The entire war was started because of slavery. The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederates fought to keep their slaves and to take other states to expand their 'slave empire'. Yes they fought for independence but only because the government would not allow them to keep slaves. So if you really support the Confederate ideology in real life then you support the idea of slavery.The Union soldiers fought to preserve the Union. Later, really, to boost the cause for fighting, they added slavery in for them to fight against. Really, too, the confederates were more fighting to secede and have the Union off their backs, and yes slavery was an issue, but not the cause for the soldiers, and why most of them fought.
If the majority actually cared about the rights of the African Americans it wouldn't have taken until 1950 before they had equal rights.
The Confederacy was about slavery. There is no arguing that.Thanks for backing me up. It can't be denied.
There is still the need to honor the confederates though. They were brave men who fought for something they believed in. I personally feel that it dishonors them when people deny what the confederacy stood for. They were brave enough to die for it which is nothing to be ashamed of.The Nazi's died for what they believed in but they don't deserve a shred of honor.
Well I'm no expert, but the confederates weren't fighting for slavery ;)
I agree the Confederates were for Slavery at the timeGlad to see I have changed your mind :P
Neutral. I'm a hipster you see.I am going blind in the overwhelming light of your awesomeness.
The Nazi's died for what they believed in but they don't deserve a shred of honor.
Plus you still didn't answer my last response :PI answered it in the first posts I made - I believe it was fought for slavery. I don't want to go on about it all night however - I'm meant to be studying :P
take it to PMs for gods sake ::)They're not being disrespectful about it, the conversation is for other people's input as well.
This whole "if you chose Confederacy you agree with slavery" is laughable. Even I know it had little/nothing to do with anything.I thought it was sad more then funny.
Well, once it gets to that point then we'll have a jolly old time warning people amidst much laughter, condescension and cigar smoke. Until then though, surely it'd be un-american to deny them their right to debate? ;)I like the way you think! :P
Until then though, surely it'd be un-american to deny them their right to debate? ;)God bless 'Murica!
The entire war was started because of slavery. The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederates fought to keep their slaves and to take other states to expand their 'slave empire'. Yes they fought for independence but only because the government would not allow them to keep slaves. So if you really support the Confederate ideology in real life then you support the idea of slavery.
The whole thing about playing a nation in a game means you support their ideals isn't what I said - I play as Romans, Axis Powers, the Mafia and all sorts of people in games but I don't support what they think. I never said that so...
I haven't researched the Civil War quite as in depth as you probably have due to your mod so I don't really now anything about the intricacies or statistics. It's just that everywhere I search about the Civil War it always said that the whole thing was fought over slavery.
Add a poll and lets see how many people support which faction ( not politically, just ingame)
I would be very careful about calling anyone ignorant, especially with such a divisive topic.
Confederate. The states were protected by the constitution but the central government wanted more power over the states. Originally the states were offered an 'opt out' deal when joining the union, much like today with the United Nation's Agenda 21, but we all know what happens when you try to 'opt out' of centralized control.
I would be very careful about calling anyone ignorant, especially with such a divisive topic.
I would be very careful about calling anyone ignorant, especially with such a divisive topic.
I assume what I say...All Northern Americans I met are like that..and I met quiet a few...thats enough for me to form a general opinion..
edit: wow, people here dont seem so fond of the union :-\Don't worry, you're on my side - you're safe! ;D
As I've stated before, the politics behind a war don't matter if one is fighting for their home and family.
Thus, I must stand with Georgia, and by extension, the Confederate States of America.
It's the Union for me. You would have fought for the Confederates because they had a just cause? So you support the enslavement of black people?
this argument has been dead for days now.It's the Union for me. You would have fought for the Confederates because they had a just cause? So you support the enslavement of black people?
That is an extremely ignorant response. The War of Northern Aggression was Fought for the rights of the States, because the tyranical Central Government oppressed them. The American Civil War was the Second Revolutionary war, That was lost.
You're missing a 4th Poll option - We Europeans need someone to root for.Hehehe.
Fix'd.
So are you saying that these once confederates states today, and all the states for that matter do not have adequate right to improve upon themselves as they see fit?No? Um, I said that the old Confederates saw an breaching in their rights, and felt threatened as new territories were going to be taken as states that would mess up the equality of representatives in congress, hint, more views similar as the Union's, and then on top of that, the new President Lincoln, was seen as someone who would destroy their economy as way of life, so they broke apart. States have rights, and I am for that, and only a small government governing them; the idea of it.
