January 6th, 2019, 10:12 PM | #481 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 668
Thanks: 179
Thanked 4,684 Times in 640 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to crinolynne For This Useful Post: |
January 7th, 2019, 12:01 AM | #482 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: NZ
Posts: 4,040
Thanks: 70,742
Thanked 40,955 Times in 4,030 Posts
|
|
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Dr Pepper For This Useful Post: |
February 19th, 2019, 11:05 PM | #483 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 78
Thanks: 7,618
Thanked 438 Times in 75 Posts
|
Grant and Sherman ended up fighting the next war, which is why they were successful. The Civil War was a meat grinder because tactics didn't change with technology. Sherman's tactics in the 20th century would be considered tame. He changed the rules of the 19th century as much as the American Colonist using Indian tactics against the British.
On the question on the Japanese a lot had to do with: 1) The sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany never attacked the US, they just declared war. 2) The Rape of Nanking, Bataan Death March, Banzai charges, Kamikazes, fake surrendering, civilian suicides, etc...... The Japanese were 1000% more viscous. They had never been conquered and they weren't going to surrender. When it became abundantly clear they were facing complete annihilation and could save the Emperor was when they finally capitulated. Japan suffered massive starvation for years after the war. Imagine if they didn't surrender and Operation Downfall went forward. They might barely be a country today. MacArthur got food stuffs released immediately to help prevent complete collapse. |
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to madgoose66 For This Useful Post: |
April 8th, 2019, 12:19 AM | #484 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,125
Thanks: 21,109
Thanked 12,368 Times in 1,106 Posts
|
Just read an interesting article about how recent research showed the families who were large slaveholding plantation owners before the war, recovered better than all the other Southerners within 20 years of the Civil War's end. Not so sure about that, but the article is at https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-po...=.a632625ecb35. An interesting read!
|
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to KissArmy For This Useful Post: |
April 13th, 2019, 12:26 AM | #485 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 439
Thanks: 12,924
Thanked 3,000 Times in 408 Posts
|
quite true, the Redeemers political stance gained momentum and with the North divided between Radical and moderate Republicans and a feckless Johnson and clueless Grant, the stage was set for over a century of hate (still going tho needs to be extinguished once Trump leaves).
|
January 6th, 2023, 10:26 PM | #486 | |
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: England
Posts: 26,238
Thanks: 162,399
Thanked 278,496 Times in 26,183 Posts
|
Quote:
I can remember reading of one case where a fugitive slave returned to his former plantation home, but this was in 1863 and this plantation, located in Tennessee, had just fallen to the advancing Union army. The returning former slave was now a sergeant in a black regiment of the Union Army and he came to his alma mater with a few of his regiment. They captured the slave overseer, who foolishly hadn't run for it when the bluecoats were on the horizon. They hanged him like a dog, as payment for various favours he had done for the slaves under his control in years past.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
January 6th, 2023, 10:39 PM | #487 | |
Vintage Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: England, and bloody proud of it!
Posts: 2,760
Thanks: 2,716
Thanked 24,428 Times in 2,768 Posts
|
Quote:
|
|
March 17th, 2023, 10:53 AM | #488 |
Vintage Member
Join Date: May 2020
Location: InterLimboNet
Posts: 529
Thanks: 2,443
Thanked 5,357 Times in 527 Posts
|
I Was Gonna Post This In The Unpopular Opinions Thread but..
Watching History Of The World Part 21 reminds me of a point that I have made regarding the Civil War in the United States. There has been an ongoing debate in America about why the war was fought. The prevailing opinion---and the one most widely taught in schools---is that the war was fought over slavery. This is true. But with a very big asterisk. The war between the States was fought over the issue of slavery. With a minority of exceptions (i.e. The Underground Railroad), the war was fought with the belief that the legality of slavery was paramount in determining where a state would land in the debate, and therefore on which side of the war. It was never fought because of the horrific and dehumanizing nature of slavery. The average soldier in the North was not, in his mind, fighting to free the slaves. It was a matter of secession, unity and keeping the nation intact in the face of simmering threats from Europe and Mexico. The evil of slavery and its effect on the people ravaged by it were of little concern...unless it served some political end. Even Lincoln agonized more about the nation's fracturing than he did about the plight of men, women and children stolen from their homeland and subjected to abuse and torture. I would spend my life savings betting on it.
1 Yeah. The show is a parody, not a history lesson. But you'd be surprised at how much they get correct.
__________________
HOW DID I GET HERE? |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CanisMantis For This Useful Post: |
|
|