Mayor Paul winfield raping women too he give tax payers cash to whores and rapes them Tax payers Will Give 20 million dollars out to a whore he ran from vicksburg he messing with she got a sex tape of him.obama see this shit hes a demicrat,obama will make his ass resign and place a new mayor in office even phil bryant can impeach him ya.hes allowing the casinos to tighten the slots so we cant win here-more funds in his pockets to rape more women,he has a wife and kids.Tell Major Media ON it Ya
its sad to see brother against brother in one of the bloodiest war in US history. but thanks God the war ended with the freedom of slaves and liberty and rights for all! :D
@midoricindy Yes, I think people don't know what kind of suffering and loss took place in the Civil War and what these solider went through. Battles horribly bloody and chaotic more than any other American war and there is no film that really shows what they were like. Life of a soldier was marching, starving, and suffering every day and a battle every now and then loosing more and more friends every time. People need to respect both sides because neither was fightin for slavery or freedom.
A question - Why did the military leaders during the Civil War (or for those south of the M-D Line The War Between the States) elect to use the tactics of the British leaders from the Revolutionary War? ie Marching into battle in formation accompanied by pagentry. Music provided cadence and served as communication, but flag-bearers with rows of soldiers stepping in formation invited carnage. The Redcoats complained the colonists fought from behind trees and cover. 60+ years later, Formations?
@RememberApostrophes I love bein a smart redneck. Warfare had changed somewhat since then and you also have to remember that this is a clip of the regular army. In the Revolution it was the same, regular army fought in formation the militias acted as guerilla fighters and fought behind trees and such. Both sides, in the Civil War, had guerrilla cavalry units dispatched throughout the South that raided into the North. The most famous are those from Missouri, namely Jesse James and his gang.
@Caveman67100 Yes, that does help. Thank you for the clarification. The arrival of improved field communications must have changed the art of warfare.
@RememberApostrophes Alot of people think they used big formations in open ground like in the Napoleonic wars but They actually dug many trenches, not like in ww1 but like ditches or mounds of dirt. Later in the war at Cold Harbor and Petersburg they dug trenches the size of about ww1 trenches. They also many time marched into battle in formations but the formations came apart during the battle and men would fight all over the place in masses.
@FastPonyGT demolished, defeated, whichever-the confederacy was overthrown. wtf do you mean who gave me that idea? uhm..HISTORY? this is old news, like 155 years old.
@Hadeydeppio Obviously you didn't get the memo. I'm still here and we've been here since the War of Northern Aggression ended and were not going anywhere anytime soon. You may want to go freshen up on some real history.
@FastPonyGT no i don't think *you* get the memo. the confederates were defeated... that doesn't mean every single confederate was killed and put out out of existence. obviously there are still people who, for reasons unknown, claim to support the confederacy. however, the north *did* win the war, and the 1866 civil rights act *was* passed, additionally congress added the 13th,14th, and 15th amendments to the constitution, and your beloved confederates and the south was put under union rule.
@Hadeydeppio do you know what the 13th amendment says boy? 1st of all, the 13th amendment was passed before the Civil War and basically says that the Federal government has no say in the decisions of individual states. Which means that the Southern states had the right to secede from the Union. Y'all think we were fightin for slavery, y'all just don't get it. Slavery was on it's way out when the war started we were fighting for our right to be free of what we saw and still see as a foreign power
@Hadeydeppio you really and truely dont know what side to butter your bread.you better find out why the south was fightin for you freedom.first of all it wasnt about slavery,it was about taxing,and if the south had won you'd be hell of alot better off,now
alright guys listen. for all you ppl holding a grudge about the north winning shut up. they won, get over it. slavery is bad. its wrong to try and own someone. and for you people who are arguing that it wasnt just slavery, slavery is what it came down to in the end. so stop arguing and embrace the present. we are one nation and one nation we shall always be. the civil war was the worse war in the history of the u.s. brothers vs brothers.
@Phillyphanatic21 lol; everyone has their own opinion, which is what makes your statements so funny. Im sure some people down south still wish the confederates had won the war, though what good it may have done them isnt really something anyone can know. The thing that is certain is that slavery would have been abolished sooner or later regardless, as soon as the south had a legitimate means of sustaining their economy. and 'free the slaves' is equal to todays 'yes we can' and 'vote for change'
@Phillyphanatic21 I hate explaining this to you damn Yankees. We were fighting for the right granted to us by the 13th amendment and wanted to be free of the control of a foreign power. Slavery was a factor for the North(who were more racist then people realize) but in the South slavery was on it's way out when the war started. The present is that the victors right history and portray the South as evil, which it wasn't we wanted to be free of foreign rule. It would have been better because we
Alot say, the civil war was based on slavery. It wasn't. The south just wanted to live their lives, under their rules.....I agree with you Phillyphanatic21
Oh God! A said day for our boys. 10 000 fresh Virginians arrived in the afternoon. That turned the tide of the battle. Our boys fought well. The movie doesn't give them justice.
You're on to something but you're off by target by a hair. Slavery was very much a big part of the issue, as were politics and economics. The whole argument of states rights is essentially about states rights to uphold and protect the institution of slavery.
It's very much true that only a small portion of people actually supported slavery, but slavery was a huge part of their culture and those who owned slaves were also at the top. They held power.
I am black. And I was born in the South. All I have to say is THANK U UNION SOLDIERS for giving us the ability to live like other caucasions. No offense to all of those confederate people. AND THANK U AS WELL ABE LINCOLN!!!!! :)
I am black. And I was born in the South. All I have to say is THANK U UNION SOLDIERS for giving us the ability to live like other caucasions. No offense to all of those confederate people.
Honestly I think things worked out the best way possible for the North and South.The rebellion was a wicked beast that deserved to die,the main difference between the Revolution and the civil war was that before the conflict the south had ample voice in the federal government so really its just like trying to justify the whiskey rebellion,and another thing whether you portray blue or gray the strongest cause is the one that doesn't need justification
@seeingthesigns With the tight grip the slave aristocracy held on Southern politics and the Southern economy, I'm not sure if it would have phased out that soon. In fact the border slave states were coerced into staying with the Union after the Emancipation Proclimation only when they were guarnteed the protection of slavery in their states until at least 1900 (obviously this never came to fruition lol). Just saying.
@seeingthesigns With the tight grip the slave aristocracy held on Southern politics and the Southern economy, I'm not sure if it would have phased out that soon. In fact the border slave states were coerced into staying with the Union after the Emancipation Proclimation only when they were guarnteed the protection of slavery in their states until at least 1900 (obviously this never came to fruition lol). Just saying. Great film (Gods and Generals) by the way XD
@TheCommunistColin There is a great new book out titled: GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES
It’s about two soldiers and a nurse from other times meeting in Gettysburg on the first day of the great battle. People that are on this post would love it.
Check out the book at my YouTube profile (GETTYSBURGbook) or search Amazon.
"Mr. Smith, instruct Captain (untelligible) to position their batteries in the center of the cracks. Now I want the 4th and the 27th regiments stationed as support. I want the 5th regiment posted to their right and the 2nd and 33rd to their left. Understood"
Maybe it's just me but that sounds like a lot to accurately remember.
