English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

if you know why or know of any good links that can explain it please help out

2006-12-21 17:44:18 · 11 answers · asked by truha689 1 in Arts & Humanities History

11 answers

Although the North had sizeable advantages over the South. The South had some advantages also:
1. The South was fighting on the defensive and were repelling invaders. Fighting on the defensive has certain advantages-shorter interior lines, a force multiplier (defending forces need less men to equal the number of an attacking force).
2. The South had a cause-a Second American Revolution in their eyes that was more motivating than a nebulous preserve the Union.
3. Southerners had a more military and weapons related heritage than Northerners.
4. Initially the South had better leaders (Lee and Jackson) than the North, (although as the war went on Grant, Sherman dominate). This initial Northern weakness is most pronounced in McClellan who was within 5 miles of Richmond with a force double the size of the Confederates in the spring of 1862. An additional force of 50,000 Union soldiers were marching down from Washington and the war should have ended there. But the Confederate Commander Joseph Johnston is wounded, Lee takes over and with the aid of Jackson breaks the siege and defeats the additional Union forces. At Antietam (Sharpsburg) McClellan not only had a copy of Lee's orders and knew Lee's forces were divided and was greatly outnumbered, but McClellan botched the battle which should have ended the war. The next two Union commanders were also cautious and allowed an outmanned Lee to defeat them. Lee's victory at Chancellorsville when he divided his forces even though outnumbered two to one was a spectacular victory partly due to poor Union generalship.

In the final stage of the war Lee's defensive prowess held off Grant for a much longer period than could normally be expected.

5. In this final phase of the war the South was simply trying to hold on and hoped the North would tire of the war and quit (sound familiar?). They had reason to believe this might happen because of the unpopularity of Lincoln, riots in Northern cities, and a strong Copperhead sentiment in the North.

2006-12-21 18:36:25 · answer #1 · answered by mk_matson 4 · 2 2

For the same reason that it takes a long time and a lot of effort and loss of life and resources that it takes to subjugate any country. Consider that the Confederacy was not trying to conquer the Union, but rather win its independence from it. The North had a very difficult task and that the country remains united to this day is a tribute not only to great men like Lincoln and Grant, but to ruthless men Like Sherman. Please, don't think that any website will give you an adequate explanation. There are thousands of books. Read a couple, like Personal Memoirs by Ulysses S Grant and The Illustrated Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era by James M Mcpherson. Then, if you live near a battle field visit it and try to appreciate what it meant to fight in a war in which 2,000 men would die in a couple of hours fighting in very close quarters over a small foot bridge. The war we fight, today is horrible enough, we have lost almost 3,000 men. During the American Civil War, well over a half million young men died. Don't wonder that it took so long to defeat the South, wonder that the country survived it at all.

Oh yeah, read this book, too. It is fiction, but it is such a great war book: The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane.

2006-12-21 18:04:30 · answer #2 · answered by redhotsillypepper 5 · 4 1

I haven't seen any non-biased links but know of some good books/movies that adequately portray both sides of the story. God's and Generals is a good movie on the subject. There is another in a three part series the third part having not been made a movie yet. They are based on a book but are historically accurate. God's and Generals, Gettysburg and the Last Full Measure. The conflict was from 1859 to 1865 which is not that long. The south was out numbered and had no real money. The south fought good on their own soil but when they attacked Gettysburg it proved fatal to their cause.

2006-12-21 17:59:23 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 2

The North had incompetent generals in the War of Northern Aggression.

2006-12-21 17:47:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

they had to find Ulysses Grant and get him on the battle field and then it was over Lincoln had a belly full of bad people trying to take on the nations finest leader who was in a confederate uniform, Robert E. Lee is our nations begrudged winner for over half the war and it was a battle of shooting our self in the foot to start with so, we learn by our mistakes,(all-political)

2006-12-22 12:44:03 · answer #5 · answered by bev 5 · 0 0

Are you talking about the United States Civil War? I would suggest www.wikipedia.org and type Civil War in the search engine.

2006-12-21 17:47:05 · answer #6 · answered by slaughter114 4 · 0 1

Because most of the Colonies' greatest Generals fought for the south.

2006-12-21 17:45:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

same reason why the old people retire in florida

2006-12-21 17:47:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

All you need to know bro:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

2006-12-21 17:45:52 · answer #9 · answered by united_nations_pilot 2 · 0 1

cuz we got teh good stuff
darn yankees

2006-12-21 17:51:45 · answer #10 · answered by kittygarfunkle 2 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers