SHOCKING FATE of Confederates After The Civil War in USA 

I hear you. I love historic sites. Lee was a brilliant military leader...until he wasn't. I have a hunch the man had a sense of destiny.

Nothing "SHOCKING" about this video this is just clickbait garbage.

Napoleon 1er had a lot to say about this very subject.

This statement is only true when the victors summarily execute all surviving adversaries, or at least among the survivors, eliminate all persons suspected of being willing and/or able to stir the pot of dissent later in the future. With victory well in hand, A. Lincoln was keen on deploying the exact opposite of this maxim. "Let them up easy," he would tell Grant. And what did he get for his trouble? Assassinated while relaxing (probably for the first time since taking the oath of office) at the theater. And the Union he saved? Look at the list of videos to your right and see. Mine has videos asking if there really were black confederates, one asking who will win the next civil war, the full movie of the Harlem Hellfighters' Great War, one asking if civil war history is being re-written, another questioning how did the civil war 'really' begin. If any 'writing of history' has been happening in the last 160 years it hasn't been the side that tactically and strategically won the civil war...aka "the victors". If you want to know who's been 'writing history', have lunch with the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

I'd say the Confederate losers went ahead anyway and wrote their own history. Their version of events, the so-called "lost cause," is a bunch baloney but that hasn't stopped millions of people from believing it. So, sorry Joe, but you're wrong.

Except the Lost. cause i guess they lost but have been busy writing fake revisionist history since the spring of. 1865. Check James Loewen s great book on the Prager. Prager U and Candice various “historical “ street signs in places as far afield as Oregon. On reasons for the civil war. Not slavery but “states rights” Dennis Prager and Prager U. S and Candace Owens are still misinforming people along with the other fake Thomas Sowell

@@jonnie106 read 2 great books by James Loewen. Zinns Peoples history and Treason in America. Anton Chaitkin. He also wrote unauthorized bio of HW Bush. New 2nd volume of his US history coming out real soon. $6 subscription to Substack gets 3-4 chapters released early! He loves Abe. FDR and JFK

AI

Fiction

Agreed. Initially, there were prisoner exchanges, as long as a POW pledged to not take up arms again. The Union commander of New Orleans refused to do this, and contributedy to the deaths of many Union POWs at Andersonville, for which Wirz was executed.

This is true, his own Confederate guards were starving as well. Grant and Lincoln should have suffered the same fate for stopping the prisoner exchange, which overpopulated prisons in the South and caused starvation. Prison camps in the North we're not much better, and the North could very well have humanly kept them. Where's the outrage for that?

@@joe-ednew2824 If you think about it, if the South couldn't feed the prisoners how would an exchange have enabled them to miracle up food to feed soldiers? Were they going to have those returned prisoners grow food or fight? Well, clearly fight, since that was the whole point in stopping the exchanges. It simply allowed the South to put their losses back into the field. Refusing to exchange them took them off the front lines for good, to the detriment of everyone who surrendered on both sides. Neither wins the moral high ground here.

This thread is based on some unsubstantiated facts and nebulous details that remain unproven and are specious. I'd like to elaborate just a little because I believe that history needs to be a much larger part of our schooling and our culture, which it is not. So, I firmly believe in this quote: "Those who can not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." ~ George Santayana Spanish-American philosopher One of the *current* reasons the South blames the North for the cessation of the prisoner exchange is because of the quote engraved on the Wirz Monument in the town of Andersonville which I won't repeat here due to the length of it (and my comment is already *quite* long). The quote on the Wirz monument was taken out of context. In addition, it was made by Grant almost a year after the exchange broke down. At that time, (August 1864) Confederate prisoners far outnumbered Union prisoners, so a resumption of the exchange would release thousands more Confederates. Grant also felt that once released, Confederate prisoners would likely violate their paroles and rejoin their units because of their loyalty to their home and their leaders. Many of the Union prisoners, on the other hand, had already fulfilled their enlistments and would likely go home. But when he supposedly made that famous quote, it was long after the exchange ceased, which occurred in the summer of 1863. At that time, Grant was only an army commander in the west and had no authority to stop the prisoners from being traded and had little to no influence in the matter. He was not promoted to command of all Union armies until the spring of 1864, a year after the exchanges had stopped and prisoners had begun arriving at Andersonville. When Lincoln called for the enlistment of black soldiers into the Union Armies in the summer of 1862 as part of the preliminary draft of the Emancipation Proclamation. In December of that same year, President Davis responded by issuing a proclamation that neither captured black soldiers nor their white officers would be subject to exchange. This became a reality when several prisoners from the 54th Massachusetts were not exchanged with the rest of the white soldiers who participated in the assault on Fort Wagner. (This is referring to famous "fighting 54th," memorialised in the Oscar-winning movie, 'Glory') However, Grant was *not* guiltless and bears a significant amount of blame after he *did* become Commander of the Union Army. But the initial breakdown occurred not because of Grant but because of politicians on both sides who were unwilling to compromise their policies. There were no clean hands and the conditions of the prisons on both sides showed how bad it really was; more soldiers died from starvation and disease than were killed during the entirety of the war.

And your point is?

Both. Deo Vindici

We need Josie Wales today.

I've been to Andersonville, it was quite sad looking over the graves of the thousands of Union Soldiers that had died from hunger, disease, and exposure. The commander of Andersonville was hanged for his crimes against humanity.

Andersonville is very close to Columbus GA and then directly south of Atlanta. This was crime by Sherman.

@@johnmatthews788 He shouldn't have been hanged. It's Grant's, the Confederate high command, and the Union in general that caused the tragedy of Andersonville. Look up Camp Douglas in Chicago, where the Confederate casualties and cruelty was WAY worse than Andersonville.

@@johnmatthews788 when was sherman hanged for war crimes and crimes against humanity?

@@johnmatthews788 If you are going to speak of crimes against humanity (a legal concept that didn't exist during this period), you must read about a few more prisons. Andersonville was horrible but the entire South was starving following the "March to The Sea". Read about: Point Lookout, Camp Douglas, and Elmira Prison.

Having a pair of grandfathers who did not believe in their own country and one who fought like a traitor against it is nothing to be proud of.

​@@Great-Documentariesmaybe they believe different than you did douchebag - who are you to judge

No one legged rebel pow would have had the strength to steal anything.

​@@Great-Documentariesthey likely believed in their state. You can keep trying to write history all you want but it is well documented the decades of senators defending state rights prior to the war and continuing to this day.

@@Great-Documentariesmy 3x great-grandfather was an abolitionist and his son my 2x great-grandfather served in the Michigan Infantry during the Civil War.

Already has.

as Tyrant, angel Lincoln

@@user-dv8np9gu4n - Nice flag of treason you're flying there, Johnny Reb. If you're going to be anti-American, then you should renounce your citizenship and get the hell out of the country.

Don't attempt to learn history from Hollywood tripe. Do the research, find the 1st person accounts (there are thousands of them) and read them and draw you own conclusions. That is what is wrong with America today is too many people believe the crap they see on television and on their phone.

Gettysburg is slightly less revisionist than Gods and Generals, but still, not 100% accurate. Lee wasn't the best general of the war by any means. Southerners claimed they all loved him, but the simple reality is he was the best general the North could have hoped to face. His insistence on operating aggressively and going on the offense every chance he had was the one strategy that would ensure the South lost. Every man lost under his command was one more man the South couldn't spare, but the North had several times the population capacity and could afford to lose men at a rate several times higher. Had Lee done what he was actually good at, which was wage a defensive war with prepared positions, he could have won the war of attrition and thus won the war itself.

The north freed the blacks look how well that worked out

Yep! Boothe let him off each easy

"Let them root Hog or die" A. Lincoln

It's really about the poisonous effect of conservatism than any political party.

Amazing family tree😯

There are many greats in your family. Congreats

....unfortunately

@@nickroberts-xf7oq Had he been hung, the US would have descended into guerrilla warfare until today. The British, and later the other major powers would have supplied the guerrillas to weaken the US.

Evidently you have never researched these Americans. The MAJORITY of these Wealthy Southerners left the Continental USA before the Civil War. They took their Wealths off Shore and returned to Europe to wait out the War, with Family. Many of these Wealthy Southerners remained invested in the War effort in both North and South. And many of them Moved their Wealths to Montreal, Canada and funded the Confederacy from Canada. And many of these Southern Families already owned property in Canada. Jefferson Davis for one. After the civil War. They Rebuilt much of the USA Southern Businesses. etc. Texas gas industry. For one! There would be no USA today, if the Southern Americans had lost. The Southern Army consisted of 92% of Small 40 acre to 160 acre FARMERS. Who did NOT own Slaves. They Farmed it themselves. Abraham Lincoln main Fight was with what once was the "Louisiana Common Wealth," that a Virginia, Thomas Jefferson had "Purchased in 1804," from France. Since all Wars are "about money and who gets to control it." The Louisiana Common Wealth was still in use of their own French "CURRENCY," the "Dix!" In plural is "Dixie." What Abraham Lincoln wanted was to dissolve all 13 "Common Wealths" Federations and make a "One" USA CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT. By consolidating all the SOVEREIGN North American Extended Families of the "Common Wealths" Wealth! Of Gold & Silver metals into the First "one" USA Treasury and to introduce the First USA Currency into circulation of WORTHLESS PAPER..And the New one USA be strictly controled solely by the North Eastern Common Wealths/States Representatives MAJORITY by using a "Democracy." for ONLY the Majority in the Congress to control the New USA Treasury.. OF GOLD & Silver and metals

lol I have said that many times.