Ideally a regiment is composed of ten, 100 man companies. A regiment should be 1,000 men. By 1863 the average size of a regiment was about 200 men. Each company is made up of two, 50 man platoons and each platoon is made up of two, 25 men sections. A companies senior officer is a Captain. A regiments C.O. is the Colonel. So you have 1 Colonel, Lt. Col, Major, 1 captain per each co. and then junior officers at the rank of Lt. along with Sgts and Cpls as file closers in the ranks.
The Confederate artillery, mostly 12 Pound Napoleons could never find the range on the Union artillery on Matthew's Hill. So the Confederate artillery fired on Union infantry.
The Union artillery dominated the battlefield, with their rifled artillery but they made the mistake moving down to Henry House Hill. At a range of under 100 yards, they were firing. Most of the shots went over Jackson's men.
We believe Jackson was wounded in the finger by a shell fragment, as no Union inf was there.
@rebel2276 Yeah and this is a movie so as being accurate historically, give it a A. I also doubt the Union formed perfect lines as Bull Run was probably the most unorganized battle of the Civil War. Both sides had infantry retreating and charging without the command to because the Soldiers never had really any experience.
Well, in our defense the wars we fought from 1918 on were to help somebody else win wars they couldn't win themselves. So naturally we didn't fight them alone.
no offense, but it's useless trying to sum up the cause and the resolve of the American Civil War in a few youtube comments. If your looking to justify your "reasoning", might I suggest you write a book. :-)
Im sorry for being so long winded but there is one more thing just in case any one brings this up. After the war the reason this is no longer an issue is due to the radical industrialization due to the war itself. Plus radical republicans had basically took control of the south which ment no opinion from the real southerners. Also by that time the north found nw means of raw materials that were cheaper aka india and south america.
This put the south into more debt because the north had a majority in the senate and thus a protective tariff was used to protect the north from over seas competition. Basically monopoly on the south. This is the real cause of the civil war.The straw that broke the camels back was the norths insistence that slavery be abolished. How was the south supposed to make a lively hood and pay back there debts with no slaves. It was a vicious cycle and a pity that no agreement could work. PS slaverys bad
north turned into a finished product then sold back to the south at a higher price that the southerners couldnt afford. This continued until the south seceded. Also the north controlled the banking system. so the protective tariff heart the south because they were forced upon debt to the north via loans the took from northern bankers so they could continue to buy slaves to pick the cotton to send to the north that made finished goods and sold the finished goods back to the south at a high price
I beg to differ with Union state heritage. The south had cared about states rights every since the founding. Look up the Kentucky resolution, and Calhouns southern ordinance. They saw the north as a threat to them and had been fighting for the right to nullify Federal laws every since the Jefferson wrote the resolution. He was agianst federalism and so was the south. They were afriad that the north would eventually own the south economically because the south produced raw materials which the...
@WAsoccer24 that 4-6% census number is the number of households. Of the overall population the number was closer to 25%. But whatever the number is doesn't matter. What soldiers fought for is why the war lasted as lone as it did and why it was as bloody as it was. It is however not why it started.
Read the statement of causes given by South Carolina after the ordinance of secession. I think it sheds light on the slavery as a cause. Its readily available.
The war was clearly about secession. What was secession about though ?
since the late 1840's the south felt it was being cheated by the north.. making most of the profit from their crops.. being taxed heavily.. plans were made to abolish slavery in the south eventually.. they didn't have the population to support their economy.. the north had thousands of immigrants daily on their docks.. they could afford it.. for immigrants were cheaper than slaves.
I have been doing this for the last 26 years, I have read tons of stuff. I still seek out tons of more information.
But reading South Carolina or Stephen's "Cornerstone speech" still does not convince me that enlisted CSA troops were fighting to keep or preserve slavery. They were fighting for their Constitutional rights that the Supreme Court in 1857 laid down.
Had those laws been accepted by Lincoln, there would have never been a war at all.
@riles521 I believe he is talking about the Dred Scott decision, when the Supreme Court refused Scott's free status and citizenship and upheld right of property in Negro slaves.
Exactly, but Dred Scott was not free, he was a slave. The Supreme Court judged that he was not an American Citizen and therefore he could not sue his master.
The Supreme Court looked over the Constitution and all other documents. Had the verdict gone the opposite way, then I would type on here, that the South was fighting to keep slavery. No questions asked.
The Dred Scott decision was even more extreme. The holding was that someone of African descent could not be a US citizen even if they were free regardless of what their state of residence might be.
Again, Constitutional rights, that our founding fathers wrote. The South was fighting for their Constitutional rights that the Supreme Court had judged on.
Had Lincoln and his radical Republicans obeyed the law, there would have never been a war.
Lincoln wanted to reverse what the Supreme Court judged on and stop the expansion of slavery in the west. The Supreme Court had judged in 1857, that American citizens could take their "Personal Property" anywhere they wanted to go.
The Supreme Court made it crystal clear that American citizens could take their "Personal Property" anywhere they wanted to go.
That territorial governors, such as Kansas and Nebraska had no power to stop, prevent or prohibit, Americans from taking their personal property into those territories.
The South was overjoyed with the Supreme Court's verdict. Lincoln and his radical republicans did not like the verdict.
He's admitting that in reality, the South had no respect whatever for the principle of states rights.
In the process, he's taking you on a merry twirl around the dance floor, to the tune of the Confederate Two-Step.
Fact is, the South was the chief purveyor of federal power, during the most of the Antebellum Period. Southerners only cared about states rights, after they lost the political power to impose their will on the rest of the nation.
In the twisted world of Confederate culture, the South has every right to deny citizens of newly formed states. the right to decide the slavery question for themselves.
Why? Because the law says so.
Yet, when those same people get fed up, and use the political process to address their grievances, it is grounds for the dissolution of the nation, without their consent...because the law says so.
Yes riles read on it. Read the papers, speeches, secession declarations, and other documents written by Southerners themselves, AT THE TIME.
They tell the true story.
Read about the experiences of the people in the South who did not support secession, and understood the evils of the plantation economy. Read about what happened to those people, when they voiced their dissent, during the Secession Crisis.
A good start..."Bitterly Divided, the South's Inner Civil War", by David Williams.
There is no constitutional right to pull out of the union, destroy federal property or kill federal troops because you fear that the president might try to amend or circumvent a Supreme Court decision. Amending or even going around SCOTUS precedent is perfectly legal.
When our founding fathers pulled away from Britain was that right? Was it right for Union soldiers to rape white Southern women and female slaves? Was it right for Union soldiers to steal cotton? Was it right for George Washington to own 300 slaves? Was it right for 12 President that owned slaves, including Grant?
Those same "Laws" protected slavery. Our constitution protected slavery as well.
Lincoln did not want to obey the law. Point blank. Even the Supreme Court sided with the South.
Lincoln ignored the Supreme Court and Congress. Lincoln never even went before Congress to ask permission to go to war. That was illegal and unconstitutional.
But King Lincoln did it and got away with it. Then left a half ass story behind for us to believe that.
You get a chance, go to Washington DC, LOC and NA.
And laws, the Constitution and the Supreme Court can and do change. You seem to think these things are static, they change all the time. It is quite legal.