Good ol' public education at work ::)
Does any of you guy's actually realise, that it wouldn't have made any differents that the Confederates allowed slavery? If the CSA won the war and remained an own nation. Then they would have need to ban slavery anyway, otherwise the UK and other major nations at that time would never have recognized them as an independent country. Quite some Confederates were even against slavery, and most of those fought more for their own state. I bet only a couple really fought for keeping the slavery.
All you confags are just hipsters. UNION WON U SUCK!Basically.
Do you actually believe that if the CSA had become independent then everyone would have lived happily ever after? No, it would've been constant war for centuries. It would've been like the fucking Balkans. Even if the Union had conceded defeat for the time being, they definitely would've waited to build up strength, and then gone right for another try at unifying the country again.
Besides, the CSA never would've survived on their own. They had no major industry besides agriculture... and slaves. Go figure.
Agriculture does seem more important than industry though. :PThe Union had enough agriculture to support itself, along with the bulk of the factories accross the enitre Union and CSA. The CSA had a lot of agriculture, but close to no mechanized industry. A nation can't support itself in the industrialized era with no... industry.
Rather have food than a factory. Besides, factories can be build relatively fast.
Do you actually believe that if the CSA had become independent then everyone would have lived happily ever after? No, it would've been constant war for centuries. It would've been like the fucking Balkans. Even if the Union had conceded defeat for the time being, they definitely would've waited to build up strength, and then gone right for another try at unifying the country again.
Besides, the CSA never would've survived on their own. They had no major industry besides agriculture... and slaves. Go figure.
Other countries would let this happen?
Generally, a super-power doesn't take kindly to someone invading one of its trading partners.
Once the Confederacy gained independence, they'd have been taken under the wing of the European powers, simply because they'd provide cheap(er) supplies. If any wars were to be fought from then on, many of them would support the Confederates with more than just materiel shipments.
And to be clear, I support the Confederacy, because of my beliefs regarding a people's right to self determination, regardless of what reasons they have for it. Were they free from evils during this era? No. But nor was the Union. One simply has to look to what they view as the lesser of two evils.
Would be a proper place to invest in, I think it would have gone allright.Yes, I know agriculture is important, but you can't rely on that alone to run a country. The Union had plentiful Agriculture and Industry, while the south only have agriculture.
Street-smart people know: Confederates fought for the same thing America fought for in the 1770s.
Book jockeys know: C0nfederates f0ught 4 sl2very, whiuch is bauded.
Ahem...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz_GLcumolw[/youtube]
Confederates.Your whole post. Just no. Oh my.
They weren't fighting for slavery, they were fighting to preserve their way of life and to protect their land that the yankees were invading. Many southerners were against slavery, and the north was equally as racist. The worst race riot in american history happened in New York (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_draft_riots) , after all.[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQmO-WfEkk4[/youtube]
As a son of Virginia currently living in the state of Ohio, I must say that I would lay down my life for Virginia but I would spit on Ohio's shoes if it were a man. So my answer is Confederacy. No one of you can ever convince me that it is right to invade your own country and to lay waste to the whole Georgian and South Carolinian countryside which was completely undefended by any military forces (because John Bell Hood was a fool) yet still bring the full power of your military upon them. If any foreign force did that to the US it would be remembered as terrible and awful but when we do it to our own people it's heroic and bold? Anyone who agrees with such acts sickens me and I can't bear to think that I breathe in the same air that you spill your Rainbow Sparkles into. Good day gentlemen, I leave you with a short tune.
Advance the flag of Dixie,
Hurrah! Hurrah!
For Dixie's land we take our stand,
to live or die for Dixie!
ModEdit: Toned it down a little. Be nice.
Actually the confederacy started the war by invading Union territory, so yeah, no. You're a colossal retard if you think most people who supported the Union also supported the pillage of the Georgian and the South Carolinian countryside. What happens in war is never to be blamed on the common man. Anyway, if the confederacy had won both of our countries would be in ruin right now, so be thankful.
The Confederates were the aggressors by, you know, seceding in the first place. And no, it's not your constitutional right to rebel without the Union doing anything about it. Again, most people did not support the murder and destruction of the south, they supported the quelling of the rebellion and the preservation of the Union.Actually the confederacy started the war by invading Union territory, so yeah, no. You're a colossal retard if you think most people who supported the Union also supported the pillage of the Georgian and the South Carolinian countryside. What happens in war is never to be blamed on the common man. Anyway, if the confederacy had won both of our countries would be in ruin right now, so be thankful.