You Yanks have murdered millions!

Historical ignorance there. He actually argued for better treatment, more supplies and shelter for the prisoners but was ignored by the Confederate government. Quite contrary to the 3rd Reich, he was executed out of a need for revenge, not justice. Justice would have seen him recognized for his failed efforts at making the camp habitable and the blame put where it belonged, on the actual heads of the Confederacy, Davis as president and Lee as Commander in Chief of all armed forces.

I still have several rebel flags nothing racist about the flag. It has been misused therefore it’s been labeled racist I honor that flag being a southerner plus ancestors who fought for both sides I was born in Fredricksburg Va there was several major battles in that area. I’m proud to be a southerner ..

And now we live in the Confederate States of America in an agricultural society living similarly to North Korea.

@@johnnystieferman6527Are you proud of people who committed treason for the sole purpose of preserving slavery?

We also here in Finland had civil war. All leaders of the lost side were either shot or got long prison sentence. 12 000 lost side soldiers died in prison after war from malnutrition. Several thousand flee out of the country. That said two years after civil war lost side came back to parliament. Seven years after was first government by lost side.

The union Was nowhere even remotely close to being liberal back then. That part they taught you was a load of crap. The simple truth of the matter is that there were evil men on both sides of the civil war. This nonsense about the union were knights in shining armor sent by God to destroy the tyranny of the confederacy and restore democracy is nothing but crap. Both sides were covered in blood just like both sides had good men and both sides had greedy politicians. all these generals knew each other on both sides of the war. Most of them even attended West Point together long before the war started And it’s a well-known and documented fact that on several occasions, the two opposing Commanders on the battlefield would meet up on a ridge somewhere just out of harms way but still within view of the battle and just casually sip coffee and shoot the breeze while their men were killing each other in the field. Don’t believe the narrative, both sides were guilty. Both sides committed some of the most egregious offenses imaginable to their fellow soldiers as well as to the public

So called reconstruction was nothing but government sponsored theft and murder of white Southerners.

The south was gonna pay! They did for a hundred years. Satellite photos, if available would have looked like the Korean peninsula. 😮😮

@@kallekonttinen1738 what year was that?

True

Thanks.

Lucy's kinda pretty.

"She Wore a Yellow Ribbon"

@@nickroberts-xf7oq Thanks. I actually have seen that one, but it was 24 years ago.

@@Bernie8330 Marion Michael Morrison ("John Wayne") made 150 + movies, and I have about 1/2 of them. ✔️ He was wonderful ! 🎥 🎭

Gen. Lee was not pardoned until 1975, despite his best efforts to have his citizenship restored.

It's conservative mentality that keeps it yearning for the 18th century.

Considering they were West Point ring-knockers and had fought together in the Mexican-American war, as I recall, I doubt it. Certainly a possibility but I suspect Grant knew better than anyone that Lee was an incredibly popular southern figure. After the war, it was in his interest to reincorporate the south rather than subdue it. Afterall, with him dead, that leaves a massive power vacuum with hundreds of thousands of angry former Soldiers that had been on campaign for years. To give a modern example, imagine if US troops had executed Sadr in Iraq. You'd basically have to murder half of Baghdad to secure the city. On top of all the uprisings and sectarian reprisals that would follow. After the years of war and annihilation of a fair percentage of the southern youth population, I'm sure everyone saw the writing on the wall and decided that cooler heads should prevail. Problem with the Civil War is that it is colored by a lot of primary sources that had a bone to pick. It is the same with post-WWII German general books talking about their side of the war. Then you have tons of secondary sources that also have an axe to grind one way or another. In either case, the Soldiers on the field had very little choice in the matter.

​@@ThrainiteIn any case, that did nothing to prevent the KKK from being born.

It depends on supply and demand. Even if your costs are 5x that of someone using slave labor yet the demand for something still gives you a handsome profit it makes you money. Look at apple and their products made with slave labor, even if you took away their slave labor they'd still have idiots paying thousands for iphones and watches...