Lincoln did not start the war. The South did by attacking Fort Sumter, a federal installation.
Also, you can stop using Lincoln as an excuse. He took office AFTER the South seceded.
LOL...Lil Reb's taking you around the dance floor, to his favorite tune.
It's okay for rich, slave holding planters to destroy the nation, with the full sanction of the US Constitution, and the Supreme Court, in order to protect their property...human chattel.
But...it's not okay for the American people to suppress a rebellion, and defend the nation, in order to protect THEIR property rights. The territorial integrity of the United States.
They couldn't or wouldn't address the slavery issue. Therefore it was left up to the American people to decide the issue, as well as the issue of secession.
Americans decided that issue on the battlefield of the South's choosing, by overwhelming majority.
@UnionStatesHeritage The founding fathers also failed to properly resolve the issue of States rights. If the States had more rights they could and would have resolved the slavery issue internally, thus negating the need for a civil war or war for independence depending on your point of view. Also the health care bill would note have been necessary. As it was Americans never decided the slavery issue since there never was a vote. Lincoln decided it unilateral.
Sure there was. In every state North of the Mason/Dixon line that applied the doctrine of states rights and voted to abolish slavery long before Lincoln was elected to the Presidency. The Republican party came into being because people in the US wanted to stop slavery from spreading to newly formed states.
@UnionStatesHeritage One other thing. The emancipation proclamation was technically an executive order that could be rescinded at anytime if some president were crazy enough.
wow they´re absolutely clueless. rotating fire anyone?! First rank shoots while the rest reloads in the back. But no... one single salvo and then the bayonet. Stupidity galore!
@Stalin111 The reason they did that was because they were bearly trained milita. They did formation drill but live fire practice was unheard of. Also no-one new the effects of modern weapons. Hope this helps your understanding of why things happened.
Your great grandfather was a member of an invasion force, and the good and honorable men of the South who were assigned to stop him, did so by cannon and by Minie ball - the very weapons which the Yankees brought to bear in my homeland of the South.
Only the rich southern slave owners wanted to fight to protect slavery. They had everything to lose with the abolition of slavery. The vast majority of southerners fought to protect their homes, which I can respect.
The war was not about slavery initially, but as the war progressed Lincoln made it into a war to free the slaves along with preserving the Union.
@Stender84 No it wont. the south was defeated and allthough the south is a great place it will never rise up as an enemy again. and if it does, the union will win again. No offense but the south wont.
Fact. The causes of the Civil War were many and can not be classified until just one cause as many are trying to do these days Fact. Public Schools and Public telivision has portrayed the South as a Racist Evil during the Civil War and have given many a false image of the south just look it up the Civil War is very very interesting
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Fact: The south started the war to promote and secure slavery.
Fact: Southern soldiers were conscript, even before the war. White small holders were conscripted/enslaved to patrol for escaped slaves. It is true that the North did not start the war to end slavery. The North fought for the Union, to prevent war after war in North America, as Germany and France fought in Europe. The Racist Jim Crow South and abhorrent racist klans arose after the war, to gain/retain Democratic power/ corruption..
@BWD1995 The winner writes history, pretty basic law. I don't know a lot the civil war, but it also looked stupid to me that slavery was the only cause, because black people were still mistreated for a long while even after the civil war. So there must've been more up to it, the only real reason probably was: Power.
Fact. The South, ultimately, was fighting for slavery (states rights to have slaves, preserving a culture based on human bondage, slavery any way you slice it). Fact. Slavery is inherently evil. End of argument.
@TaiidanSoldier However, most of the South owned very few slaves and many poor whites had no slaves at all. Lee didn't have any, nor did most of the other confederate generals. The TRUE reason the South was fighting was the fear that the government would grow too big and would eliminate their states rights. Besides the use of slavery was seen as mandatory to maintaining the Southern economy that was heavily dependent on the cotton trade.
Very few slaves? Many places in the South had slave populations that made up over 50% of the total population in the area. True, many poor whites had no slaves, but owning slaves was something almost all Southerners strove for.
Furthermore, though slavery might've been seen as mandatory before 1840 (at least by the South), the South demonstrated that it COULD have industrialized (as it attempted to in the early 1850s) but simply refused to give up their ass-backwards culture based on slaves and aristocrats.
And, again, you've failed to mention what "right", exactly, they feared the government interfering with. That "right" being the "right" to hold other humans in bondage.
@TaiidanSoldier Agree with you on slavery, but technically, the US government intefered with the right to secede from the Union, whatever the motives for secession.Not sure Lincoln could have called for 90.000 armed volunteers against the seceded states if the latter hadn't attacked and destroyed a federal property, i.e Ft Sumpter.Whether the Southern states would have eventually dropped slavery by themselves 30 or 50 years later, particularly if left alone, is open to debate IMHO.
@BWD1995 Agree, and among the causes, one is seldom evoked : two conflicting economical perspectives, one of free trade (the South) the other of a protected market (the North).Among the rights the seceded states were defending, one was
to freely import low taxed goods from Europe, in competition with Northern made products which often hit the domestic markets with higher prices then.Northern interests dictated exactly the opposite.
@061369317 Not only that but there was no federal income tax. The federal government got most of its revenues through tariffs. Most of the exports came from the South. Other countries of course swiftly imposed retaliatory tariffs which hurt sales. So the South was losing sales abroad, providing most of the federal income and paying higher prices for manufactured goods....ie being treated as a cash cow. Just as in most wars, money was a huge causal factor in the War Between the States.
Fact. Abraham Lincoln's family owned slaves and he married into a very wealthy slave owning family Fact. Slaves were imported by the North and sold to the South Fact. After the Civil War was over five Northern states still had slavery until the passing of the thirteenth amendment later that year in 1865
Lincoln said that the face that grew the corn should eat the corn. Marx said that was the essence of Communism.
In theory.
In practice, communism has emulated the southern plantation, with workers in slave cabins at starvation wages, with party members in the big house, living grandly.
Lincoln, then could be considered the greatest American president ever, realistically. Instead he goes down in true history as the president who lost more American lives than any president to date. Any idiot can start a war, but it takes a real leader to prevent war.
Fact is men enjoyed looking at & hearing the beautiful Cora Scott. Women wanted change after viewing the Fox sisters & Cora Scott conjuring spirits. Spirits that curiously fueled the fire for reform. Even President Lincoln, who is to deny a grieving wife the opportunity to speak with the spirits about their dead son? Amazing coincidence, the seance spirit agreed with all the other conjured spirits. Done staring at C. Scott's ass have a bite of this abolitionist suffragette apple Mr. President.
A war over slavery. The confederate leaders made rebellion to protect their investment in slaves. The Union raised taxes on themselves, and paid a heavy price in lives to end slavery.
The war was started to protect and further slave power. The Rebels were willing to murder to support their supposed right to traffic in human slavery. If the Confederacy had won, there would have been war after war between Americans, just as there have been war after war between France and Germany.
Actually the war wasnt started over slavery . Was salvery one of the main issues during the Civil War yes it was but it want the cause . Fact. Many soldiers fighting for the south didnt own slaves Fact. General US Grant owned slaves Fact. General William T Sherman was a racist white man
the fact is that US grant was not for slavery. The slaves he had were given him by his father in law to help him on his farm, most of which he gave their freedom. The ones he did keep were given very good living conditions.
