The American Civil War

It's come to my attention that Brits think the American Civil War was irrelevant and not worthy of learning about

I wanna debate.

Could I get some british opinions, please?

Do they teach us about the British colonial empire in middle school and high school? Nope. Then why should they have to learn about the American Civil War?

The civil war was horrible but you need to learn about it.

The guns were brutal even though they were one shot (except for the 6 shot revolver)

.

I would rather be called English than British. ;)

I think it's good to learn history, even if you don't like The American Civil War history, which I don't, then you should still know a bit about it.

I couldn't care less if it happened or not. :)

I suspect that the Brits who said that are somewhat ignorant of their own history. Britain tacitly supported the Confederacy as teh southern states supplied British mills with a cheap supply of cotton. Britain would likely have come to the aid of the Confederacy were it not for the issue of slavery. Britain outlawed slavery in all its colonies in 1833. It also outlawed the trade in slaves and would intercept slavers leaving the coast of Africa or trying to make the run for the US, Brazil, or various islands in the Carribbean. Had the Confederacy freed the slaves before firing on Ft. Sumter, the Brits most likely would've sent troops and ships to aid the South. When the war finally ended, some members of the US.S gov't sought to punish Britain for its continued trade with the Confederacy and they pushed for a US annexation of the various British colonies in what is now Canada. In fact, the US provided money and materiel support for an invasion of Canada by US citizens of Irish decent in 1866. The Brits, fearing being drawn into a war with a large, fully mobilized veteran US Army decided to grant Canada dominion status and declare it a more or less independent nation in 1867.

True, Bogaty. Britain (England, sorry.) was a huge importer of southern goods, and they needed southern products...

If Brits (English) look past just the actual battles and into the politics, you would see the British (English) were very involved.

Also, I learned alot about British (English) history throughout school, so that's not really an issue.

I just don't understand why a major war in the history of the world is "irrelevant"

One of the great failings of the way Americans are taught history is the over-importance of all aspects of American history in relation to the rest of the world. The U.S. Civil War was of great importance to North America, and by extension future influences of world history. However, the Spanish-American War was of far greater importance worldwide (it established the geo-political dominance of American interests for the next century) than the U.S. Civil War.Chemistian

I suspect that the Brits who said that are somewhat ignorant of their own history. Britain tacitly supported the Confederacy as teh southern states supplied British mills with a cheap supply of cotton. Britain would likely have come to the aid of the Confederacy were it not for the issue of slavery. Britain outlawed slavery in all its colonies in 1833. It also outlawed the trade in slaves and would intercept slavers leaving the coast of Africa or trying to make the run for the US, Brazil, or various islands in the Carribbean. Had the Confederacy freed the slaves before firing on Ft. Sumter, the Brits most likely would've sent troops and ships to aid the South. When the war finally ended, some members of the US.S gov't sought to punish Britain for its continued trade with the Confederacy and they pushed for a US annexation of the various British colonies in what is now Canada. In fact, the US provided money and materiel support for an invasion of Canada by US citizens of Irish decent in 1866. The Brits, fearing being drawn into a war with a large, fully mobilized veteran US Army decided to grant Canada dominion status and declare it a more or less independent nation in 1867.

bogaty

Let me ask you. Do English schools teach anything other than England being the best country in the world? Do French schools talk about how much France sucks? Nope. I imagine every countries pre college school teaches how their country is the best.

However, I was just in a history class at my college that opened my eyes, because it wasn't completely biased. And it showed that every war shapes the world in one way or another. America would not be where it was today without the CW, and so the rest of the world wouldn't be where it was either.

Like me and someone else pointed out, the war changed Britain (Then the most powerful country) economically. Therefore it changed everyone else economically.

Do yall see what I'm getting at?

I'm not saying it was the most influential war, but it did affect everyone else.

Let me ask you. Do English schools teach anything other than England being the best country in the world? Do French schools talk about how much France sucks? Nope. I imagine every countries pre college school teaches how their country is the best.