Be thankful that, because of the war, my family no longer has a home in Georgia?
Be thankful that the economy of the state was destroyed, and took decades to recover?
Nay, I'll not be thankful for a murdering fool who led a legion of murdering fools.
So.. which state did the Confederate troops invade?
I recall a bombardment in Charleston as being the spark that started the fire to destroy a nation.
The Confederates were the aggressors by, you know, seceding in the first place. And no, it's not your constitutional right to rebel without the Union doing anything about it. Again, most people did not support the murder and destruction of the south, they supported the quelling of the rebellion and the preservation of the Union.
And, are you really implying that if the south had won, the south's economy would not be in ruins? Both of our countries would be shitholes today, and neither side would be happy. I wouldn't be surprised if we would have been living under foreign rule by the end of world war one, or even before that.
It's a human right if you ask me for a people to govern themselves. Seeing as nearly the entirety of Southerners wanted to secede I'd say that's basis enough to want to govern themselves. And when the Confederates seceded they asked the Union troops to peacefully leave the forts in Southern lands - most of them did actually and had the garrison at Fort Sumter done so, 600,000+ dead could have been avoided - they did not just start attacking the Union without any point or reason. Also, there are plenty of people who believe that Sherman's destruction of civilian targets was a good thing and to those people, I say stop breathing. I used to have family in Georgia before Sherman's march. And I repeat myself, if you believe that the actions of Sherman were the right actions then I can not believe I breathe in the odorous filth with which you pollute the air. Sorry Mods but rainbow sparkles are good but just don't cut it.The second half of your post makes zero sense. It's hard to argue with a fanatic so I'm just going to stop.
The Confederates were the aggressors by, you know, seceding in the first place. And no, it's not your constitutional right to rebel without the Union doing anything about it. Again, most people did not support the murder and destruction of the south, they supported the quelling of the rebellion and the preservation of the Union.
You know, given that they'd just fought a war for it, it's pretty damn hypocritical of the first 'Americans' to put together a government that prohibits secessio... wait... it didn't.
'You cannot leave this union, even if most people want to, or we'll burn down your homes, murder and rape your wives, and salt your bloody fields.'
Sounds about right. Preservation at all costs.And, are you really implying that if the south had won, the south's economy would not be in ruins? Both of our countries would be shitholes today, and neither side would be happy. I wouldn't be surprised if we would have been living under foreign rule by the end of world war one, or even before that.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt your message-exchange with the alternate timeline in which the Confederacy did win. Given that neither of us have experienced a Confederate victory in the war, I dare say we cannot judge what may have happened after.
Yes, it was hypocritical, but there's no way you can say that it was a realistic goal to make it so that people could revolt whenever they wanted and the Union couldn't do anything about it or they would be branded as tyrants. There have been hardly any instances in history where a revolt sprung up and the ruling state didn't do anything about it. It just goes against the nature of a state to let a whole half of a nation devolve into rebellion and lawlessness and just say "Durr, oh well the founding fathers said we should let them revolt, so I guess we'll just let them do whatever they want and bring both of our nations into the dust". And anyway, the confederacy hardly asked nicely. There had been decades of unofficial war in Slave and non-slave states (ie John Brown's war), so the time for negotiations was long gone.
Also, you keep conveniently breezing over my point about how most people did not support the harsh treatment of the south. Yes, the Union army did some fucked up things, but people do fucked up things in times of war, and there's nothing we can do about that. This is basically how defeated rebels have been treated in literally every single instance in history. Yes, it shouldn't have been like that, but there's nothing we can do about it now.
I know there's no way of knowing for sure what would have happened if the Confederacy had won, but I'm pretty certain that it would not have turned out well for both sides. Maybe we wouldn't be in the shitter, but we definitely wouldn't be as powerful as the 50 States of the Union are today.
