Advantages And Disadvantages Of The South In The Civil War

The industrial superiority of the North was even higher than the demographic and provided abundant resources for the manufacture of weapons and ammunition, clothing and other accoutrements. Its rail network was far superior. However, the South had certain advantages. The most important was geography, as southerners fought a defensive war in its own territory; they could establish their independence with only defeat the armies of the North. The South also had a strong military tradition and had senior military

Business owners made lots of money from the railroads because they were able to transport goods farther and faster with ease. Although the railroads tremendously impacted businesses and therefore the economy, the native americans were negatively impacted because the railroads were being laid on “their” land. This caused distrust between the settlers and the natives because of the “disrespect” for the land. Because of the new ways of transportation, the industrial revolution took place causing skilled artisans to be replaced by unskilled workers that used large complex machines. The

Jefferson action was considered to be one of his greatest achievements of the third president. Afterward of the purchase has a great result on American society, doubled the size of previous US territory allow the westward expansion “Lewis and Clark expedition”. “The Lewis and Clark expedition” help America expand into different lands. They had full control over the Ports of New Orlean and the Mississippi River, which help the farmer ship their goods in a faster trading routes help the US commerce in their domestic policies.Originally, the constitution states nothing about the president power to be able to purchase land. However, Thomas Jefferson action of purchasing Louisiana allows the American society and its economy to flourish, without this action, the US wouldn't have become as

While most people supported the role of slavery in the development of the US, a real number was still opposed to the use of slaves. Those that held the issue of slavery thought that it was necessary for the actual development of the country. They thought that the slaves were a productive tool, especially in agriculture and mining. Their use was therefore justified as they could provide the manpower to carry out the activities. The African slaves were particularly endowed in strength and Stamina.

After four long years, the Unions won the war which saw to it that both parties ended up as a united nation once again. The North overpowered and defeated the South due to a number of reasons as illustrate below. To begin with, the fact that the South majored in agriculture made them to be left behind in terms of industrialization, an important factor during the civil war since fabricated merchandise was highly regarded than agricultural products. The North was therefore privileged to be in a better position in production of armory since it was able to host firms that manufactured ammunitions and war locomotives. The South was poorer, since cotton was no longer making ready income and they only had a few manufacturing origins.

Julius Caesar proved that he was one of the greatest Romans to be apart of Rome and with his military strategies that led him to conquer most of Gaul and parks of England, this shows that he was a true genius. The way that he was able to manipulate the government so he would win his election is just so elegant. He got the richest man in Rome and one of the most respected and joined them three together, and together they could have done anything. Julius Caesar used his greatness in battle as a way for him to gain popularity within the Roman population. Julius Caesar was a Roman

Although the North and South had many advantages over one another, they each had as many disadvantages. The North had to conquer a large amount of land in order to win the Civil War. They were also invading unfamiliar land. The North may of had a strong Navy, but overall their soldiers were not properly skilled compared to the South. The South did have the advantage of good officers to train the soldiers, but they had very few people for the job.

When militarism became a huge deal, it not only meant that every country improved their army and navy, no it also meant the arms race and the government´s attitude. The Government attitude means that many generals had a huge influence on the government of the country, which led to problems, which then turned into long term problems, escalation into the war. This also meant that all the countries were very aggressive, but especially the government of Austria-Hungary and Germany were militaristic. At the time of 1914, the arm force was divided like that, that Germany had about 2,2 million soldiers, Austria-Hungary had about 810,000 Soldier and Russia had about 1,2 million soldiers. When on country improved their army and general armed force, all the other had the idear to grow, causing every country to grow bigger and better.

The power that Alexander had, was created by all of the places that he and his father had conquered. The power that Alexander had got him stronger armies, because everyone listened to the king, no one could not do what the king said because that is against laws and punishments would be given. Stronger armies also can get you more land which means you can get more money with the growth of crops. Also wit stronger armies, Alexander can use his phalanx strategy and his smart tactics to defeat larger armies than the Persian

Additionally, despite the fact that the Union had more resources and a better equipped army, the Confederacy was able to better arm and supply itself and take advantage of the Union resources by capturing the Union’s regional supply depot during the battle. To my mind, two compelling questions regarding the Second Battle of Bull Run would be ‘If the union armies had been cohesive, instead of separating into two separate groups, and had a better understanding of the local terrain at Bull Run would they have been able to be victorious?’, and ‘If the Southern States had been a bit more powerful economically, given the battlefield superiority of their generals such as Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, would the south have won the civil war? If so, what would the USA look like

The southerners had an advantage of the land mass they owned, so it was easier for them because there people knew the land and this made it harder for the people who didn 't. While the swamps and forest were known by the people of the south but in the west the great river were used as the union 's supply routes. The geographic features of the land were both advantages and extremely unhelpful to both sides. The north had more industry and was far wealthier giving it a huge advantage to the north. On top of that the north had two million men fighting against the the south 's with just 900,000.

Final Copy The weapons of the union and confederate that they used during the civil war were closely similar. However the union had many advantages like the industrial system and others. The union had the better weapons then the confederate. The union was superior to the confederacy in almost every way they could they had better factories, a lot more soldiers, and incredibly advanced technology. Epically when compared to the confederates weapons, soldiers and such to the northern.

Robert E. Lee is the most prominent Confederate general in the civil war history of the United States. Scholars are divided about the brilliance of Robert E. Lee as a military leader because he has a mixed legacy of success and failure. He is a controversial figure because suffered earth shuttering losses and he also won inspirational victories (Arnold 6). General Robert Edward Lee displayed military leadership in the American Civil war because he mastered the art of pitch battles (Carmichael 50). Historically, his greatest asset was his reputation because it provided him with respect and the loyalty of Confederate soldiers.

First, its population was bigger by almost four times when compared to the non-slave population of the south. This led to not only manpower for its army, but also the workforce to supply this army. This workforce and heavy industrialization allowed the North to supply all of its own war materials. The infrastructure was also superior in the North. The railroad was more integrated and they had twice as much trackage.

In the beginning of World War 1 this form of fighting in which two armies would use their cavalry to charge at one another was very common because of its multiple advantages including that the troops had a greater mobility, a larger impact, and the riders had a higher position. For these reasons this type of fighting was a favorite of many generals, including the British cavalry which in 11918 had over 75,000 horses that were used in charges. However, this type of fighting worked well in the beginning of the war, some may argue that it had become completely useless by the end of the war because of the proliferation of war technology. Although horses were used less often by the end of the war compared to the beginning, it does not change the fact the cavalry battle tactics were still being used until the very end of the war. One example of this attack happened in 2March of 1918 when over 150 horses of the British cavalry charged on German fire.