of the world
SweetOdinsRavens 1 year ago
@TNSmith37 North America becomes alot like Europe
MrIrishfan1171 1 year ago
Hello,
There is a great new book out titled: GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES
It is a great page-turning read and full of intrigue and revelation.
You can get your copy from my YouTube site (GETTYSBURGbook) or search Amazon or eBay.
GETTYSBURGbook 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES – new book.
It is a great read about the famous battle and very different. You can get your copy from my YouTube site (GETTYSBURGbook) or search Amazon or eBay.
Cheers. To all.
GETTYSBURGbook 1 year ago
Knasterreal1 is right. Everyone only thinks of slavery which was such a tiny part of the South and this war. The war was all about the restrictions that were put on the southern states in pricing and threatening our way of life. I am a southerner and had relatives way back then that were in Picketts Charge. Thinking about the Civil War and how states rights were threatened by the north reminds me much like what is going on now. Think about it.
joconc 1 year ago
@joconc- I wouldn't say that slavery was a small part of this war. For a couple of years leading up to the war the territories were being flooded with people from the North and the South who were already at war killing eachother over weather the territories would be free or slave. Lincoln made it clear that they would be free and that slavery should be contained to where it existed. He was against the war with Mexico because he didn't want slavery to expand. I am not happy with the way cont.----
TheLostIdea 1 year ago
@joconc- cont.- I am not happy with the way things are now, but if the South won the Civil War the 20th century would have been a disater for not only us, but the whole world. And by now we would be under a German or a Soviet rule along with the rest of the planet.
TheLostIdea 1 year ago
@TheLostIdea or the world would be under southern control!!!! it's a southern thing!
bashenbrian 1 year ago
@bashenbrian =- Oh, OK so you couldn't win a civil war in your own country and you are convinced you could defeat an enemy that concurred all of Europe or all of Asia.
TheLostIdea 1 year ago
@TheLostIdea all of asia? u mean they CONQUERED Russia and China? wtf war are u talking bout son, lol...
artymeyer 1 year ago
@artymeyer I'm talking about a little war that killed 10 million people in Asia nad 50 million in Europe called World War 2.
TheLostIdea 1 year ago
Great song and a great job on the video
ozzblair 1 year ago
Thank You.
rebsunrise 1 year ago
The confederates would probably have freed the slaves. The war wasnt about slaves but the trade laws and union centralisation which made the southern loose their rights and sovereign of their states.
Knasterreal1 1 year ago
@Knasterreal1- If it was about trade then why didn't the South wait till Lincoln took office to see what his trade rules would be like. The Confederates left as soon as Lincoln was elected and before he took office when all they knew about him was he was against slavery. They weren't interested in even talking to him. I wonder what issue they could have so much passion over. Also most of the presidents up till that moment had been from the South, so they weren't oppressed.
TheLostIdea 1 year ago
@TheLostIdea They knew full well what Lincoln was about they first and foremost did not like hime since he was an abolitionist and they had been attacking the southerners in every turn using politics to threaten southern trade prices and shipping. Since they werent about to be pushed into freeing the slaves.
The southern cotton was the lifeblood for a large part of USA and any restrictions put on the cotton states were seen as a threat to their way of life.
Knasterreal1 1 year ago
This song was completely out of place it would seem for iced earth and obviously a project at the time, but it seriously is epic in its own, and though Barlow is easily the greatest clean vocalist in metal, I think only Ripper could have pulled THIS one off. I remember him live right next to the stage doin this shit live and he fuckin kills with this album.
G0RThauRTheCruEL 1 year ago
@G0RThauRTheCruEL Greatest clean vocalist? I think you should listen to "Bridge of Death" by Manowar. Eric Adams is THE greatest singer I have EVER heard.
