1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

questions about the civil war

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by Icey101, Dec 23, 2011.

  1. ok so

    1. what was it all about?....nth v sth? but what did they think they would get if they won? same country?

    2. how did they define who they needed to fight who?...was there a border?

    3. Was there really friends fighting each other cause they were on each side of a river or creek?

    4. How did the generals know how their armies were going with no communications?

    5.so for each side where were all the guns and cannons made and who made them?...where did the money come from to make them?

    6. was it all about armies lining up and blasting the crap out of each other or did they do any night raids or unanounced attacks?

    7. were civilians attacked...like attrocities?

    8. When the war was won...did everyone simple mix in and work with each other again...nth and south become as one? or did they still hate each other?

    9. were there any advancements in weapons? like inventions? gattling gun?

    10. Did ships...like dreadnaughts play a big role? i heard the story of those guys in a sub who attacked a big ship and lost their lives

    11. who were the heroes of the war and what did they do?

  2. jmattbassplaya

    jmattbassplaya Looking for a gig around East Islip, NY!

    Jan 13, 2008
    I'm curious as to why you're curious. Are you writing a research paper or something?
  3. i've seen movies...read a bit of history but would like to get an idea from people in the states to what really happened
  4. pedroims


    Dec 19, 2007
    Lincoln was elected president, he was against slavery. Eleven states from the south did not like this idea so they '' separeted '' and created the confederated states, the other states fought them to recover the states. North won and slavery was outlawed everywhere in the nation. discrimination and racism still exist today.
  5. Hi.

    No offense Icey101, but are You joking?

    Or are You just trying to weasel yourself out of writing an essay?

  6. Btw, I'm not a historian, just a bored insomniac.
  7. Buxtehude


    Jan 5, 2011
    We doin home works now?
  8. jmattbassplaya

    jmattbassplaya Looking for a gig around East Islip, NY!

    Jan 13, 2008
    I was thinking the same thing :p

    Honestly, go read the Wikipedia page for it. It gives a fairly decent (and fairly unbiased) overview of the war's history.
  9. Bard2dbone


    Aug 4, 2002
    Arlington TX
    It drives me crazy that people put it all on slavery now. It was an important issue. But it wasn't the main cause of the war. It was related to SOME of the main causes. But wars are never that simple. Mostly it will all come down to economics every time. Somebody in charge will think of a way to get rich and some of the people who got screwed because of that guys plan will get mad and start rabble-rousing.

    Slavery was a big deal. Don't think I'm saying it's not. But it wasn't the whole cause of the civil war.

    The north had lots of industry. The south had lots of raw materials. Both North and South wanted to have more power in general and more power to control their destinies. The biggest agricultural powers in the south (Read that as being like Exxon/Mobil or GE now) could afford to own humans to do large scale farming cheaply. Most farmers in the South could not. The North had people who objected to slavery for proper moral reasons. They didn't push us into a war. The North also had people who wanted to hurt southern landowners and companies in ways that let those same Northerners benefit from it. (Read that as Goldman-Sachs) None of those people could get along or communicate their issues effectively to reach conclusions. What they could do was to get royally pissed of at each other. During all that we had the worst President in our history. People on both sides of the aisle have referred to our current and last Presidents as the worst in history, depending on which party you prefer. Both of those are slanders. Buchanan was the only President so bad at it that he made half the country say "Fine! Screw all y'all. We're leaving!" *Picture slamming door sound all along the Mason-Dixon line.

    Lincoln didn't start the war. He had to fix it. He issued the Emancipation Proclamation late in the war. If slavery had really been the only cause he would have done so much earlier.

    All wars are caused by economics. But the victors write the history books and no one wants to write "We started a nationwide murder spree against our own cousins so a few people could get insanely rich and then afterwards go steal everything they could carry from the people who lost." Doesn't it sound more noble to say "We were forced into a war to restore and then protect. the dignity of people who had through force been treated as property and unjustly used as mere beasts of the field." I know which of those two I'd want to support.

    So in summary: Pro - actually ended slavery as an institution in this nation. Con - the south was economicall raped for a very extended time afterward. In my childhood I remember people who referred to the Civil War as the War of Northern Aggression with a complete lack of irony.
  10. Answers in bold. Seriously. Do your own research. There are books written on this war, even on each question you asked.
  11. Bard2dbone


    Aug 4, 2002
    Arlington TX
    If i could post links to webcomics from my work computer I would have a great one to use the Civil War to demonstrate why you DON'T want to use wikipedia for homework.

    In essence I believe it said the Civil War was the first major conflict to center around the use of gigantic spider robots.

    Hmmmm...it seems to be gone. It was in Charliehorse by KrazyKrow
  12. Febs

    Febs Supporting Member

    May 7, 2007
    Philadelphia, PA
    Here ya go:

  13. mindbass


    Jan 12, 2010
    I'm no expert on the issue, but as far as i understood the south was rich and north was poor. When the south decided to leave the north got pissed because most of the money the state raised in taxes was gone too. One of the reasons that the south was rich was its reliance on unpaid labour, i.e. slavery.
  14. BassMom88


    Oct 17, 2011
    Regarding #6
    My GGGGrandfather (Frank "Mocking Bird" Angelo) was one of Mosby's Rangers -43rd Battalion of VA Cavalry. They did not play by the rules and are described as "an elite guerilla unit". There's some pretty awful stuff in some of the books I've read. He met his wife when they would pass through...she hid silver for them and gave them water and after the war he went back and married her & they had a whole bunch of kids. He lived until 1928 and worked after the war for the US Dept of Agriculture.
  15. bjabass


    Jan 10, 2011
    Mountain South
    After a quick scan of the replies I feel like the issue of states rights needs to be explained further. The north (the 'Union') wanted to consolidate most law making at the federal level and the south (the 'Confederacy') thought it was better for the states to have their own individual set of laws for each state, (including slavery).

    Families and friends didn't fight each other just because they were on opposite sides of some border, they fought because they were on opposite sides of these issues.
  16. BurningSkies

    BurningSkies CRAZY BALDHEAD Supporting Member

    Feb 20, 2005
    Syracuse NY
    Endorsing artist: Dingwall Guitars
    Thanks for saving me from posting this...While in everybody's mind, slavery was the big issue, the real divide was agrarian south against industrial north. In a way, we were already 'two countries' before hand, and added pressure of westward expansion and 'manifest destiny' strained an already poor relationship.
  17. Phalex

    Phalex Semper Gumby Supporting Member

    Oct 3, 2006
    G.R. MI
    I thought this thread was gonna be about family coming over at Christmas.........
  18. pharmakon


    Jun 15, 2010
    As the great Axl Rose once posited: "What's so civil about war, anyway?"
  19. burk48237

    burk48237 Supporting Member

    Nov 22, 2004
    Oak Park, MI
    Sorry, I couldn't disagree more. The fact of the matter is no divide over slavery-no civil war. The other issues were peripheral at best. To me this new revisionist bent is an attempt to denigrate the sacrifice of a good many men who died to end slavery and save the Union. Lincoln clearly stated that allowing slavery to continue was morally unsustainable and he was clearly convinced of that as was a majority of the country.
  20. As far as the communications go. I believe the Telegraph was used in war for the first time during The Civil War. Lincoln used the telegraph for "real time" communications to his front line Generals.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.