The war for southern independence should never have been fought at all. If Lincoln would have let the south succeed from the union all this blood shed could have been averted. Within a few decades slavery would have been no longer needed , the north and south would have been reunited and been much stronger as a result.
Grieving from the loss of her son Mary Scott Lincoln sponsored several seances in the White House which Lincoln attended. Spirit based religions became quite popular amongst the social elite & middle class. The expression, "turning the table", was the result of the coffee table turning & tilting during the seance to whom the spirit spoke. The United States 1865 Broadsheet linked Spiritualism to Witchcraft, Witchcraft to Abolition and blamed that relationship for the Civil War!"
Doesn't look much fun, 10% of the English population died in our civil war but mostly from disease, no idea what the percentage would have been in this war, maybe 3-4% mostly in battle you would presume. At least the right side won in both wars.
Mayor Paul winfield raping women too he give tax payers cash to whores and rapes them Tax payers Will Give 20 million dollars out to a whore he ran from vicksburg he messing with she got a sex tape of him.obama see this shit hes a demicrat,obama will make his ass resign and place a new mayor in office even phil bryant can impeach him ya.hes allowing the casinos to tighten the slots so we cant win here-more funds in his pockets to rape more women,he has a wife and kids.Tell Major Media ON it Ya
cleves2007usa 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BRITISH XEBOPHOBES AGAINST VS ANGLO-JEWISH INTERNATIONALS
unfukkkmee 2 months ago
watching this in 240p makes feal like im ther in the somke and all
12F220 2 months ago
THE SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN!!!!!!0
boomhauerfan1 2 months ago 2
its sad to see brother against brother in one of the bloodiest war in US history. but thanks God the war ended with the freedom of slaves and liberty and rights for all! :D
midoricindy 2 months ago
@midoricindy Yes, I think people don't know what kind of suffering and loss took place in the Civil War and what these solider went through. Battles horribly bloody and chaotic more than any other American war and there is no film that really shows what they were like. Life of a soldier was marching, starving, and suffering every day and a battle every now and then loosing more and more friends every time. People need to respect both sides because neither was fightin for slavery or freedom.
AUG351 2 weeks ago
I'm with him (UNDER). OK
SuperAcerocks 3 months ago
ok
az12758 3 months ago
Wienners write the history books. Of course the the southerners are the inept bad guys, its poitically correct bullshit.
j19527 3 months ago 2
A question - Why did the military leaders during the Civil War (or for those south of the M-D Line The War Between the States) elect to use the tactics of the British leaders from the Revolutionary War? ie Marching into battle in formation accompanied by pagentry. Music provided cadence and served as communication, but flag-bearers with rows of soldiers stepping in formation invited carnage. The Redcoats complained the colonists fought from behind trees and cover. 60+ years later, Formations?
RememberApostrophes 6 months ago
@RememberApostrophes I love bein a smart redneck. Warfare had changed somewhat since then and you also have to remember that this is a clip of the regular army. In the Revolution it was the same, regular army fought in formation the militias acted as guerilla fighters and fought behind trees and such. Both sides, in the Civil War, had guerrilla cavalry units dispatched throughout the South that raided into the North. The most famous are those from Missouri, namely Jesse James and his gang.
Caveman67100 5 months ago
@RememberApostrophes hope that helps
Caveman67100 5 months ago
@Caveman67100 Yes, that does help. Thank you for the clarification. The arrival of improved field communications must have changed the art of warfare.
RememberApostrophes 5 months ago
@RememberApostrophes Alot of people think they used big formations in open ground like in the Napoleonic wars but They actually dug many trenches, not like in ww1 but like ditches or mounds of dirt. Later in the war at Cold Harbor and Petersburg they dug trenches the size of about ww1 trenches. They also many time marched into battle in formations but the formations came apart during the battle and men would fight all over the place in masses.
AUG351 4 months ago
@AUG351 Thanks for the information. I appreciate you taking the time to help me gain a better grasp of events.
RememberApostrophes 4 months ago
my great great great uncles brother's cousin was *insert famous generals name here*
EpicTrollBeastMan 7 months ago
Heheheheheheheeeeeee Lots funny >: )
1FishJelly 7 months ago
as an american i support both sides -.-
castronm69 8 months ago
Wait the north won I thought we was still fighting
RedNeckwithbbgun 9 months ago
Wheres General GRUBBLEBUMP?
Imachowderhead 9 months ago
long live the confedirate states of america! its nothing personal they just happen too have a cool flag
alonmerlin 10 months ago
@alonmerlin actually not long live the confederates...they were demolished by the union. sorry, bud.
Hadeydeppio 10 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hadeydeppio Were not demolished. Who gave you that idea? I'm sitting here right now and replying to some dumb Yankee. Don't ask me why, I just am.
FastPonyGT 9 months ago
@FastPonyGT demolished, defeated, whichever-the confederacy was overthrown. wtf do you mean who gave me that idea? uhm..HISTORY? this is old news, like 155 years old.
Hadeydeppio 9 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hadeydeppio Obviously you didn't get the memo. I'm still here and we've been here since the War of Northern Aggression ended and were not going anywhere anytime soon. You may want to go freshen up on some real history.
FastPonyGT 9 months ago
@FastPonyGT no i don't think *you* get the memo. the confederates were defeated... that doesn't mean every single confederate was killed and put out out of existence. obviously there are still people who, for reasons unknown, claim to support the confederacy. however, the north *did* win the war, and the 1866 civil rights act *was* passed, additionally congress added the 13th,14th, and 15th amendments to the constitution, and your beloved confederates and the south was put under union rule.
Hadeydeppio 9 months ago 3
@Hadeydeppio do you know what the 13th amendment says boy? 1st of all, the 13th amendment was passed before the Civil War and basically says that the Federal government has no say in the decisions of individual states. Which means that the Southern states had the right to secede from the Union. Y'all think we were fightin for slavery, y'all just don't get it. Slavery was on it's way out when the war started we were fighting for our right to be free of what we saw and still see as a foreign power
Caveman67100 5 months ago
@Hadeydeppio THE SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN! this coming from a gay yankee
impaledscarecrow17 3 months ago 2
@Hadeydeppio you really and truely dont know what side to butter your bread.you better find out why the south was fightin for you freedom.first of all it wasnt about slavery,it was about taxing,and if the south had won you'd be hell of alot better off,now
Mr1963chevy 1 month ago
Can I use this video in an English Project ?
pikercaitl 10 months ago
OMG were muskets that inaccurate
TheGuilbran78 11 months ago
@TheGuilbran78 no
Dbackfed 10 months ago
alright guys listen. for all you ppl holding a grudge about the north winning shut up. they won, get over it. slavery is bad. its wrong to try and own someone. and for you people who are arguing that it wasnt just slavery, slavery is what it came down to in the end. so stop arguing and embrace the present. we are one nation and one nation we shall always be. the civil war was the worse war in the history of the u.s. brothers vs brothers.