InAGaddaDaVida29 1 year ago
Long live Iced Earth!!
raykanobi85 1 year ago
the way they just stand there shooting at eachother is amazing. i don't know how u just sit there and take it. they should have relied on more ambush and gurilla tatics not pure numbers and force. if you think about it if they would have used bow and arrows instead of muskets (which took like 2-3 minutes to reload) they could have killed more of em close up. its amazing what those people did for our country. God bless them and may they rest in peace.
BloodJunkie11 1 year ago
@BloodJunkie11 Not possible, that was considered dishonorable. that doesn't mean much now, but back then most of those men would rather die then commit dishonor.
badism 1 year ago
@badism what the fuck are you talkin about. i understand honor AND there is NO honor in defeat and having your armies decimated by foolish military tactics. WAR is WAR and you win it at any cost butttt minimizing those costs along the way as much as possible. its only COMMON SENSE.
BloodJunkie11 1 year ago
Great job putting this together. The timing, like when the rebel sharp shooter takes Reynolds life, is spot on accurate. Great video, well done, sir.
electricalron 1 year ago
Today marks the 147th anniversary of that dreadful battle, 50,000 people killed, wounded, or missing. May we never forget what they did.
bullyboy1863 1 year ago
wow, this is awesome, now i can show everybody what I always see in my head while listening to this great songs.
But is there maybe a way to put this video up in better quality, like 720p, it would be awesome to watch it on the hd tv after downloading it. Thanks a lot to all the work spent to do this, great job
BlutDerFinsternis 1 year ago
Good job on the video. If it was not about slavery and its expansion, then what was the Civil War about. Tariffs?
c'mon--war over tariffs--please.
krllkrll 1 year ago
States' rights? look at the record: slave states had their will over Congress and S Court, and in most cases president through 1860. Congress passed legislation that emphasized a national approach to slavery, that is a return of runaways to the south with the jailing of those in opposition. Northern states started passing freedom laws for runaway slaves in response to Congress.
krllkrll 1 year ago
Jon Schaffer has a new project called Sons of Liberty. Anyone who is an Iced Earth fan should check it out, it's awesome!!
IcedEarth426 1 year ago
2:03 i love
harveyfamily1958 1 year ago
All 3 parts! You done good!
miketelemania 1 year ago
anyone knowing the origin of the bridge at 4:28 ?
MWamenhotep 1 year ago
Your little project is well done...thanks!
rburdman87 1 year ago
7:17 my personal Favorite Part! :)
ShareVook 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
7:17 my personal Favorite Part! :)
ShareVook 1 year ago
7:17 my personal Favorite Part! :)
ShareVook 1 year ago
7:17 My Favorite! :)
ShareVook 1 year ago
What is the melody that starts at 4:31 ? it sounds pretty familiar to me, but i don't know its name...
Anyone knows this melody or, the name of it?
ophois 1 year ago
@ophois When Johnny comes marching home, obviously a song tying in with the American Civil War. The song also starts with the Star Spangled Banner
0oIronMaideno0 1 year ago
@0oIronMaideno0 thank you very much!
ophois 1 year ago
I give the music and video a 5 star rating!
rebel2276 1 year ago
I am a huge Civil War buff, and i like Iced Earths sound a lot! MUY MUCHO!!!
metalhead4311 2 years ago
I just want to say, I can't believe my little project would produce this level of debate on the topic of the Civil War, thanks to everyone who has commented or viewed my videos.
mojobytes 2 years ago 41
Thank you for the outstanding videos and music! This is my favorite video, the music is excellent!
Thank you for all the hard work you do!
Have a great day!
rebel2276 2 years ago
@mojobytes You done good!
miketelemania 1 year ago
I don't believe in slavery because I was brought up in a time period where there was no slavery. That was almost 150 years ago. We find it simply appalling in our time period.
It was just the law, nothing I made up or anyone else on Youtube.
rebel2276 2 years ago 2
@rebel2276 you realize the civil war had nothing to do with slavery. thats just propaganda to cover up the fact that the confederacy was only doing what it was allowed to do by the constitution. nothing more.
panzerdragoonSS 1 year ago
@rebel2276 - Slavery exists. It's just changed. The finance system is a system of slavery. The Debtor is slave to the lender to quote the bible. You know anyone who actually OWNS land and doesn't pay tax on it aka to 'own in allodial title' ?