It's a human right if you ask me for a people to govern themselves. Seeing as nearly the entirety of Southerners wanted to secede I'd say that's basis enough to want to govern themselves. And when the Confederates seceded they asked the Union troops to peacefully leave the forts in Southern lands - most of them did actually and had the garrison at Fort Sumter done so, 600,000+ dead could have been avoided - they did not just start attacking the Union without any point or reason. Also, there are plenty of people who believe that Sherman's destruction of civilian targets was a good thing and to those people, I say stop breathing. I used to have family in Georgia before Sherman's march. And I repeat myself, if you believe that the actions of Sherman were the right actions then I can not believe I breathe in the odorous filth with which you pollute the air. Sorry Mods but rainbow sparkles are good but just don't cut it.The second half of your post makes zero sense. It's hard to argue with a fanatic so I'm just going to stop.
The Confederates were the aggressors by, you know, seceding in the first place. And no, it's not your constitutional right to rebel without the Union doing anything about it. Again, most people did not support the murder and destruction of the south, they supported the quelling of the rebellion and the preservation of the Union.
You know, given that they'd just fought a war for it, it's pretty damn hypocritical of the first 'Americans' to put together a government that prohibits secessio... wait... it didn't.
'You cannot leave this union, even if most people want to, or we'll burn down your homes, murder and rape your wives, and salt your bloody fields.'
Sounds about right. Preservation at all costs.And, are you really implying that if the south had won, the south's economy would not be in ruins? Both of our countries would be shitholes today, and neither side would be happy. I wouldn't be surprised if we would have been living under foreign rule by the end of world war one, or even before that.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt your message-exchange with the alternate timeline in which the Confederacy did win. Given that neither of us have experienced a Confederate victory in the war, I dare say we cannot judge what may have happened after.
Most confederate soldiers didn't own a single slave. The only reason the northern states was "against" slavery was because their economy wasn't dependent on slavery anymore. It's not like the average northerner liked blacks more than any others, actually the first lynching of blacks happened in northern states.\
Well we can all speculate about the war being about slavery or independence.If you haven't noticed, anti-northern sentiment is still pretty strong in the south, and they like to go out of their way to teach people what they think are the "right facts". Unlike many other wars, the the winners of the ACW didn't try to suppress the rebels utterly after they won, like, for instance the allies did after winning WW2.
But history is written by the victors.
mostly though
Weren't suppressed? The Yankees destroyed everything in their path, toppled the government, and then they occupied the South for months. I would say it was alot like what happened after WW2.I'm not talking about that part of it, which I agree, is suppression. I'm talking about suppression of revolutionary passions and sentiments, which, as anyone can see should they happen to take a trip to the south, are still very much alive to this day.
Did the south start the war.In war each side is evil.
Yes.
Does this mean they were evil and destroyed the economy.
No.
Observation, made famous by Winston Churchill, that history tends to be written “by the victors.” Less known and more cheeky was Churchill’s prediction (mostly accurate, it turned out) that “History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.”
I remember Napoleon saying that in the Waterloo movie. Obviously that's a horrible source for facts, but I'm curious as to why they would include that quote in the movie if it was actually spoken 120 years later?QuoteObservation, made famous by Winston Churchill, that history tends to be written “by the victors.” Less known and more cheeky was Churchill’s prediction (mostly accurate, it turned out) that “History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.”
he did say the following:That's probably what I was thinking of
History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.
Exactly.Did the south start the war.In war each side is evil.
Yes.
Does this mean they were evil and destroyed the economy.
No.
In war each side is evil.Exactly.
Although didn't the Confederates win most of their battles?
Well I'm no expert, but the confederates weren't fighting for slavery ;)Well, they were fighting for independence and to preserve slavery. At first it was for independence, but by 1864 it was all about slavery. By thw way I am a US Civil War expert.
They were fighting for their independence and right to govern themselves. That seems pretty just to me, I'd be pretty mad too if I had no choice who I was governed by. And plus the Union didn't abolish slavery until after the war started.
I wonder how the world would be now if Great Britain would've put a stop to the rebelling colonies back in the 18th century, which they could've done easily.
Hehe, GB has more votes than the Union ;DOh yes :3
Would be a great alternative history if the Brits invaded and mowed down the yanks and rebels.
Neither, Confederate Irregulars, WE DO WHAT WE WANT!
The entire war was started because of slavery. The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederates fought to keep their slaves and to take other states to expand their 'slave empire'. Yes they fought for independence but only because the government would not allow them to keep slaves. So if you really support the Confederate ideology in real life then you support the idea of slavery.
The entire war was started because of slavery. The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederates fought to keep their slaves and to take other states to expand their 'slave empire'. Yes they fought for independence but only because the government would not allow them to keep slaves. So if you really support the Confederate ideology in real life then you support the idea of slavery.
