For anyone watching this video, do not take this to be a comprehensive summary of the Civil War. The American Battlefield Trust has an amazing 27 minute video that goes into way more detail while also getting the big picture. For starters, Lee does not take over command of the Army of Northern Virginia until about a year into the war. By the time Antietam comes around, he had only repelled two Union campaigns, so its not like it was “numerous times”. The South did not exactly hold such a definitive advantage in military leadership as the woman says. The Union had many generals that regularly out fought the Southern Command: Grant, Thomas, Rosecrans, Meade. Yes the Southern commanders were able to prolong the war for longer than many thought possible, but this was at the expense of bloody assaults like Chickamauga or Chancellorsville.
why did president Lincoln free the slaves 2 years after the war started? Before the war started Lincoln told the South he had no intention of freeing the slaves but the war started anyway. Lincoln is quoted saying if he could make all the states in the union a slave state in order to end the war he would and if he could make the war end by freeing all the slaves in every state of the union he would also. He decided to free the slaves hoping it would destroy the South economy quicker to end the war.
+michael ghebrial-ibrahim Amazing channel I have to say. Could not find it whereas I was looking for it. I am glad to have found it now! I want to build a channel about international politics. It would be so nice if you could check my first video and tell me if you feel like following the channel or not :)
Yes exactly: the US Civil War really was essentially a crusade about the issue of slavery: the sole essential difference between the sides was the issue of race-based slavery.
One percent of the south owned slaves…you think 99% fought for the rights of elite the 1%? Sounds like a stretch. Maybe they like states rights? Or maybe they didn’t like the idea of federally enforced tyranny like they had with England, but humans being from the south didn’t make them love and fight for slavery. Much easier to just oversimplify. The Germans didn’t fight for concentration camps in WW2 either. I’ll save you the suspense.
Their livelihood, their money which greatly helped support the north. Even the emancipation proclamation only freed slaves from rebel states. (So they would deprive southern elites and join northern militias) not to be altruistic. You clearly point out the north was willing to compromise on slavery and not end it.
Look at Maryland the 50% of the colored people were only slaves in 1860. The mild republicans (Lincoln too) thought a 20-25 years long time with money compensation to the slave owners abolition. The immediataly measure was only from republicans to forbid the slavery in the future West states except for New Mexico and Arizona. Two "Bon Mot" and short explanations. First: The long Civil War assisted the abolition, because Lincoln and others learnt the South lost with the abolition. If Lincoln and the North had won in autumn 1862 the Lincoln goverment did not abolish the slavery so maximum the slow 20-25 years long time money compensation slavary abolition would have started! Lincoln wanted the border states as the 11% slavery population Missouri, the 21% slavery population Kentucky and the 12% slavery population Maryland and he avoided the slavery question until Antiatem. Second: The Civil War lasted for years, because the Spencer rifle was launched in mass counts only in 1864 at the US Army. The main Ordanance leaders in the Northern army were afraid of the soldiers would shot too many cartreges to the enemy and this could cause logistic problem! Funny but the US Army logistic leaders did not want better arms, weapons! Muskets used less cartridge! Might it be the lack of the Spencer rifle in the Northern Army was abolished the slaves????????????? Spencer rifle was invented in 1860!!!!!!!!!!!!
The better generals for the South gave a little sance to win the Civil War and to hold Missouri, Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland and new state West Virginia to gave the North bigger sance to win! Do not forget: If North lost the Civil War the slavery would been abolished about 1900 only in the North American continent!
d.c. was able to get europe to not buy, cotton during the civil war. thats the reason they always had no money really and lost. . during this time europe didnt want to get d.c. angry. so they bought cotton from egypt in 1860. with that money egypt was able to build canals around Cairo. but had the south was able to sell cotton in exchange for ships and war materials. im sure the out come would had been way different. but keeping europe out of it sank the conferecy.
About the 90 day service period: Sherman and Grant knew from simple analysis that that was nonsense to do that, what was needed was a huge army, professionally trained and equipped far better than their opponents, with competent officers, in short, the finest army on the planet, and the Union got that alright; as well as the best supplied army of its day imaginable. In short, an armed force that could beat all the other nations' armies combined if need came. Thankfully it did not come to that kind of a global war, but we had to have an armed force that could do that if it came to that.
Addendum: I was addressing the strategic situation from the perspective of a man such as R. E. Lee or one of his high-officers; someone "in the know" strategically and logistically about the comparitive situation between the combatants in that conflict: they'd know the South was in dire straights right from the start about their situation, as far as ability to win the war goes.
Reason Virginia was so vital and so much of a battleground for the US Civil War: it had approximately 90% of the Confederacy's industry capacity alone: capture that and the rest of the south will fall into your hands like a ripe fruit!
That many of the population enslaved would be kind of hard to garrison in the kind of war the South would have to fight to be able to win; they'd be desperately short of manpower for their army all the blessed time right from the start!