They abolished one form for another. And liberation is at hand brother.
willyrobinson 1 year ago
Was there really 50,000 dead after this one battle? Quite a number for a mid 19th century battle.
11damion11 2 years ago
No, not all. There is not one single historian past and present that knows the true loss. Many of the "wounded" came back to duty after a day to a year of recovering.
If both armies really lost that many men, both would have been with a corporal's guard in April 1865.
rebel2276 2 years ago
not really when you consider that the battle tactics of the Civil War were basically line up very close to the other side and shoot a
TowellytheGreat 2 years ago
t the other side until one side broke
TowellytheGreat 2 years ago
Casualties back then meant KIA, mortally wounded, wounded, POW's and men who simply couldn't be found (either deserters or POW's or whatever). The *estimated* losses at Gettysburg were 53,000 (give or take a few thousand since all estimates on losses in the CW were inaccurate). If I remember correctly the number of men estimated to be KIA at Gettysburg was 10,000.
Lonovavir 2 years ago
I actually feel sorry for the Northern civilians. Stripped of their Civil Liberties and rights, no wonder they had to have four drafts during the war.
Draft dates: Sep 1st, 1862, Feb 1st, 1864, Sep 5th, 1864 and April 15th, 1864.
Why in the world would the Union need to draft men? Countless foreigners were forced to join the Union army and fight. Many did not even speak english.
rebel2276 2 years ago
True, but the draft was much more extensive in the South.
Only 6% of the 2.1M Union soldiers were drafted, the rest were volunteers & 75% were American born. Though the CSA kept no records it is estimated a 1/4 to a 1/3 of their 2M soldiers were draftees.
The CSA 's1st draft started Apr 15th, 1862 & required all men ages 18-35 to serve. The age was extended to 45 in Sep 1862 & expanded to 17-50 in Feb 1864. Ironically, any man who owned more than 20 slaves was not required to serve.
rjbaun 2 years ago
I agree with your post, excellent research. I agree also that the Confederates records are horrible. When Richmond burned, many records were lost to history.
If I had been the President of the South back then, I would have that slave owner and his 20 slaves on the line and given freedom to any Africans that served in the Army. Regardless, if we won or lost. I would have called up all men, regardless of color. 16-50 to serve.
Great post, Rjbaun!
rebel2276 2 years ago
I must be crazy because I actually enjoy war, its in my blood. Had the most family in the Civil War and American Revolution War. I can trace my family as far back to the battle of Hastings, England in 1066.
My family has fought in all wars on this soil, that we hold so dear. If I die in combat, that is how I wish to go. My face to these towel heads. I have four sons that will follow the blood line and they will fight against terrorist.
Have a good day, Gage
rebel2276 2 years ago
So you're saying that you're going to get yourself killed because your folks did it, and are going to send your own kids to die because you did it. What a wonderful person you are.
And I find it amusing one can be desperate to fight a an individual of a terminology derived from having no race, gender, or belief. Have fun knowing the fact that you're too pathetic to do anything other than get through life by taking it, pal.
youmustbethatninja 2 years ago
We all owe the G-ds a death. Run away as long as you please, and death will find you anyways. Perhaps death will find you only because you have run off.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
if you were the warrior in which you claim to be, you wouldnt find it useful to boast to total strangers on the internet about it.
just a thought
MisterGage77 2 years ago
if the south had won it would have been a disaster for both sides. it would have set a precedent and after the war other states might have broken away from the union and confederacy. after all even with the confederacy at stake one of confederate president davis's hardest jobs was making the states work together. imagine how hard it would be after the war was over. america could have become like europe. lots of little countrys fighting all over the place.
fieldman07 2 years ago
My parents are long retired, my wife and I are in the Army. She is in Iraq and I am here with her till Wednesday. My oldest son and I will then fly to Afghanistan and see my men for the first time since the IED injury to my right foot.