LOL!
You have ZERO knowledge about the civil war.
Someone wanna give me a quick summary of what caused the civil war? We were taught in school, although it was only like 10 minutes about it, that the Confederates were for slavery and union against and when Lincoln got office the south didnt want him so they split up.
Someone wanna give me a quick summary of what caused the civil war? We were taught in school, although it was only like 10 minutes about it, that the Confederates were for slavery and union against and when Lincoln got office the south didnt want him so they split up.
What does Dixie mean? Is it just a term used for the southern states as in Dixie lands?
Im a Union Man
Confederate - People assume the confederates only purpose and reason for going to war was that they believed black people were inferior; it wasn't. They went to war to protect their people, take away their slaves and take away their main economy fund. They fight with what they could gather together, boys took up arms with their fathers.
Confederate - People assume the confederates only purpose and reason for going to war was that they believed black people were inferior; it wasn't. They went to war to protect their people, take away their slaves and take away their main economy fund. They fight with what they could gather together, boys took up arms with their fathers.
You disgust me. They went to war politically and economically. After Abraham Lincoln become president, they thought the Republicans were gonna outlaw slavery. Because Lincoln outlawed expansion of Slavery, some people thought that the State government should decide between Slave states and Free states. Then when Lincoln called for the different states of the Union to raise armies in order to fight the rebels of the states that had pulled out, more states left the Union. It was because these states had left the Union, and that it was seen as an open act of rebellion, that the War of Northern Aggression was started.
Ill stand by the Union with billy barlow!
Why does only the Confederates get props for bravery? I know no braver soldiers than the Federals at Fredricksburgamen Millander
I'm going to say I'll be France (poll, why didn't you include them? :c ).Until he loses a war in 7 weeks and is taken captive in battle :P. it's ok, I like France too..
While you Americans are fighting, we'll be establishing a regime in Mexico and pestering the British to work with us and recognize the CSA as a legitimate state.
Long live Napoleon III!
I'm going to say I'll be France (poll, why didn't you include them? :c ).
While you Americans are fighting, we'll be establishing a regime in Mexico and pestering the British to work with us and recognize the CSA as a legitimate state.
Long live Napoleon III!
i would say Confederacy since they look really cool ::)
i would say Confederacy since they look really cool ::)
they look like a bunch of rags
i would say Confederacy since they look really cool ::)
they look like a bunch of rags
Define Rags please?Spoiler(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/255283_363201593748404_428284826_n.jpg)[close]Spoiler(https://sphotos-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/599230_404195446315685_625990042_n.jpg)[close]
:P
To be fair Deo, their uniforms look more slapped together than those of the AWI.
American war of independence i guess. ;) (Not totally sure though.)To be fair Deo, their uniforms look more slapped together than those of the AWI.
That is true, But the rebs werent that raggedy as everyone would think of is what im basically saying, but what you mean by AWI?
American war of independence i guess. ;) (Not totally sure though.)To be fair Deo, their uniforms look more slapped together than those of the AWI.
That is true, But the rebs werent that raggedy as everyone would think of is what im basically saying, but what you mean by AWI?
well, now im going say conferacy, found out that my grandfather (4) was in the 19th VA Company H. a
yah know the union boys fought just as hard for their country as well.Dude they YOLO charge 360 no ramrod
Confederacy, always was interested in the idealism of a federal free south. I also love southern food.
Confederacy, always was interested in the idealism of a federal free south. I also love southern food.
Only reason id go with the south, as a non-American.
The entire war was started because of slavery. The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederates fought to keep their slaves and to take other states to expand their 'slave empire'. Yes they fought for independence but only because the government would not allow them to keep slaves. So if you really support the Confederate ideology in real life then you support the idea of slavery.
Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.
Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.
Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.
Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Historical_revisionism_(negationism).html
Not all historical revisionism is bad, Millander. I earnestly believe that we do need to look over the events and underlying causes of the American Civil War in light of new knowledge of the period and to do so in an unbiased manner.
It's incredibly important to note that the Civil War was not blatantly about slavery at the onset. I'm sure you realize that the Civil War essentially began with the Battle of Fort Sumter (1861), when the Confederate troops under Beauregard began to shell the fort. This leads one to suspect that the war was not begun for slavery, but as an independence movement.
