Does anyone else think that the south should have won the civil war?

Answer 1

yes

Answer 2

If you have no problem with the possibility of slavery lasting well into the 20th century, if not longer, yes. If you are sane, on the other hand, then no. The result of the Civil War did not just impact the US, after all, and the extinction of slavery was far from inevitable. During the time of the US Civil War, Mexico was occupied by French troops propping up the puppet Maximilian regime. If the South had won, this would have benefited Napoleon III, who was sympathetic to the Confederacy and was looking to reinstitute slavery in Mexico. Slavery was also still widely practiced in Brazil and in Cuba by the Spanish. Two large slave countries in North America would very likely have given the institution a second wind in the other countries where it had continued to hang on, even possibly allowing it to spread. The Union victory in 1865 not only preserved a strong United States, but eventually set slavery on to the path of extinction in the entire Western hemisphere.

Answer 3

The South had no right to secede in the first place. The United States is a "federation" not a "confederation". The first government during the Revolutionary War was under the "Articles of Confederation" It was a "confederation".
This was a union of loosely joined independent states. That's why they were called "states". But when the government proved weak they met in Phila. in 1787 and founded a new government under the "Constitution". This was a "federation" or "federal republic". In this system the USA is one nation. The states were no longer independent even though they are still called "states".
When they seceded the southern states formed the "Confederate States of America" or the "Confederacy" This was a "confederation". But during the Civil War, President Davis had no real power because each of the southern states acted like a separate nation. In fact at one point the state of Georgia seceded from the Confedacy. The South fought better than the North but usually in war the side with the most manpower and resources wins.

Answer 4

There are a large number of people who believe so.

The primary issue at hand is whether individual states have a right to leave the United States after joining it.

There is simply no question that the founders believed so. And amusingly, a few decades before the South left, the Northeast threatened to do so itself.

However, this ignores the question of the legitimacy of the state governments of the South.

Since black Americans were denied a say in the question of secession, I don't see how the decision of the Confederate state governments can be considered to be legitimate.

Since Lincoln used force the question was settled on the battlefield and the obvious legal right of a state to seceed is currently null and viod in the United States.

Internationally, such a right seems to have gained more widespread belief - see Yugoslavia, East Timor, and the former Soviet Union.

Answer 5

After the first year or so there was no way that they could have one it. The south lost because of two errors that they made relatively early on in the war. The biggest one was misjudging the power of their cotton on world politics. The South expected Britain and France to jump in and help out if the South threatened to cut off their cotton exports to the two industrializing nations. This was a mistake because England simply turned to another supplier (Egypt) and refused to fight on behalf of slavery (which they had recently abolished). The other error made by the South was that they attempted to fight a war of attrition (don't have to win just can't lose) because of this they essentially didn't invade the North until they were to low on supplies and manpower (combination of Northern blockade, inflation, and lack of southern industry) plus the North had more men and industry so they were able to throw away more men and the material than the South. If they South had wanted to win they would have had to agree to free the slaves to entice England into the war, and launch several successful attacks to capture key northern cities such as Washington D.C.

Answer 6

The North should've just let the South secede from the Union. With two separate countries, everybody would be happy. Look at how politically divided the North and the South are today.

Answer 7

I don't think it would have mattered. Most likely sooner rather than later the institution of slavery would have collapsed from economic pressure from England and the other countries the South sold its cotton to. This would have crushed the Confederacy economically and they would have come crawling back to the Union.

Answer 8

Does anyone else think that we should have nuked the South?

Answer 9

That is a tough question. I believe they had a right to leave the union, just as they had the right to enter.

Answer 10

no because we would be an entirely different country and the south would probably all be farmers today