No need to pray, I always look forward to a honorable death on a battlefield. I just live in the wrong century. I rather have the enemy and my men put down rifles and bombs and planes and lets fight like the old times, eye to eye with swords.
rebel2276 2 years ago
I'm not from the South nor North. Family were all Army so we moved around all over the world.
Make sure to read what both sides wrote, that is very important to understand the war.
Have a good weekend, KingTiger!
rebel2276 2 years ago
shit im from the north but hell i love the south...and think the same as rebel2276
valoskater69 2 years ago
I'm not from the South either, lol. I am living in Washington DC (Military). Other then that, I have been stationed all over the world.
I just respect General Lee, as a top general in all history. Lee was outnumbered on several battlefields 2-1 and 3-1.
I have always been very curious to how General Grant would have been in Lee's boots. Per say, Lee had 125,000 and Grant with 65,000.
To me it is difficult to judge Grant for he was never outnumbered on any major battlefield.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Good strategy and good tactics are bullshit through political ideology and statistics. The South royally screwed themselves and everyone around them for 80 years, turning even the Constitution itself into something to justify slavery. Even now they remain a plague of worthless trash who depend on the economics of other countries.
youmustbethatninja 2 years ago
Neither side won the cavalry battle at Gettysburg. I will give the Union cavalry a tactical victory, because they did stop Stuart's cavalry from getting in the rear of the AOP.
The reason that Custer was successful was the 5th and 6th Michigan cavalry were armed with 7 Shot Spencer rifles. No other Union or Confederate cavalry regiment had that firepower.
rebel2276 2 years ago
America was never in need to be saved. Lincoln did not want to obey the laws that the Supreme Court had judged in 1857 "Dred Scott ruling". All laws sided with the South. They made that crystal clear in 1857.
Yes the ANV Artillery did aim for one spot and then launch a massive, three division attack, which was suppose to split the AOP in half. The Artillery bombardment did not work, 80% of the shells either did not explode or sailed way over the 2nd Corps.
rebel2276 2 years ago
i dont question ur knowlege of history, i do question ur sanity however
MisterGage77 2 years ago
You think I am crazy on here, you should watch me in combat with my men. I am suppose to be in the rear directing, but I like it right up front well ahead of my men. I make sure my men eat first and sleep first.
I ask none of my men to do something I would not do myself. I will not send some 18 year old private to scout for me, that kid is young and has a life ahead of him. I want something done, I do it myself. I whoop and yell when I attack, just like the Indians. I bet they think I am crazy
rebel2276 2 years ago
The Dred Scott ruling was blatantly partial towards the racist trash that made up the country at the time. Dred Scott sued his owner over his rights in property out of his initial state bounds when they were traveling. It was technically legal that, since he was property, those sort of laws didn't necessarily apply in other states.
I only find it sad we couldn't go to war with the the traitorous Southerners as early as the Constitutional Convention, where we had a lot of internal pressure.
youmustbethatninja 2 years ago
The Supreme Court was not "Racist Trash" and the Constitution clearly has on it "All other peoples are Three-Fifth's of a person. Thus, Since Dred Scott was a slave, he was NOT an American citizen.
We went war because Lincoln did not want to obey the law.
rebel2276 2 years ago
The court tried to reconcile the law, and couldn't so they denied Dred Scott had the standing to ask them the question.
The war came anyways, brought by the southerners who fought to extend and protect human slavery. The southern whites were slaves themselves to the slave owners, they were forced to serve by the 1792 militia act which was extended to perform "patrol for runaway slaves".
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Dred Scott was a slave and he had no rights nor was he an American citizen.
The war came because Lincoln and the Republicans did not want to obey the law handed down by the Supreme Court.
American citizens could take their "Private Property" anywhere they wanted to go. The Missouri Compromise (1820) was illegal and unconstitutional. All pacts and compromises were illegal as well.
