Sunday, April 22, 2012
I don't really think that the South had a good chance because the Union had many more advantages. The Union had more railroads which could transport soldiers quickly and they could send supplies, maybe even ammunition. he Union had more factories which could produce materials that could be used in war. And, most of the population in America lived in the North. The North had 22 million people and the South only had 9 million and 3.5 million of them were slaves. Also, when the Confederacy tried to gain foreign support from Britain and France, (both countries who had banned slavery) because of the cotton trade, but Britain had conquered India which was full of cotton so the Confederacy's cotton or King Cotton was pretty much useless. And even if the South had better generals, motivation, or a home field advantage it still doesn't mean hat they'll win because overall the Union had more advantages overall.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Just because one side has more advantages doesn't necessarily mean that side will win. The North had a bundle of advantages, but the South had advantages that out shined the North's.
ReplyDeleteIt's true that the North had more men, but the South had the better generals. That in addition to home field advantage, the South surely had the great benefit on the defensive end, since their main purpose in the war was to disconnect with the North, not conquer it.
Railroads enabled the North to transport their men, but I see this helpful to them more when THEY were the ones getting invaded. I'm not stating that the South never attempted to capture Washington, D.C., but I am implying that the South had many other methods to win the war besides attacking. Just like the Revolutionary War, the South had to simply stand on its feet until their enemy gave up.
England did not conquer India. They just colonized India and made India a trading partner. I have to agree with Jimmy except the last part about the Union giving up. Looking back at the Civil War, you can see that the Union had no choice but to keep the South in the Union. Thus, they cannot give up no matter the consequence. If they allowed the South the secede, it would show the other countries that the USA is weak and is easily divided and possibly easy to conquer. This then takes away the meaning of their holding-out-until-they-give-up strategy. Also, they had no other plan other than that, so if the South won, it would be on a whim so small, it could only fit an atom. (Very nerdy and scientific analogy; sorry)
ReplyDelete