Phillyphanatic21 11 months ago
@Phillyphanatic21 lol; everyone has their own opinion, which is what makes your statements so funny. Im sure some people down south still wish the confederates had won the war, though what good it may have done them isnt really something anyone can know. The thing that is certain is that slavery would have been abolished sooner or later regardless, as soon as the south had a legitimate means of sustaining their economy. and 'free the slaves' is equal to todays 'yes we can' and 'vote for change'
EZBreezy187 11 months ago
@Phillyphanatic21 I hate explaining this to you damn Yankees. We were fighting for the right granted to us by the 13th amendment and wanted to be free of the control of a foreign power. Slavery was a factor for the North(who were more racist then people realize) but in the South slavery was on it's way out when the war started. The present is that the victors right history and portray the South as evil, which it wasn't we wanted to be free of foreign rule. It would have been better because we
Caveman67100 5 months ago
@Caveman67100
Alot say, the civil war was based on slavery. It wasn't. The south just wanted to live their lives, under their rules.....I agree with you Phillyphanatic21
dougssmookie 4 months ago
@Phillyphanatic21 wanted to govern ourselves not be governed by some Yank who didn't understand us
Caveman67100 5 months ago
Oh God! A said day for our boys. 10 000 fresh Virginians arrived in the afternoon. That turned the tide of the battle. Our boys fought well. The movie doesn't give them justice.
johan12564 1 year ago
Damn north taking away our way of life -_-'
ShortyTheDireWolf 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
now this is what i call warfare
RegDawg101 1 year ago
safe to say in hindsight that the wrong side won that war...
reaperofdagrim 1 year ago
@reaperofdagrim Based off you knowing exactly how it would turn out had the south won....yeah I buy that.
Oldcartoons571 11 months ago
@Oldcartoons571 i know enough... :)
reaperofdagrim 11 months ago
@CitizenJohnSmith
You're on to something but you're off by target by a hair. Slavery was very much a big part of the issue, as were politics and economics. The whole argument of states rights is essentially about states rights to uphold and protect the institution of slavery.
It's very much true that only a small portion of people actually supported slavery, but slavery was a huge part of their culture and those who owned slaves were also at the top. They held power.
Mahbu 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey, check out my video of the Sumner attack. The video's on my page.
TheWalrus9091 1 year ago
go union!!!!!!!!
A74893 1 year ago
I am black. And I was born in the South. All I have to say is THANK U UNION SOLDIERS for giving us the ability to live like other caucasions. No offense to all of those confederate people. AND THANK U AS WELL ABE LINCOLN!!!!! :)
greenbean686 1 year ago
I am black. And I was born in the South. All I have to say is THANK U UNION SOLDIERS for giving us the ability to live like other caucasions. No offense to all of those confederate people.
greenbean686 1 year ago
God Damn proud to be a Virginian boy!!!
tomfan180 1 year ago 2
Honestly I think things worked out the best way possible for the North and South.The rebellion was a wicked beast that deserved to die,the main difference between the Revolution and the civil war was that before the conflict the south had ample voice in the federal government so really its just like trying to justify the whiskey rebellion,and another thing whether you portray blue or gray the strongest cause is the one that doesn't need justification
markmason1000 1 year ago
Playing at war
terrydalley 1 year ago
blackglowingeyes: Less crime, strong family values, safer schools, etc.
The slavery issue would have been phased out within a few decades.Blacks would have been deported back to their homeland.
seeingthesigns 1 year ago
@seeingthesigns With the tight grip the slave aristocracy held on Southern politics and the Southern economy, I'm not sure if it would have phased out that soon. In fact the border slave states were coerced into staying with the Union after the Emancipation Proclimation only when they were guarnteed the protection of slavery in their states until at least 1900 (obviously this never came to fruition lol). Just saying.
DarthMercanto 1 year ago
@seeingthesigns With the tight grip the slave aristocracy held on Southern politics and the Southern economy, I'm not sure if it would have phased out that soon. In fact the border slave states were coerced into staying with the Union after the Emancipation Proclimation only when they were guarnteed the protection of slavery in their states until at least 1900 (obviously this never came to fruition lol). Just saying. Great film (Gods and Generals) by the way XD
DarthMercanto 1 year ago
Who thinks the United States of America would be better if the south won the war?
blackglowingeyes 1 year ago
2:32 A guy drops from a lucky bullet
TheCommunistColin 1 year ago
what movie is this? im very much interested on knowing the title...
punic026 1 year ago
@punic026 The first battle is Bull Run, from "Gods and Generals".
The second battle is Chancellorsville, also from "Gods and Generals".
The third battle is Petersburg, from "Cold Mountain".
TheCommunistColin 1 year ago
@TheCommunistColin thanks... : )
punic026 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheCommunistColin There is a great new book out titled: GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES
It’s about two soldiers and a nurse from other times meeting in Gettysburg on the first day of the great battle. People that are on this post would love it.
Check out the book at my YouTube profile (GETTYSBURGbook) or search Amazon.
Cheers...
GETTYSBURGbook 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheCommunistColin Hello,
There is a great new book out titled: GETTYSBURG… OTHER TIMES
It features the history in an accurate but most different way than before.
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
The patriot is a good movie and also I can't believe the frigging south were fighting to make sure a black person does their dishes.
1123456789qwerty 1 year ago
I would like to know more about the civil war actually. Any other good movies besides these two?
Metaldude1945 1 year ago
I'm Hispanic and from the South. Does that mean I cant like the Rebels? Cause, they seem pretty awesome.
floridamyhomestate 1 year ago
"Mr. Smith, instruct Captain (untelligible) to position their batteries in the center of the cracks. Now I want the 4th and the 27th regiments stationed as support. I want the 5th regiment posted to their right and the 2nd and 33rd to their left. Understood"
Maybe it's just me but that sounds like a lot to accurately remember.
UtahMike41 1 year ago
why does every product i buy come with instructions in english and then spanish? did i sign up for a spanish class and not know it?
longfootbuddy 1 year ago
WTF is a regiment? And where are the Green Berets are in the civil war?
royaladam 1 year ago
@royaladam
Ideally a regiment is composed of ten, 100 man companies. A regiment should be 1,000 men. By 1863 the average size of a regiment was about 200 men. Each company is made up of two, 50 man platoons and each platoon is made up of two, 25 men sections. A companies senior officer is a Captain. A regiments C.O. is the Colonel. So you have 1 Colonel, Lt. Col, Major, 1 captain per each co. and then junior officers at the rank of Lt. along with Sgts and Cpls as file closers in the ranks.
appstatecanesfan 1 year ago
@edgehead31593 American education is total fail
Alexandros1294 1 year ago
gods and generals =)
gansta4lyfe20707 1 year ago
It's a shame the American Education system doesn't tell people the truth about the Civil War....
xxJMStudiosxx 1 year ago
The Confederate artillery, mostly 12 Pound Napoleons could never find the range on the Union artillery on Matthew's Hill. So the Confederate artillery fired on Union infantry.
The Union artillery dominated the battlefield, with their rifled artillery but they made the mistake moving down to Henry House Hill. At a range of under 100 yards, they were firing. Most of the shots went over Jackson's men.