It is a shame that so many deny the large estrangement that resulted over the slavery question, so large that it ruptured the nation into two separate states (or one, depending on your viewpoint). The North and South had different opinions on slavery, but this did not result in war independently of any other factors. Even Lincoln is quoted to have said "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that" in a letter to Horace Greeley in 1862.
It is also important to note that the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 did not end slavery in the Union, and would only apply to states "still in revolt". This meant that slavery in the border states was preserved in the border states until slavery was officially abolished (13th Amendment, 1865-Post Civil War).
The greatest factor in the American Civil War would be the preservation of the Union as a single nation as opposed to different nations. When the Confederacy formed, Fort Sumter (in SC) was not evacuated by the Union troops, essentially indicating that the Confederate government was not recognized as a legitimate body (France nor Britain recognized them either). Following the shelling of Ft. Sumter, the southern states were considered to be "in revolt" and responded to accordingly.
The American Civil War was more the result of estrangement caused by sectionalism than motivated by slavery alone. Slavery was a factor, but to call it the cause of the American Civil War is a logical fallacy.
Sources:
http://www.civilwar.org/battlefields/fort-sumter.html?tab=facts
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/
PS: I've always liked the Union. :)
Long live the CS of the holy A!'
Slavery was the underlined cause of the war. Lost cause believers and revisionists will deny that but the maine cause the the riff between North and South was the slavery question.
Do you also believe WW1 started because of the assassination of Franz Ferdinand?
The poll says otherwise...Long live the CS of the holy A!'
If the CSA is holy, I'm Queen fckin Elizabeth.
lol. read it properly, he said long live the Confederate States of the holy America. He didnt say that the CSA is holy. He said America is holy.The poll says otherwise...Long live the CS of the holy A!'
If the CSA is holy, I'm Queen fckin Elizabeth.
Union because if states should have the right to Govern themselves then samething should apply to the Black People.Well, it doesn't have anything with you being black, it's about being a slave. There were free black men and plenty off coloured slave owners.
I picked the Union, and I have to say that I am a bit disheartened to see so many people choosing the Confederacy. Maybe some people just like an underdog? :). I know it is just a video game, and I will probably play as both sides in the game, just for fun :). That being said, the Confederates were not fighting for a 'just cause', or rather, the Confederacy did not form out of a struggle against oppression, because the Southern states were not being oppressed. I saw comments on here stating that the Confederates wanted to govern themselves, but they already had the same levels of state-autonomy as any of the Northern states. This is not like the American revolution, where you had the Colonists rebelling against a government that they did not have any representation in, because the Southern states of the time had full representation within the US Congress.
Slavery was the cause of the civil war, and that is not to say that everyone who fought in the war was motivated for or against slavery, but it was the Institution of slavery that created the geopolitical and economic conditions which made this conflict happen. All of the other issues about 'states rights' and what not, are byproducts of slavery. The Southern states seceded because the leaders felt that slavery was under threat from the growing abolitionist movement in the North, sparked by the Dred Scott Case, and bolstered by the increasing political and economic clout of the free-states during the Industrial revolution. The Union only attacked after the Confederacy struck first at Fort Sumter, so it was actually the Confederacy which started the Civil war. So slavery WAS the cause of the Civil War, and the Confederacy was not fighting against an oppressive government.
There's a big difference between reasons to go to war and reasons to fight in a war.
There's a big difference between reasons to go to war and reasons to fight in a war.Not really.
There's a big difference between reasons to go to war and reasons to fight in a war.Not really.
There's a big difference between reasons to go to war and reasons to fight in a war.Not really.
yea really
A quote i found.
''This war is not about slavery''
~General Robert E. Lee
A quote i found.
''This war is not about slavery''
~General Robert E. Lee
Right. Because one of their highest militairy commanders is a very reliable and unbiased source. That's like saying the Holocaust wasn't bad because Hitler said 'We kill them cos they evil".
The fact that Lee refused to stand up for what he believed and simply went along with what his home state was doing makes him a coward in my book.Easy enough for you to say behind your keyboard. You are the coward in my book.
The fact that Lee refused to stand up for what he believed and simply went along with what his home state was doing makes him a coward in my book.Easy enough for you to say behind your keyboard. You are the coward in my book.
McClellan was a good man, a good tactician, but a poor General.
He was a good man because he cared about his men
He was one of the best battle planners in the Union Army
He was a poor general because every time he started to take casualties he pulled back.
Moral of the story? Care about your men, but realize that you're leading some of them to their death.
