A. fighting for their right to self-government.
B. having a larger population and more factories.
C. having more experienced generals.
D. being able to fight a defensive war.
2007-10-05 05:36:14 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It helps if you keep a very open mind about this subject, Tori.
Yes, B is a suitable answer to the question asked here.
Along with those factories came rifles, trains, and telegraphs.
Sadly, you will have to put up with bias from those whose always deny the role of slavery in the conflict, and the fact that it was the South's aggression which set the political conflict off into the military one it became.
2007-10-05 06:04:37 · answer #1 · answered by WMD 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A - wrong, the south was fighting for the right to self-government. The southern states had the right to leave the union, the north fought a war of conquest.
B - true
C - wrong. Robert E. Lee was a much better general than any of the northern generals.
D - wrong. The north invaded the south. The north could have ended the war anytime they wanted, just by agreeing to bring their troops back. The south could only end the war by surrendering.
You got 1 out of 4.
By the way, Lincoln did not free the slaves. He declared that slaves in the southern controlled areas were free, but not the slaves in areas the north controlled. He did this to encourage the slaves to come north, which weakened the south.
2007-10-05 05:49:23 · answer #2 · answered by kimmyisahotbabe 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Everything everyone else said + the North had a better food source than the South, the North had the moral high ground (Britain and France behind them), and they already had an established government. A confederacy is a bad type of government to win a war anyways.
2016-05-17 04:31:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
B is the best answer but, there were some really good Union Generals and some really bad Confederate Generals too.
The Union did have to fight a defensive war at times, primarily the battles of Antietam and Gettysburg and then there was Morgan's Raid through Indiana and Ohio.
2007-10-05 09:02:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Haha, this test is too convoluted. The obviously correct answer they WANT you to guess is B. However:
A) Incorrect
B) Correct
C) Correct - Lee was a tactical commander, but his generalship was poor at the strategic level. He succeeded because he dragged previous union Generals down and then stomped them in the details. Grant, however, refused to buy into that game and his strategy was simply better than Lee's. Furthermore, at Gettysberg the south lost it's best Generals, making Sherman another powerhouse for the north.
D) partially correct. When the south tried to invade the north, even Mclellan was able to stomp on Lee for a bit.
2007-10-05 09:15:42 · answer #5 · answered by promethius9594 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The south was fighting for the right of self government. I DO NOT support the slavery issue in any way and can not understand how a person could be so cruel to another person. With that said, the governmental issue was one of dominence, federal governement forcing states to submit to their will. The north had the factories and stronger military. The south was protecting their homeland.
2007-10-05 05:51:45 · answer #6 · answered by uidittybop 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
B.
with the exception of Pennsylvania much of the action was south of the Mason Dixon line.
Although the North ultimately won, The South is generally thought to have had better military leaders, tactically speaking.
2007-10-05 06:02:45 · answer #7 · answered by sirtanaka 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
B. plus better logistics and railroads
2007-10-05 06:14:54 · answer #8 · answered by Smoker06 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
fighting for their right to self-government.
2007-10-09 05:11:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
B
2007-10-05 05:50:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