@SuperbattleshipYamato hard to argue against any of this really. The IJN was so far gone by this point in the war that there’s not really much they could have done to salvage their situation one way or another. The bit about the allies not having many LSTs in general is something I never knew before though.
Additional Confederate States
-
Lets keep the War between the States going.
-
@ABWorsham:
Lets keep the War between the States going.
I thought that ended in 1865 :-D
-
@Brain:
@ABWorsham:
Lets keep the War between the States going.
I thought that ended in 1865 :-D
LoL You’re right.
-
Even with two more states the Southern States could not have sustained a long term war against the Union. Their only chance was a quick war but that failed. There were several missed opportunities on the eastern front after the the first and second battle of Bull Run. The losses at Gettysburg and Vicksburg strategically sealed the fate of the Southern States in the long term. When Lincoln won reelection against George McClellan that pretty much guaranteed the outcome.
The south had terrible infrastructure, when they had food and supplies to send to the troops it rarely managed to do so because of chaotic railroads, corrupt officials, and just plan incompetence. The south’s only advantages were in in their battlefield leaders and cavalry early in the war. Even fighting on their own ground was not always an advantage, especially when the long term damage to agriculture and what little industrial production they had.
-
Okay, I’ll bite. How were Civil Liberties Violated by forcing them to treat blacks as citizens? The right to discriminate?
-
The Southern States, according to Northern politicans and generals, after the war, were occupied territory. Ironic, the same people who said secession was illegal, when it came to ratifying the 14th Amendment said the Southern States were “conquered territorties.” They wanted their cake and to eat also. See, they couldn’t have it both ways. If they were States and could never secede, then they were entitled to 100% rights of States. But, when the Northern States, rediscovered federalism without secession, and this federalism meant that Southern States could no longer be coerced like they were during the war, then teh Southern States had to be declared ‘outside the Union,’ though the whole purpose of war was that Southern States could not be ‘outside the Union.’ Don’t you love logic?
I did not know about the “conquered territories” part.
But the question is, did those states have thee right to keep slavery? Wasn’t it against the Constitution before the 13th(I think) amendment?
-
WHAT REALLY ANGERED THE NORTH AFTER THE WAR? The 13th Amendment for one thing outlawed slavery. Remember, before the war, slaves only counted as 3/4 of a person. When the 13th amendment outlawed slavery, what happened to Black person’s worth in the South? You got it: they ‘became’ a full person. Now, then, what happened to the South’s representation in Congress after the war? Oh no!!! IT INCREASED! I understand the Northern anger.
So what did they(the North) do in response?
Suggested Topics