We believe Jackson was wounded in the finger by a shell fragment, as no Union inf was there.
rebel2276 1 year ago
@rebel2276 Yeah and this is a movie so as being accurate historically, give it a A. I also doubt the Union formed perfect lines as Bull Run was probably the most unorganized battle of the Civil War. Both sides had infantry retreating and charging without the command to because the Soldiers never had really any experience.
TexTechxTexasAM 1 year ago
the only war america could win by itself was one against itself
scids225 2 years ago
Well, in our defense the wars we fought from 1918 on were to help somebody else win wars they couldn't win themselves. So naturally we didn't fight them alone.
Shafeone 2 years ago
no offense, but it's useless trying to sum up the cause and the resolve of the American Civil War in a few youtube comments. If your looking to justify your "reasoning", might I suggest you write a book. :-)
poopingeneral 2 years ago
Im sorry for being so long winded but there is one more thing just in case any one brings this up. After the war the reason this is no longer an issue is due to the radical industrialization due to the war itself. Plus radical republicans had basically took control of the south which ment no opinion from the real southerners. Also by that time the north found nw means of raw materials that were cheaper aka india and south america.
MonteCraz 2 years ago
This put the south into more debt because the north had a majority in the senate and thus a protective tariff was used to protect the north from over seas competition. Basically monopoly on the south. This is the real cause of the civil war.The straw that broke the camels back was the norths insistence that slavery be abolished. How was the south supposed to make a lively hood and pay back there debts with no slaves. It was a vicious cycle and a pity that no agreement could work. PS slaverys bad
MonteCraz 2 years ago
north turned into a finished product then sold back to the south at a higher price that the southerners couldnt afford. This continued until the south seceded. Also the north controlled the banking system. so the protective tariff heart the south because they were forced upon debt to the north via loans the took from northern bankers so they could continue to buy slaves to pick the cotton to send to the north that made finished goods and sold the finished goods back to the south at a high price
MonteCraz 2 years ago
I beg to differ with Union state heritage. The south had cared about states rights every since the founding. Look up the Kentucky resolution, and Calhouns southern ordinance. They saw the north as a threat to them and had been fighting for the right to nullify Federal laws every since the Jefferson wrote the resolution. He was agianst federalism and so was the south. They were afriad that the north would eventually own the south economically because the south produced raw materials which the...
MonteCraz 2 years ago
Gotta love the old 'Stand there and exchange fire' tactic!
EvaIowaCubsFan 2 years ago
Great movie, just sad the same actor plays another role in the next!!!!
SlotraceDK 2 years ago
@WAsoccer24 that 4-6% census number is the number of households. Of the overall population the number was closer to 25%. But whatever the number is doesn't matter. What soldiers fought for is why the war lasted as lone as it did and why it was as bloody as it was. It is however not why it started.
TigerRifle1 2 years ago
Check out South Carolina's reasons for secession released around the time of the ordnance of secession
riles521 2 years ago
That's about the few things Pro-Union people will dig up every time. That and Vice President Alexander Stephens "Cornerstone Speech".
About all they have and can find. Interesting that South Carolina did not represent the whole Confederacy, they were one single state.
Nor did Alexander Stephens represent the whole Confederacy. No political figure in history will ever represented every single person in his country.
60% of Northerners voted against Lincoln in the 1860 election.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Read the statement of causes given by South Carolina after the ordinance of secession. I think it sheds light on the slavery as a cause. Its readily available.
The war was clearly about secession. What was secession about though ?
riles521 2 years ago
since the late 1840's the south felt it was being cheated by the north.. making most of the profit from their crops.. being taxed heavily.. plans were made to abolish slavery in the south eventually.. they didn't have the population to support their economy.. the north had thousands of immigrants daily on their docks.. they could afford it.. for immigrants were cheaper than slaves.
woobstoob 2 years ago
I highly doubt the majority of enlisted Confederates were getting killed and wounded over slaves.
Nor do I believe Union soldiers were getting killed and wounded to free slaves.
rebel2276 2 years ago
I agreee. The war itself was about secession and the primary ideology was about fighting for your country (the definition being differnet of course).
The motives for secesssion if you read the contemporary documents appear to be almost entirely concerning slavery.
The downgrading of slavery as a cause of dispute is a post-war phenonomenon.
Again read the casues that South Carolina lists for its secession.
riles521 2 years ago
I have been doing this for the last 26 years, I have read tons of stuff. I still seek out tons of more information.
But reading South Carolina or Stephen's "Cornerstone speech" still does not convince me that enlisted CSA troops were fighting to keep or preserve slavery. They were fighting for their Constitutional rights that the Supreme Court in 1857 laid down.
Had those laws been accepted by Lincoln, there would have never been a war at all.
rebel2276 2 years ago
What exactly are the constituional rights laid down by the Supreme Court in 1857 ?
riles521 2 years ago
@riles521 I believe he is talking about the Dred Scott decision, when the Supreme Court refused Scott's free status and citizenship and upheld right of property in Negro slaves.
TigerRifle1 2 years ago
Exactly, but Dred Scott was not free, he was a slave. The Supreme Court judged that he was not an American Citizen and therefore he could not sue his master.
The Supreme Court looked over the Constitution and all other documents. Had the verdict gone the opposite way, then I would type on here, that the South was fighting to keep slavery. No questions asked.
rebel2276 2 years ago
The Dred Scott decision was even more extreme. The holding was that someone of African descent could not be a US citizen even if they were free regardless of what their state of residence might be.
riles521 2 years ago
Read on the "Dred Scot Supreme Court case". If we were taught more in depth on that verdict people would know what the South was fighting for.
Since the Union won and Lincoln changed what the war was about half way, people believe the South was fighting to keep their slaves.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Read on it, get deep into it. They have tried to hide that for the last 150 years.
Notice in your history books, a paragraph was all they had on it?
Read and seek the truth, Riles!
God Bless
rebel2276 2 years ago
Again, Constitutional rights, that our founding fathers wrote. The South was fighting for their Constitutional rights that the Supreme Court had judged on.
Had Lincoln and his radical Republicans obeyed the law, there would have never been a war.
Lincoln wanted to reverse what the Supreme Court judged on and stop the expansion of slavery in the west. The Supreme Court had judged in 1857, that American citizens could take their "Personal Property" anywhere they wanted to go.
rebel2276 2 years ago
If Dred Scott is what it is all about, then you would seem to be saying that the Southnern cause was the exapansion of slavery.
riles521 2 years ago
The Supreme Court made it crystal clear that American citizens could take their "Personal Property" anywhere they wanted to go.
That territorial governors, such as Kansas and Nebraska had no power to stop, prevent or prohibit, Americans from taking their personal property into those territories.
The South was overjoyed with the Supreme Court's verdict. Lincoln and his radical republicans did not like the verdict.
Thus, war.
rebel2276 2 years ago
So you are saying that the Confederate enlisted men were fighting and dying because they wanted to be able to take slaves into Kansas
riles521 2 years ago
He's admitting that in reality, the South had no respect whatever for the principle of states rights.
In the process, he's taking you on a merry twirl around the dance floor, to the tune of the Confederate Two-Step.
Fact is, the South was the chief purveyor of federal power, during the most of the Antebellum Period. Southerners only cared about states rights, after they lost the political power to impose their will on the rest of the nation.