Territorial Governors such as (Kansas and Nebraska) had not powers to stop, prevent or prohibit, slavery.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Lincoln and the Republicans wanted to limit slavery, banning it from the territories, a government power as old as the Northwest Ordinance. The founders voted in the Northwest Ordinance, and so their position on the federal power to do so is clear.
The pact that was illegal was the so called confederate constitution. The south never followed it, and never appointed their counterpart to the US Supreme Court. The south was busy building a lawless society.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Lincoln and his Republicans wanted to do the exact opposite of what the Supreme Court judged on.
They would not accept the law and thus they all went to war.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Actually they wanted to pass laws or an amemdment to correct the Court. Congress has the authority to set bounds on the court, and the amendment process is over all. only the foolish rebellion gave Lincoln power to free slaves in enemy held areas as a war measure. 13, 14th amendments were passed by the states to correct the Court's error in Dred Scot.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Again there was no error on the Supreme Court's verdict. Just a classic example of a President that became a dictator and got away with with it.
Then to top that off, he is seen as the "Good Guy", they might have you fooled, but not me.
rebel2276 2 years ago
The amendment process is one of the proper and legal corrective to Supreme Court Error. Extra credit if you can name the others!
DonMeaker 2 years ago
You have a whole bunch of reading to do. Come back when you read more on Lincoln, his evil side.
rebel2276 2 years ago
@rebel2276: Reb read the Constitution & the Fed Papers. The Supreme Court was not intended by the Founders to be the final authority on the law.
There is much wrong in the Dred Scott decision. The Court ruled blacks were not citizens yet they were in 5 states & could vote. They ruled they were not persons. Surely based on this alone you must agree the Court was morally wrong. They also ruled Congress had no authority in federal territories wrt slavery. Where does the Constitution say that?
rjbaun 2 years ago
The Constitution protected slavery. "All other peoples were Three-Fifths of a person". Thus, slaves could not be American citizens and were not. Dred Scott was a slave and thus could not sue his former master.
The Supreme Court also judged that the "Missouri 1820 Compromise was illegal and unconstitutional". That all pacts and compromises were illegal and unconstitutional.
American citizens could take "Their Private Property" anywhere they wanted to.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Chief Justice Taney's Scott opinion (Taney was a slave owner) is based on his personal believe that blacks are property & not people. It uses a false premise that blacks were not citizens at ratification (they were in 5 states). One could argue by counting blacks for representation purposes at all acknowledges they are persons. There was no basis for the court to rule on the Missouri Compromise. IMHO, the opinion was a broad interpretation driven by personal believes, not Constitutional law.
rjbaun 2 years ago
That was the law, certainly not everyone on the Supreme Court owned slaves.
The Constitution protected slavery, "All other peoples are Three-Fifth's of a person". So right there they are basically saying, your not a full person and thus not an American Citizen.
Its ironic the law was on the South's side.
rebel2276 2 years ago
The 3/5ths Compromise was intended to achieve ratification, not meant to define the humanity/citizenship of slaves. In it the South traded greater House representation for a promise to end Slavery in 1808. Madison explains this in Federalist Paper #54.
In Scott, Taney & 5 other Southern justices clearly ignored the intent of the Founders to push their agenda using a very broad Constitutional interpretation. So, IMHO the "law" was not on the side of the South, just 6 biased justices.
rjbaun 2 years ago
5 states - means in five states they consider them such n such. those 5 states having it doesn't make it applicable for the whole - in the rest they would conform to the Supreme court's decision. That's how it works. - unless those states decided they wanted to implement law otherwise - that's the southern 'aka states rights' position. States can do as they please - but a state doing something doesn't mean shit for another state.
willyrobinson 2 years ago
My point was the legal precedence for treating blacks as citizens as 5 states recognized them as such, the court ignored this. As to all states having to conform to the Supreme Court's decision, read the 10th Amendment, the basis of state's rights. You can't have it both ways & say the Court is the final word on the law & then claim state's rights.