The South succession was not about slavery it was about being taxed heavily and unfairly compared to the rest of the nation at the time. This is a very biased video. President Lincoln said before the war he had no intent of freeing the slaves and the South should come back to the union. President Lincoln was quoted saying to end the war he would have made all states a slave state or no states a slave state which he did only to end the war more quickly. If it was about slavery why didn't Lincoln free all the slaves at the very beginning of the war and not wait 2 years after many deaths. After the war Lincoln wanted to ship all slaves back to Africa but most refused. Lincoln had a very low opinion about black people at the time. History is written by the winners and the winners only wanted to glamorize the civil war by basing it on good moral issues when the real reason was about heavy southern taxation. All through history slavery has existed and still today people ignore it because they profit from it. Will humanity ever stop the evils of slavery in every parts of the world? Unfortunately, probably not as long as there's profit in it. Even animals will never make their own kind into slaves maybe we can learn from them.
@iamFord @iamFord why did president Lincoln free the slaves 2 years after the war started? Before the war started Lincoln told the South he had no intention of freeing the slaves but the war started anyway. Lincoln is quoted saying if he could make all the states in the union a slave state in order to end the war he would and if he could make the war end by freeing all the slaves in every state of the union he would also. He decided to free the slaves hoping it would destroy the South economy quicker to end the war.
For anyone watching this video, do not take this to be a comprehensive summary of the Civil War. The American Battlefield Trust has an amazing 27 minute video that goes into way more detail while also getting the big picture.
For starters, Lee does not take over command of the Army of Northern Virginia until about a year into the war. By the time Antietam comes around, he had only repelled two Union campaigns, so its not like it was “numerous times”.
The South did not exactly hold such a definitive advantage in military leadership as the woman says. The Union had many generals that regularly out fought the Southern Command: Grant, Thomas, Rosecrans, Meade. Yes the Southern commanders were able to prolong the war for longer than many thought possible, but this was at the expense of bloody assaults like Chickamauga or Chancellorsville.
im done school is making me watch this
This isn't accurate history, this is indoctrination.
@@jamesthomas4693 please explain.
@@grainbread539 ah, it would be progressive to abolish slavery
I’m just done with school. Imma be a drop out at this point.
typical leftist socialist, never excepts facts.
why did president Lincoln free the slaves 2 years after the war started? Before the war started Lincoln told the South he had no intention of freeing the slaves but the war started anyway. Lincoln is quoted saying if he could make all the states in the union a slave state in order to end the war he would and if he could make the war end by freeing all the slaves in every state of the union he would also. He decided to free the slaves hoping it would destroy the South economy quicker to end the war.
@The United Republic Of Ukhelia I will. I understand schools going to be hard and I’ll just have to push myself :)
@@jonlast4433 you’re an amazing person! You’re so kind :( ❤️
@The United Republic Of Ukhelia I mean I can drop out haha
8:22 that laugh
Right? First time I've heard someone laugh in a Khan academy video
LMAO SOUNDS LIKE A DEMON
I cant believe this channel isn't huge
***** celebrated, idolized, but not huge. It's a well funded even by backers like bill gates but it dosnt get the view count it deserves
+michael ghebrial-ibrahim
Amazing channel I have to say. Could not find it whereas I was looking for it. I am glad to have found it now! I want to build a channel about international politics. It would be so nice if you could check my first video and tell me if you feel like following the channel or not :)
+Daedric Dewi thank you Daedric :)
It gets overshadowed by the John Green bandwagon
I enjoy your video,especially Grammar Video
I would suggest reading The Coming Fury by Bruce Catton. A great book that spells out the beginnings of the civil war.
Also, interesting to note that Virginia wasn't actually a willing part of the confederacy.
What if I’m on unemployment currently (PEUC) and I’m filing weekly, do I need to re do my entire claim? Or do I just keep filing?
I really enjoyed this video. It is good to relearn history.
Nerd
To me it didn’t
Yes exactly: the US Civil War really was essentially a crusade about the issue of slavery: the sole essential difference between the sides was the issue of race-based slavery.
By republicans - Lincoln
@@michaelgermanovsky1793 Yes, and the Republican party was specifically set up to oppose slavery.
Oversimplification
@@jimziogas8978 Not at all.
One percent of the south owned slaves…you think 99% fought for the rights of elite the 1%? Sounds like a stretch. Maybe they like states rights? Or maybe they didn’t like the idea of federally enforced tyranny like they had with England, but humans being from the south didn’t make them love and fight for slavery. Much easier to just oversimplify. The Germans didn’t fight for concentration camps in WW2 either. I’ll save you the suspense.
The first shot of the Civil War was fired during Buchanan's reign as president.
Where else in the world were there places discussing ending slavery in the mid 1800s?
Their livelihood, their money which greatly helped support the north. Even the emancipation proclamation only freed slaves from rebel states. (So they would deprive southern elites and join northern militias) not to be altruistic. You clearly point out the north was willing to compromise on slavery and not end it.