UnionStatesHeritage 2 years ago
In the twisted world of Confederate culture, the South has every right to deny citizens of newly formed states. the right to decide the slavery question for themselves.
Why? Because the law says so.
Yet, when those same people get fed up, and use the political process to address their grievances, it is grounds for the dissolution of the nation, without their consent...because the law says so.
See how that works?
UnionStatesHeritage 2 years ago
Yes riles read on it. Read the papers, speeches, secession declarations, and other documents written by Southerners themselves, AT THE TIME.
They tell the true story.
Read about the experiences of the people in the South who did not support secession, and understood the evils of the plantation economy. Read about what happened to those people, when they voiced their dissent, during the Secession Crisis.
A good start..."Bitterly Divided, the South's Inner Civil War", by David Williams.
UnionStatesHeritage 2 years ago
There is no constitutional right to pull out of the union, destroy federal property or kill federal troops because you fear that the president might try to amend or circumvent a Supreme Court decision. Amending or even going around SCOTUS precedent is perfectly legal.
mst3k4evur 2 years ago
When our founding fathers pulled away from Britain was that right? Was it right for Union soldiers to rape white Southern women and female slaves? Was it right for Union soldiers to steal cotton? Was it right for George Washington to own 300 slaves? Was it right for 12 President that owned slaves, including Grant?
Anymore questions?
rebel2276 2 years ago
"When our founding fathers pulled away from Britain was that right?"
By our laws yes.
"Was it right for Union soldiers to rape white Southern women and female slaves? "
No, that's why it did not happen.
"Was it right for Union soldiers to steal cotton?"
Theft does not compare to treason.
"Was it right for 12 President that owned slaves, including Grant?"
No, but it was legal. Once the law changes, you can take them away.
mst3k4evur 2 years ago
Those same "Laws" protected slavery. Our constitution protected slavery as well.
Lincoln did not want to obey the law. Point blank. Even the Supreme Court sided with the South.
Lincoln ignored the Supreme Court and Congress. Lincoln never even went before Congress to ask permission to go to war. That was illegal and unconstitutional.
But King Lincoln did it and got away with it. Then left a half ass story behind for us to believe that.
You get a chance, go to Washington DC, LOC and NA.
rebel2276 2 years ago
And laws, the Constitution and the Supreme Court can and do change. You seem to think these things are static, they change all the time. It is quite legal.
Lincoln did not start the war. The South did by attacking Fort Sumter, a federal installation.
Also, you can stop using Lincoln as an excuse. He took office AFTER the South seceded.
mst3k4evur 2 years ago
LOL...Lil Reb's taking you around the dance floor, to his favorite tune.
It's okay for rich, slave holding planters to destroy the nation, with the full sanction of the US Constitution, and the Supreme Court, in order to protect their property...human chattel.
But...it's not okay for the American people to suppress a rebellion, and defend the nation, in order to protect THEIR property rights. The territorial integrity of the United States.
wolfencrow 2 years ago
Fighting to preserve slavery upholds the highest ideals of our Constitution.
Fighting to defend the Union created by the Constitution is tyranny. A decision that was backed by the overwhelming majority of Americans at the time.
It's always the same shell game of morally-bankrupt double speak.
wolfencrow 2 years ago
Our founding fathers wrote that in the Constitution, read it a few more times with your high school education.
rebel2276 2 years ago
That's the founders the problem.
They couldn't or wouldn't address the slavery issue. Therefore it was left up to the American people to decide the issue, as well as the issue of secession.
Americans decided that issue on the battlefield of the South's choosing, by overwhelming majority.
Learn to live with that fact.
UnionStatesHeritage 1 year ago
@UnionStatesHeritage The founding fathers also failed to properly resolve the issue of States rights. If the States had more rights they could and would have resolved the slavery issue internally, thus negating the need for a civil war or war for independence depending on your point of view. Also the health care bill would note have been necessary. As it was Americans never decided the slavery issue since there never was a vote. Lincoln decided it unilateral.
fadingjedi 1 year ago
@fadingjedi
Sure there was. In every state North of the Mason/Dixon line that applied the doctrine of states rights and voted to abolish slavery long before Lincoln was elected to the Presidency. The Republican party came into being because people in the US wanted to stop slavery from spreading to newly formed states.
UnionStatesHeritage 1 year ago
@UnionStatesHeritage One other thing. The emancipation proclamation was technically an executive order that could be rescinded at anytime if some president were crazy enough.
fadingjedi 1 year ago
@fadingjedi
Guess that's why they passed the 13th Amendment.
UnionStatesHeritage 1 year ago
Let all these people know beforehand that your own family fought for the South. Hypocrite.
rebel2276 2 years ago
This, coming from a loud-mouthed Yankee.
UnionStatesHeritage 1 year ago
Sure, hiding behind your computer grew you some pretty big balls.
rebel2276 1 year ago
Hmmm....it seems to have worked well enough for you...stuffing a cyber sock in your knickers.
Still no face pic on your profile?
UnionStatesHeritage 1 year ago
I don't see your face picture either. Go join the Army, come out here to Afghanistan, I am sure we can find a nice place to chat.
rebel2276 1 year ago
wow they´re absolutely clueless. rotating fire anyone?! First rank shoots while the rest reloads in the back. But no... one single salvo and then the bayonet. Stupidity galore!
Stalin111 2 years ago
@Stalin111 The reason they did that was because they were bearly trained milita. They did formation drill but live fire practice was unheard of. Also no-one new the effects of modern weapons. Hope this helps your understanding of why things happened.
REDTROOP44 2 years ago
My great grandfather was kia by a southern troop
wowhobbster666 2 years ago
Stop lying, in another post you claimed your Great grandfather was Stonewall Jackson, damn grow up.
rebel2276 2 years ago
Your great grandfather was a member of an invasion force, and the good and honorable men of the South who were assigned to stop him, did so by cannon and by Minie ball - the very weapons which the Yankees brought to bear in my homeland of the South.
ShermanBurns 2 years ago
that is an incorrect statement the south was the first to fire and they were the invaders until later in the war
FingerBoardMe 2 years ago
whats this movie please reply!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
alcody1 2 years ago
Gods and generals
pharoah246 2 years ago
God's and Generals. Here is the full trailer for it.
/watch?v=VxPXrrZ8bJU
Itsmeagain9145 2 years ago
Only the rich southern slave owners wanted to fight to protect slavery. They had everything to lose with the abolition of slavery. The vast majority of southerners fought to protect their homes, which I can respect.
The war was not about slavery initially, but as the war progressed Lincoln made it into a war to free the slaves along with preserving the Union.
burnsesuit 2 years ago
Fact: The south will rise again.
Stender84 2 years ago 3
@Stender84
And be destroyed again:).
refuckulate420 1 year ago 2
@Stender84 yea boy the south will rise again!!!!
American260 1 year ago
@Stender84 No it wont. the south was defeated and allthough the south is a great place it will never rise up as an enemy again. and if it does, the union will win again. No offense but the south wont.
washingtonboy09 1 year ago
Fact. The causes of the Civil War were many and can not be classified until just one cause as many are trying to do these days Fact. Public Schools and Public telivision has portrayed the South as a Racist Evil during the Civil War and have given many a false image of the south just look it up the Civil War is very very interesting
BWD1995 2 years ago 8
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Fact: The south started the war to promote and secure slavery.
