Position:Home>History> Civil War History question?

While I'm of the opinion that the Civil War, at least from the South's end, WAS about slavery (some argue this), I wouldn't really count "continuing slavery" as a goal for the paper!. What they had to do where it's concerned was force the USA government in Washington D!.C!. (or the USA rather) to say (in simple terms) "This isn't worth the fight, you guys go be your own nation"!. They also had to be recognized as a legitimate and independent nation both by USA and other countries, and they had to have a viable economy!.

To accomplish these things they would have to

1- prove to the north that they could and would fight
2- that they could win battles
3- they could trade with foreign markets for their goods on their own terms
4- they had the resources to keep an army in the field for as long as it took
among other things!.

They DID show they could fight/win battles!. They were NOT able to get foreign markets for their goods due to the Union blockade!. Their economy was a disaster from day 1 because their printed money was worthless, they had almost no gold, and they couldn't get their goods to market outside the south!.
They were not recognized by foreign nations because other nations did not think they could win the war (if the CSA had won they'd have been recognized, no problem) and the foreign economies would not loan them money for the war due to the same reason (the CSA had counted heavily on this- without foreign loans from France and Germany the USA would never have won the Revolution)!. They ultimately failed at being able to keep the war going because
1- the North had far more men and even more arriving everyday on immigrant ships while the South got to the point where they could not replace their wounded and dead
2- they had too few supplies/provisions/weapons and ammo and could not get more with no money and a destroyed infrastructure
3- they did not have the factories to make everything from pistols to gunpowder that the north did (and in the north these factories were safe)
4- Jefferson Davis was a total snob who kept in power men like General Bragg in Tennessee who were totally incompetent because of their social class/Westpoint education rather than promote on merit men like Forrest who was not an aristocrat but was a bloody genius, and thus the military strategies were bungled (the north made some serious blunders too, but they could afford it a lot more)

So in short the south bit off a lot more than it could afford to chew!. Hope this helped!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

north had more resources,people,and industry
south had a better generals a better knowelge for the battle feild and they fought harder bc they were fighting for there homes and way of life
the south had to draw the north deeper into the south and end the war quickly ,they didnt accomplish this bc of there lack of human and natural resourcesWww@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Ofcourse it makes sense!. It sounds like you just answered your own question really!. The South felt that they had the right to keep slavery and their goal was probably to defeat the North so their goal would be accomplished!. It's just a guess so good luck!Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

The South was like the 13 colonies during the Revolutionary War - they just wanted to be separate, have their own country, and continue slavery the way it had been running for centuries!. However, the North had the "harder" goal bringing back the South to the Union!. Although we often think that the Civil War was fought to end slavery, it REALLY occurred because the South seceded, and Lincoln's first and FOREMOST goal was to preserve the Union (he really felt that if the Union could be preserved by maintaining slavery, so be it)!.

The North had more people and more industry (which means more food, more weapons, more ships, etc)

The South had better leaders (Robert E!. Lee!!!) and it could be aruged that they had more people (counting the slaves) but that's a diff story - their "goal" was also simpler

The South wanted to maintain slavery - to do so, they would have to be their own nation, because the Northern abolitionists of the Union wanted ABOLITION!. The South had VERY LITTLE INDUSTRY during the 1800s - 1860 - their main crops were cotton, tobacco - and you can't eat COTTON! Sherman's "March to the Sea" showed how total war destroyed the South's food sources - they were literally starving!Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

slavery was not an issue in the South!. They wanted secession in order to escape excessive taxation and trade tariffs!. In essence the North wanted to develop its industries at the expense of the South
The south preferred to trade directly with Europe!. Which is why the first act of the North was to keep hold of the ex-federal forts in the southern harbours (retaining the ability to blockade the harbours at will)- fort Sumter was just one such fort!.
militarily the south had better troops!. the north had milions of immigrants it could (and did) draft!. It also had the industry to arm them
the north had the navy- and used it to cut off the south from supplies!. The south needed to win the war FAST- before they ran out of supplies and men!. The north could afford a carnage type of war and exhaust the south

back to slavery- slave states were also in the north!. and they remained slave states even after the southern slaves were "freed" by the Lincoln declaration!. FYI Black volunteers (slave and free) served alongside white troops in the Confederate Army in non-segregated units (all nothern units were segregated)!. Again- slavery was not an issue in the war, it only became one for propaganda purposesWww@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

The above poster mention economic discrimination against the south!. Another thing to take into consideration is that the slave trader(those merchants who brought them over and sold them to the southern planter) were Yankee like the Cabots and Fanieuls of Massachusetts and the Roosevelts of New York!. O'Reilly had James Roosevelt on his program a few years back and he acknowleddge what people in the South have always known, FDR's grandfather was a slave trader!.

Actually the Roosevelt family fortune was based on rum and slave trading!. The branch Theodore and Eleanor belonged to got out of it much sooner than the branch to which FDR belonged!.

The slave trade was financed by New York and Boston bankers and was done under the stars and stripes of the United States not the stars and bars of the Confederacy!.

The South wanted some type of economic consideration for giving up their slaves!. It is understandable that Congress did not go alone with the government paying the Southern planter for relinquishing their slaves!. However, the last legislation was that the Southern planter would receive some type of economic consideration from those families in the North who had made a mint off of the slave trade!. At first it appeared it would pass!. Then there were legislators who had been for it that voted against it!. It has been said they they were in the pockets of those slave trading families!.

Msgr!. Owen Campion who was bested in a debate on the subject of Yankee slave trading, now states that those families should have been made to give some type of economic consideration to the former slaves, once they were freed, not the Southern Planter!. If such legislation had been proposed and the South voted against it then you can lay the blame for the Civil War solely on the Confederacy!. Otherwise the blame lays on both sides!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---