No they wont haha. Now especially in the 21st Century. You'd have no valuable resources. Example Texas, they'll never leave the Union because they have nothing to trade; they'll go broke so fast.
ahh :p haha yea, I was gonna say. I like your Polandball sig too. I can't find one that really fits my personality unless you got a website or anything for me :)
No they wont haha. Now especially in the 21st Century. You'd have no valuable resources. Example Texas, they'll never leave the Union because they have nothing to trade; they'll go broke so fast.
No they wont haha. Now especially in the 21st Century. You'd have no valuable resources. Example Texas, they'll never leave the Union because they have nothing to trade; they'll go broke so fast.
wut. its called cotton and its a major trade product. just like it was in those times...
No they wont haha. Now especially in the 21st Century. You'd have no valuable resources. Example Texas, they'll never leave the Union because they have nothing to trade; they'll go broke so fast.
wut. its called cotton and its a major trade product. just like it was in those times...
Haha Cotton…why get real cotton when you can get artificial cotton. That would be the souths only export.
I still wouldn't see the CSA rising up againNo they wont haha. Now especially in the 21st Century. You'd have no valuable resources. Example Texas, they'll never leave the Union because they have nothing to trade; they'll go broke so fast.
wut. its called cotton and its a major trade product. just like it was in those times...
Haha Cotton…why get real cotton when you can get artificial cotton. That would be the souths only export.
So? It still keeps the economy going and it generates enough wealth for the states, which is all they care about.
And you would be surprised how many people get real cotton instead of artificial.
George, I'm rather puzzled you claim Texas can be independent because of the cotton and don't talk about the oil...
George, I'm rather puzzled you claim Texas can be independent because of the cotton and don't talk about the oil...
And I'm talking about in the 1860's.
wut. its called cotton and its a major trade product. just like it was in those times...
And you would be surprised how many people get real cotton instead of artificial.
i second that
lol aight, have fun, boys.i second that
Knock knock augy!
Confederate to the end.
I would not desire to be a politically brain-washed Yankee getting horse-drawn into a war by them greedy, power-hungry leaders up north, using ad campaigns with holy marxist ideologies about slavery to pursue their political control and producing national bias about southerns over such things as their "intelligence", and which as stated before, the union didn't remove slavery from their own turf until after the war started, obviously using slavery as fuel to feed the fire. Anyone who thinks it was a good idea getting roughly 620,000 Americans killed over a measly 4-8 percent of Confederates who actually owned slaves is a self-ascended bigot and a marxist fanatic. The world was advancing quickly and as many have said, it would have died out in the south of natural cause anyway, and without all the death, and we wouldn't have formed such prejudices as "southern redneck illiterate neanderthals" and "yankee brainwashed self-centered city-creeps." This war's main focus was not about slavery, slavery was an impromptu concern that was brought to the forefront when the north realized the confederation was forming and wanted to squash the secession. This war was about political, tyrannical dominance and power, and I'll be fighting nobly on the side of freedom and liberation.
^That's just for the sake of defending an old argument, I'm actually a fun-lovin' guy... who's gonna blow all your guts out with ranked volleys when this game is finally released!
^ You talk about the power hungry north attacking the south but you forget it was a rebellion and the only natural reaction of a rebelling part of country is to take it back by force so don't try to make it out like the big bad wolf attack another country fact is the south was not another country it received no recognition by any other country in the world all of them view it as a rebellion so any action taken by the united states during the civil war was a action any other country would have done. And yes slavery was just one more reason used by the north to justify the war which it really did not need to use since there is no more reason in the world then taking back what belongs to it.
But come on, if slavery wasn't such a big factor then why the hell did the South KEEP SLAVERY? The main reason Lincoln was despised was because in the Senate he acted very abolitionist.I think everyone from Dixie knew about the fact that slavery was not quite forward-looking. And also the southern government wanted to dispose slavery.
oh he is 'left wing" alright, just not too far from the center line.
SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN!And the North will burn it down again ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQmO-WfEkk4
we must just find a new Robert. E. Lee to lead us and will get free from the yanks :D
This is why they should have just shot Bragg after Chattanooga.
This is why they should have just shot Bragg after Chattanooga.