However, I was just in a history class at my college that opened my eyes, because it wasn't completely biased. And it showed that every war shapes the world in one way or another. America would not be where it was today without the CW, and so the rest of the world wouldn't be where it was either.

Like me and someone else pointed out, the war changed Britain (Then the most powerful country) economically. Therefore it changed everyone else economically.

Do yall see what I'm getting at?

I'm not saying it was the most influential war, but it did affect everyone else.

GCNfreak011

[QUOTE="GCNfreak011"]

Let me ask you. Do English schools teach anything other than England being the best country in the world? Do French schools talk about how much France sucks? Nope. I imagine every countries pre college school teaches how their country is the best.

However, I was just in a history class at my college that opened my eyes, because it wasn't completely biased. And it showed that every war shapes the world in one way or another. America would not be where it was today without the CW, and so the rest of the world wouldn't be where it was either.

Like me and someone else pointed out, the war changed Britain (Then the most powerful country) economically. Therefore it changed everyone else economically.

Do yall see what I'm getting at?

I'm not saying it was the most influential war, but it did affect everyone else.

GTA_dude

Perfect example.

As for the rap thing, dont even get me started hahaha.

[QUOTE="GTA_dude"][QUOTE="GCNfreak011"]

Let me ask you. Do English schools teach anything other than England being the best country in the world? Do French schools talk about how much France sucks? Nope. I imagine every countries pre college school teaches how their country is the best.

However, I was just in a history class at my college that opened my eyes, because it wasn't completely biased. And it showed that every war shapes the world in one way or another. America would not be where it was today without the CW, and so the rest of the world wouldn't be where it was either.

Like me and someone else pointed out, the war changed Britain (Then the most powerful country) economically. Therefore it changed everyone else economically.

Do yall see what I'm getting at?

I'm not saying it was the most influential war, but it did affect everyone else.

GCNfreak011

Perfect example.

As for the rap thing, dont even get me started hahaha.

Let me ask you. Do English schools teach anything other than England being the best country in the world? Do French schools talk about how much France sucks? Nope. I imagine every countries pre college school teaches how their country is the best.

However, I was just in a history class at my college that opened my eyes, because it wasn't completely biased. And it showed that every war shapes the world in one way or another. America would not be where it was today without the CW, and so the rest of the world wouldn't be where it was either.

Like me and someone else pointed out, the war changed Britain (Then the most powerful country) economically. Therefore it changed everyone else economically.

Do yall see what I'm getting at?

I'm not saying it was the most influential war, but it did affect everyone else.

GCNfreak011

Well, back when I was at school which was only year and a half ago, we learned about our own history, but once we got that covered we learnt about other countries. :P We're not patriotic or anything, it's just like saying "family first" right?

It has affected everyone, like now, this crisis could at least last 5-10 years and after this christmas a lot more people will be losing their jobs. This is just the same as when the war was going, people were working for nothing, they were most likely working to pay for the money that was put into that war. Correct me if I'm wrong, I might be.

True, Bogaty. Britain (England, sorry.) was a huge importer of southern goods, and they needed southern products...GCNfreak011

until the South tried to blackmail them with cotton. then they just got everything from Egypt.

I suspect that the Brits who said that are somewhat ignorant of their own history. Britain tacitly supported the Confederacy as teh southern states supplied British mills with a cheap supply of cotton. Britain would likely have come to the aid of the Confederacy were it not for the issue of slavery. Britain outlawed slavery in all its colonies in 1833. It also outlawed the trade in slaves and would intercept slavers leaving the coast of Africa or trying to make the run for the US, Brazil, or various islands in the Carribbean. Had the Confederacy freed the slaves before firing on Ft. Sumter, the Brits most likely would've sent troops and ships to aid the South. When the war finally ended, some members of the US.S gov't sought to punish Britain for its continued trade with the Confederacy and they pushed for a US annexation of the various British colonies in what is now Canada. In fact, the US provided money and materiel support for an invasion of Canada by US citizens of Irish decent in 1866. The Brits, fearing being drawn into a war with a large, fully mobilized veteran US Army decided to grant Canada dominion status and declare it a more or less independent nation in 1867.

bogaty

Do they teach us about the British colonial empire in middle school and high school? Nope. Then why should they have to learn about the American Civil War?