This is 1 problem with the South's logic on Scott. They insisted Scott should be the law of the land, but ignored the Fed govt when convenient.
rjbaun 2 years ago
@rebel2276: Lincoln didn't want war, he wanted to preserve the Union & was willing to fight to do so. He believed that the idea of a Constitutional Republic would die if secession succeeded. Amble evidence exists that Lincoln tried very hard to stop secession by peaceful means, e.g. the Corwin amendment.
On the other hand, there were more in the South who wanted war, hence the attack on Ft. Sumter. There aim was to provoke war so as to force the fence sitting states to pick sides. It worked
rjbaun 2 years ago
Ft sumpter laid not any longer in US terr the us wouldnt leave terr that wasn't theirs so it got attacked for occupying foreign terr
the north fought to preserve the Revolution by holding the Union together. The South fought to preserve the Revolution by defending their rights.
A union that is not voluntary is not a union. It is slavery. Marriage is voluntary marriage is a union. One can join and one can leave. Thats a union. Lincoln lost his authority by infringing upon the constitution.
willyrobinson 2 years ago
Ft. Sumter was a Federal installation & the point of the South attacking was to provoke a war.
We do agree that both sides were right. Constitutionally the concept of state's right IMHO was corrected. However, Lincoln was also right that had the South been allowed to leave the union the dream of the Revolution would have died.
rjbaun 2 years ago 3
All that's just rhetoric. The constitution has been continually eroded beginning w/ the war between the states.
willyrobinson 2 years ago
@rjbaun
Lincoln kills the dream by waging furious war upon his fellow countrymen, a war he provoked by pushing ever higher taxes.
TheTerminator97 2 years ago
Terminator: How could Lincoln have provoked war by raising taxes? By the time he was inaugurated on Mar 4, 1861 7 southern states had succeeded. Ft. Sumter was attacked on April 12th, hardly enough time for any taxes to cause succession.
rjbaun 2 years ago
@rjbaun if the federals had just let the confederacy secede, like it says they had the right to do in the constitution, there would never have been any shots fired at fort sumter or a civil war.
panzerdragoonSS 1 year ago
@rjbaun I would disagree with your evaluation. If the South would have had success at Gettysburg, Lincoln would not have been re-elected to president, or at most would have come to an agreement with the South about the real purpose of the Union, or specifically the role the Federal Government can involve itself in State Policies. The real war was about Wall Street domination of the Nation.
ChiefOren 1 year ago
@willyrobinson
Not to mention suspending habeas corpus and arresting judges who didn't go along with him.
TheTerminator97 2 years ago
@willyrobinson South Carolinians attacked Fort Sumter *because* it would result in a the federal government marching an army to restore it.
At that time, Virginia was split. So were the other border states. By forcing an army across Virginia, they ensured the secessionists in that state government possessed the political capital to drive the vote towards secession.
Virginia was the most important state in those days. Once they had that, the secession was the real deal.
seekortry 2 years ago
People like you were one of the reasons we secceded moron, people stereotyped the south and pretty much labled us all as evil.
dude853 2 years ago
Yea the ONLY win on an open field, lol.
What really surprised me is how in the world did the Union lose the same amount of men and they were on the defense?
rebel2276 2 years ago
Look-- if the Confederates had one, there'd either be a nation of slaves, and one of freedom, or the Union would've joined into the confederates. What happened happened. No changing that. People are free. That's what counts. What also counts, is how epic this song is. Too bad youtube makes it so it must be cut short. Jon Schaffer is an amazing composer.
LordRevan107 2 years ago 10
i agree 100%
malaketh 2 years ago
Across the way the union digs in
The round tops, Cemetery Ridge and out to Culps Hill
Their lines are strong, no denying they'll stay
When the confederates strike
There'll be the devil to pay!
my favorite part of the song gives me chills everytime i hear it!
NYYdynasty3457 2 years ago
Love the soundtrack to this!
rebel2276 2 years ago 2