Fact: Southern soldiers were conscript, even before the war. White small holders were conscripted/enslaved to patrol for escaped slaves. It is true that the North did not start the war to end slavery. The North fought for the Union, to prevent war after war in North America, as Germany and France fought in Europe. The Racist Jim Crow South and abhorrent racist klans arose after the war, to gain/retain Democratic power/ corruption..
DonMeaker 2 years ago
@BWD1995 The winner writes history, pretty basic law. I don't know a lot the civil war, but it also looked stupid to me that slavery was the only cause, because black people were still mistreated for a long while even after the civil war. So there must've been more up to it, the only real reason probably was: Power.
Metaldude1945 1 year ago
@BWD1995
Fact. The South, ultimately, was fighting for slavery (states rights to have slaves, preserving a culture based on human bondage, slavery any way you slice it). Fact. Slavery is inherently evil. End of argument.
TaiidanSoldier 1 year ago
@TaiidanSoldier However, most of the South owned very few slaves and many poor whites had no slaves at all. Lee didn't have any, nor did most of the other confederate generals. The TRUE reason the South was fighting was the fear that the government would grow too big and would eliminate their states rights. Besides the use of slavery was seen as mandatory to maintaining the Southern economy that was heavily dependent on the cotton trade.
alexiaNBC 1 year ago
@alexiaNBC
Very few slaves? Many places in the South had slave populations that made up over 50% of the total population in the area. True, many poor whites had no slaves, but owning slaves was something almost all Southerners strove for.
TaiidanSoldier 1 year ago
@alexiaNBC
Furthermore, though slavery might've been seen as mandatory before 1840 (at least by the South), the South demonstrated that it COULD have industrialized (as it attempted to in the early 1850s) but simply refused to give up their ass-backwards culture based on slaves and aristocrats.
And, again, you've failed to mention what "right", exactly, they feared the government interfering with. That "right" being the "right" to hold other humans in bondage.
TaiidanSoldier 1 year ago
@TaiidanSoldier Agree with you on slavery, but technically, the US government intefered with the right to secede from the Union, whatever the motives for secession.Not sure Lincoln could have called for 90.000 armed volunteers against the seceded states if the latter hadn't attacked and destroyed a federal property, i.e Ft Sumpter.Whether the Southern states would have eventually dropped slavery by themselves 30 or 50 years later, particularly if left alone, is open to debate IMHO.
061369317 1 year ago
@BWD1995 Agree, and among the causes, one is seldom evoked : two conflicting economical perspectives, one of free trade (the South) the other of a protected market (the North).Among the rights the seceded states were defending, one was
to freely import low taxed goods from Europe, in competition with Northern made products which often hit the domestic markets with higher prices then.Northern interests dictated exactly the opposite.
061369317 1 year ago
@061369317 Not only that but there was no federal income tax. The federal government got most of its revenues through tariffs. Most of the exports came from the South. Other countries of course swiftly imposed retaliatory tariffs which hurt sales. So the South was losing sales abroad, providing most of the federal income and paying higher prices for manufactured goods....ie being treated as a cash cow. Just as in most wars, money was a huge causal factor in the War Between the States.
hungarygator 1 year ago
Fact. Abraham Lincoln's family owned slaves and he married into a very wealthy slave owning family Fact. Slaves were imported by the North and sold to the South Fact. After the Civil War was over five Northern states still had slavery until the passing of the thirteenth amendment later that year in 1865
BWD1995 2 years ago 3
this war makes me think of drawing a war between monotheism and polytheism
Farfeb 2 years ago
Lincoln was the highest paid corporate lawyer of his day. Karl Marx congratulated Lincoln in 1864 after Lincoln's reelection.
Think!
FGTBOGSAT 2 years ago
"GIVE THEM THE BAYONET!!!!"
Man Stephen Lang is great as Stonewall Jackson
cripplehawk 2 years ago 5
3:34 Damn what a Shot!
CrosslegLuke 2 years ago
Comment removed
Amy16899 2 years ago
Karl Marx was an admirer of Lincoln.
Think!
FGTBOGSAT 2 years ago 2
Lincoln said that the face that grew the corn should eat the corn. Marx said that was the essence of Communism.
In theory.
In practice, communism has emulated the southern plantation, with workers in slave cabins at starvation wages, with party members in the big house, living grandly.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
If Marx knew God and Shakespeare as well as Lincoln (and as well as you know Elvis) things probably wouldn't
Stink!
thinazzabird 2 years ago
long live the south
boplo 2 years ago 3
Lincoln, then could be considered the greatest American president ever, realistically. Instead he goes down in true history as the president who lost more American lives than any president to date. Any idiot can start a war, but it takes a real leader to prevent war.
bestringtail 2 years ago 4
Fact is men enjoyed looking at & hearing the beautiful Cora Scott. Women wanted change after viewing the Fox sisters & Cora Scott conjuring spirits. Spirits that curiously fueled the fire for reform. Even President Lincoln, who is to deny a grieving wife the opportunity to speak with the spirits about their dead son? Amazing coincidence, the seance spirit agreed with all the other conjured spirits. Done staring at C. Scott's ass have a bite of this abolitionist suffragette apple Mr. President.
waketheoblivious 2 years ago
A war over lost tax revenue.
FGTBOGSAT 2 years ago
A war over slavery. The confederate leaders made rebellion to protect their investment in slaves. The Union raised taxes on themselves, and paid a heavy price in lives to end slavery.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
The war was started to protect and further slave power. The Rebels were willing to murder to support their supposed right to traffic in human slavery. If the Confederacy had won, there would have been war after war between Americans, just as there have been war after war between France and Germany.
DonMeaker 2 years ago
Actually the war wasnt started over slavery . Was salvery one of the main issues during the Civil War yes it was but it want the cause . Fact. Many soldiers fighting for the south didnt own slaves Fact. General US Grant owned slaves Fact. General William T Sherman was a racist white man
BWD1995 2 years ago
the fact is that US grant was not for slavery. The slaves he had were given him by his father in law to help him on his farm, most of which he gave their freedom. The ones he did keep were given very good living conditions.
FeSo4man 2 years ago
The war for southern independence should never have been fought at all. If Lincoln would have let the south succeed from the union all this blood shed could have been averted. Within a few decades slavery would have been no longer needed , the north and south would have been reunited and been much stronger as a result.
bestringtail 2 years ago
A+ bestringtail
Grieving from the loss of her son Mary Scott Lincoln sponsored several seances in the White House which Lincoln attended. Spirit based religions became quite popular amongst the social elite & middle class. The expression, "turning the table", was the result of the coffee table turning & tilting during the seance to whom the spirit spoke. The United States 1865 Broadsheet linked Spiritualism to Witchcraft, Witchcraft to Abolition and blamed that relationship for the Civil War!"
waketheoblivious 2 years ago
Doesn't look much fun, 10% of the English population died in our civil war but mostly from disease, no idea what the percentage would have been in this war, maybe 3-4% mostly in battle you would presume. At least the right side won in both wars.
KEYNSHAM4 3 years ago
the south should have won
worldbattle39 3 years ago 3