Wasdie

civil war.............. that brings something to mind WORST MILITARY STRATEGIES EVER....fluffers623

Worst strategies ever?

Jesus, even american schools need to spend more time on the CW.

How bout the strategy when the US sent a huge army down the coast and dropped em in behind enemy lines to seize the Confederate capital in Virginia, and Robert E Lee finds out. The CSA force is vastly outnumbered, but Lee has a plan. He orders part of the army to march around in circles behind a huge hill. This kicks dust up in the air, making the Union dudes think that a much bigger force is moving. At night, Lee ordered each man to build one fire, as opposed to a fire for five or six people. Again, the US was fooled into thinking that the Confeds had a much bigger force there.

The Union general takes all his men and retreats, and the CSA capital is safe.

Well I live in Canada and I've learned about both the British empire and the American civil war.Big_player

Do they teach us about the British colonial empire in middle school and high school? Nope. Then why should they have to learn about the American Civil War?

Wasdie

Yes they do. Unless you go to some crap high school.

[QUOTE="fluffers623"]civil war.............. that brings something to mind WORST MILITARY STRATEGIES EVER....GCNfreak011

Worst strategies ever?

Jesus, even american schools need to spend more time on the CW.

How bout the strategy when the US sent a huge army down the coast and dropped em in behind enemy lines to seize the Confederate capital in Virginia, and Robert E Lee finds out. The CSA force is vastly outnumbered, but Lee has a plan. He orders part of the army to march around in circles behind a huge hill. This kicks dust up in the air, making the Union dudes think that a much bigger force is moving. At night, Lee ordered each man to build one fire, as opposed to a fire for five or six people. Again, the US was fooled into thinking that the Confeds had a much bigger force there.

The Union general takes all his men and retreats, and the CSA capital is safe.

I think he was trying to refer to battlefield tactics and doctrine. Both the Union and the CSA forces used tactics little changed from the Napoleonic Wars desipte the advances in technology that made using such tactics very costly in terms of casualties. Rifled muskets increased the effective range from ~50 metres to ~200. Artillery was similarly more effective.

The philosophies of the Enlightenment affected military thinking in much the same way that they'd affected the scientific world. People really did think that there weremathematical certainties that would predict and model every aspect of life. If one could simply derive the proper formula, then victory would be a foregone conclusion.

There were two prominent military thinkers in the early 19th century. One remained obscure and ignored until much later when his brilliance was recognized. That man's name was Carl Von Clausewitz. The main reason he was ignored was because he eschewed the popular thinking of the day and instead said that there was no magical formula to win a war. His writings were also more general in nature and in an age where people wanted detailed formulae and mathematical certainty regarding things like logistics, fortress construction, use of artillery, etc. his works were seen as too vague to be of real use.

The other writer was Antoine Jomini. He served in the Napoleonic Wars in both the French and Russian militaries. Military officers in the 19th century were in still in awe of Napoleon and the fact that Jomini servedon the French General Staff gave weight to his writings. He also appealed to the conventional wisdom of the day and tried to apply a rational, scientific approach to the fighting of wars. Basically, his theory came down to this: put superior combat power at the decisive point. In order to do so, one must attack, attack, attack!

His advice became doctrine for European armies from the Napoleonic Wars up through WWI and it cost untold thousands of lives. Civil War generals followed this doctrine so slavishly that they actually used the number of casualties their own troops suffered in an operation as a way of gauging its merit. The more costly it was, the more worthwhile and glorious.

I'm American and I don't even like learning about the Civil War. World War 1 and 2 please...FunkWeasel

I'm American and I don't even like learning about the Civil War. World War 1 and 2 please...FunkWeasel

I am not sure about little old Britain, but New Zealand learns about it.optiow

We spent a couple days on it in grade 10 history in Canada. Not any more depth than I get from the American tv that Canada is flooded with. You can take an American history course in grade 12 though.