Although I was born in raised in Ohio, surrounded by biased teachers and parents alike, from what I've learned, I support the Confederacy. They were simply more justified for defending their homelands and fighting against oppression and alla that good shtuff.No better way to fight against oppression than to do it to a whole race of people yourself.
hold back the wild Howe from pouncing on the naive new forumite.Although I was born in raised in Ohio, surrounded by biased teachers and parents alike, from what I've learned, I support the Confederacy. They were simply more justified for defending their homelands and fighting against oppression and alla that good shtuff.No better way to fight against oppression than to do it to a whole race of people yourself.
Their just so tender and supple I can't help myselfhold back the wild Howe from pouncing on the naive new forumite.Although I was born in raised in Ohio, surrounded by biased teachers and parents alike, from what I've learned, I support the Confederacy. They were simply more justified for defending their homelands and fighting against oppression and alla that good shtuff.No better way to fight against oppression than to do it to a whole race of people yourself.
"Howe" welcoming new members by showing them how we are all just a bunch of ranting a-holesI should be in charge of the Forumite welcomer comittee.
I like this guy.
I like this guy.
I love this guy! ( Lemonsquid) Nice picture btw. ;)
I cannot see the first two pictures, odd.. is it just me?SpoilerBoth sides, Union & Confederacy still mistreated the enslaved black race of humans, in the North this is evident but was more strongly seen in the South due to their economy foundation since the colonies formed. As I see it, both sides did terrible things to the other in a bloody civil war throwing men into the fray and calling for more to join the fight. May it not be forgotten the Confederacy opened fire, first shots upon Fort Sumter. It is noteworthy the hypocrisy of the North concerning slavery is appalling IMO. "All men are created equal" yet not treated equal.
In my opinion which is to each their own, mine is supporting of the Union in the end. Keeping the United States of America as one and moving to a more progressive era to stop this cruel treatment of people just because of the color of their skin. The KKK as a terrorizing group and the Southern anti-Reconstruction mindset tried to discourage more civil rights for 'blacks' by keeping them out of office and murdering them.
Bottom line, even if Lincoln very much did controversial actions as president that is questionable of power limits. It was important from the North perspective to keep the United States - united. If the U.S. and C.S. continued on it would not be too long until a European nation would take advantage of the conflict. Great Britain would surely of taken the opportunity to suppress the North American colonies once again. If the nation was divided it would be a goner to remain independent for long.
As a western American from the Pacific coast, and from a State forbidding slavery: as I see it the U.S. would of been worse off had the Confederacy won the war and kept the blacks in slavery and harass/terrorize blacks and the white sympathizers of them. A what if eventuality the slaves would rise up against their owners and the U.S. would have an even Larger history of resentment from the blacks directed to us whites. A history of hating a race for terrible things done to the other.[close]
Confederacy all the way!South is so charming with that whip
Better songs! Better culture! And a whole lot of southern charm ftw ;)
Confederacy all the way!South is so charming with that whip
Better songs! Better culture! And a whole lot of southern charm ftw ;)
But okei massa
Confederacy all the way!South is so charming with that whip
Better songs! Better culture! And a whole lot of southern charm ftw ;)
But okei massa
That ignorance is top lel. Will enjoy skewering you on the field ya tyrant scumbag!
The Confederacy of course! I'm a proud Southerner with ancestors who wore the butternut and gray. My ancestors were Louisiana infantry, Texas cavalry, various Cherokee groups, and many others that fought in various other Confederate regiments.Damn rebel scum. We'll march into Dixie, shouting the battecry of freedom
(https://www.fsegames.eu/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.confederate-flags.org%2Fimages%2F3natan.gif&hash=ce4c8e07ae20e4a8ee53366cab4751966d674b88)
The Confederacy of course.
For the Union ! :D
Dev Blog 26. That's what i'd fight for.
Confederacy all the way, Union is too lame for meYeh I Agree Plus Confeds Were better at melee. 8)
I find the Confederate uniforms more swaggier.
For the Union ! :D
I find the Confederate uniforms more swaggier.So that's a joke.
Make Britain great again. One day... :'(
I know this was done on the N&S forum but let's give it a shot here.
Who do you most look forward to playing on BCoF? The Union or Confederacy. And if you had been born in America at the time which side would you have fought for? Union, Confederacy or none?
Personally I look forward to playing as the Confederates, and would have chose to have fought for them in the war, I may not know much but I believe that they had the most just cause.
These kids were really talking about BCOF a full decade before its release
Nice Scam FSE very cool
The most glaring problem of this thread is that you are taking Mexicant seriously