Look at Maryland the 50% of the colored people were only slaves in 1860. The mild republicans (Lincoln too) thought a 20-25 years long time with money compensation to the slave owners abolition. The immediataly measure was only from republicans to forbid the slavery in the future West states except for New Mexico and Arizona.
Two "Bon Mot" and short explanations. First: The long Civil War assisted the abolition, because Lincoln and others learnt the South lost with the abolition. If Lincoln and the North had won in autumn 1862 the Lincoln goverment did not abolish the slavery so maximum the slow 20-25 years long time money compensation slavary abolition would have started! Lincoln wanted the border states as the 11% slavery population Missouri, the 21% slavery population Kentucky and the 12% slavery population Maryland and he avoided the slavery question until Antiatem.
Second: The Civil War lasted for years, because the Spencer rifle was launched in mass counts only in 1864 at the US Army. The main Ordanance leaders in the Northern army were afraid of the soldiers would shot too many cartreges to the enemy and this could cause logistic problem! Funny but the US Army logistic leaders did not want better arms, weapons! Muskets used less cartridge!
Might it be the lack of the Spencer rifle in the Northern Army was abolished the slaves?????????????
Spencer rifle was invented in 1860!!!!!!!!!!!!
The better generals for the South gave a little sance to win the Civil War and to hold Missouri, Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland and new state West Virginia to gave the North bigger sance to win! Do not forget: If North lost the Civil War the slavery would been abolished about 1900 only in the North American continent!
I turned this Indian constitution.
Why?
I’m sorry but no one can get me to watch a 10 minute video 4 minutes is the limit
d.c. was able to get europe to not buy, cotton during the civil war. thats the reason
they always had no money really and lost.
. during this time europe didnt want to get d.c. angry.
so they bought cotton from egypt in 1860. with that money egypt was able to build canals around Cairo.
but had the south was able to sell cotton in exchange for ships and war materials.
im sure the out come would had been way different.
but keeping europe out of it sank the conferecy.
I was not aware if this. Thanks.
Kindly please show author name.
Why would people think Lincoln would come for slavery?
well, cause he did.
This is an earrape
About the 90 day service period: Sherman and Grant knew from simple analysis that that was nonsense to do that, what was needed was a huge army, professionally trained and equipped far better than their opponents, with competent officers, in short, the finest army on the planet, and the Union got that alright; as well as the best supplied army of its day imaginable. In short, an armed force that could beat all the other nations' armies combined if need came.
Thankfully it did not come to that kind of a global war, but we had to have an armed force that could do that if it came to that.
Anyone here from school?
buh his miccccccccc
thx a lot for killing my ears
watchmojo sent me here :)
My school teacher sent me here a video that came out 4years ago
1:51
Addendum: I was addressing the strategic situation from the perspective of a man such as R. E. Lee or one of his high-officers; someone "in the know" strategically and logistically about the comparitive situation between the combatants in that conflict: they'd know the South was in dire straights right from the start about their situation, as far as ability to win the war goes.
Reason Virginia was so vital and so much of a battleground for the US Civil War: it had approximately 90% of the Confederacy's industry capacity alone: capture that and the rest of the south will fall into your hands like a ripe fruit!
That many of the population enslaved would be kind of hard to garrison in the kind of war the South would have to fight to be able to win; they'd be desperately short of manpower for their army all the blessed time right from the start!
Anyone from UPA?
LivToSwim thats my school im talking about
The South succession was not about slavery it was about being taxed heavily and unfairly compared to the rest of the nation at the time. This is a very biased video. President Lincoln said before the war he had no intent of freeing the slaves and the South should come back to the union. President Lincoln was quoted saying to end the war he would have made all states a slave state or no states a slave state which he did only to end the war more quickly. If it was about slavery why didn't Lincoln free all the slaves at the very beginning of the war and not wait 2 years after many deaths. After the war Lincoln wanted to ship all slaves back to Africa but most refused. Lincoln had a very low opinion about black people at the time. History is written by the winners and the winners only wanted to glamorize the civil war by basing it on good moral issues when the real reason was about heavy southern taxation. All through history slavery has existed and still today people ignore it because they profit from it. Will humanity ever stop the evils of slavery in every parts of the world? Unfortunately, probably not as long as there's profit in it. Even animals will never make their own kind into slaves maybe we can learn from them.
@iamFord @iamFord why did president Lincoln free the slaves 2 years after the war started? Before the war started Lincoln told the South he had no intention of freeing the slaves but the war started anyway. Lincoln is quoted saying if he could make all the states in the union a slave state in order to end the war he would and if he could make the war end by freeing all the slaves in every state of the union he would also. He decided to free the slaves hoping it would destroy the South economy quicker to end the war.
Guest speaker seems nervous, unsure....perhaps her first time
She has a nice voice and handwriting and seems to know her material.