No they fought to save their homes and livestock and to keep Yankees from raping the women

Nope. They were fighting for their constitutional right to bear slaves. The north had grudgingly institutionalized slavery into the constitution in order to get the southern states onboard with the union. When the south lost equal representation in congress, the writing was on the wall for the ratification of the 13th Amendment as more free states joined the union. Farmers to this day still protest against government policies they feel are detrimental to their way of life. Outlawing slavery would be like banning a widely used farming practice.

@@stewiesaidthat So the north didn't have slaves?

@@ziggystardust1122 12 of the first 13 presidents owned slaves. Slavery was practiced throughout the colonies. It was just more prevalent in the south due to the north becoming industrialized and people actually wanting to work in the factory sweatshops.

black

Northern prisons were operated on par with Southern ones simply because they considered it appropriate to treat the Southern prisoners the same way they treated their Northern captives. The North "could" have treated them better, but the point was that they wouldn't unless the South did also.

@@NobodyNeedstoknow-bq5px , the south could barely feed the guards and were many times forced to send out hunters and foragers to try to make ends meet . They did what they could but the north had plenty of food and blankets which they definitely refused to distribute or sold for personal profit.

@@charlesbelser7249 Again, they treated the Southern prisoners no differently than the South treated theirs. It was tit for tat for both sides. What one could or couldn't do was completely irrelevant in the greater scheme of things. The South COULD have simple released the prisoners if the issue was a shortage of food, but they CHOSE not to. Don't blame one side for doing exactly what was done by the other. The South COULD have provided more food, they chose not to for military reasons. The North COULD have provided more, but again, they had no desire to treat Southern prisoners better than their men were being treated after capture. You can blame whatever side you want but ultimately, the South was the driving force behind the horrible conditions because they failed to provide adequate care in a war they started and never had the means of supplying.

Yes,when I try to put on these utube chanels about the Tyrant Lincoln on the things he did while in office it never gets posted seems it's always too much one sided when I try to print the truth of angel Lincoln. But you sir have a good comment

Thank you for your most honorable post .

I don't understand what you mean but I hope to God you're right.

Facts about Lincolns showing the other side of him ,mine never get printed on utube. . Put it this way who read the books on Lincoln when he was young and before he become the leader in Germany.@@dickon728

I recommend reading "Secession on Trial: The Treason Prosecution of Jefferson Davis (Studies in Legal History)", by Cynthia Nicoletti, JD, PhD. After reading this book and hearing her speak, I believe (as she postulates) that the Federal Govt. would have failed in court to convict Davis. They didn't want to lose in a trial what they had won on the battlefield. All of the Republican leadership betrayed a willingness to circumvent truth to achieve a win that only served to subjugate the average American Citizen to Federal Despotism.

And yet with a 29% fatality rate for it's prisoners, Andersonville still holds the records for the largest percent of prisoners dying and the largest number of prisoners dead in total. You're whataboutism failed hard here since it's the responsibility of the captive nation to provide for the care of the prisoners it holds. It wasn't up to the North to provide the South food and material just as it wasn't up to the South to provide the same to the North. Neither side won any awards for their care of prisoners and both sides were quick to use any claim of maltreatment by the other as an excuse to withdraw support to the prisoners. The South refused to follow the terms of parole requiring prisoners to notbear arms again, and so parole was terminated since it simply meant returning Southern soldiers back to the fight.

@@NobodyNeedstoknow-bq5px There were prisoners of Andersonville writing to their commanders and their government for aide and assistance, their government refused them. The aide those prisoners were requesting from the North wasn't 'for the South', it was solely for the Northern prisoners in the camp. Food and medicine was requested, the North refused, clearly stating they would not risk the South getting their hands on food or medicine that might help them. The South offered to exchange these prisoners, the North refused. At one point, the South offered to release them if the North would just come and get them, they were in no condition to make it home on their own. The North refused to do so, they abandoned their own men. In every Yankee prison camp, the conditions were the same as those in the South, Confederate prisoners in the North suffered the same fates as Yankee prisoners in the South. They were all hell-holes, overcrowded, lack of medical care, lack of rations, etc. At Elmira in NY, they even went so far as to construct observation towers, and Northern citizens could pay a nickel or a dime to climb these towers and watch the Southern prisoners thru binoculars. The money made went to the officials of the camp. You never found that in the South. Southern folk did try to send aide to their imprisoned men, which more often than not was confiscated by the yankee prison officials, documented in the North's own war records. As to the point that Confederates 'violated their parole' and rejoined the military, you can't honestly think no Yankee ever did that. Many Confederates took a parole that stated they must stay 'above the Ohio river' or some other Northern point for the duration of the war. Government records indicate that many did just that, just as they indicate that a lot of Southern POW's returned home and did not rejoin the military. Your whataboutism failed hard here.

@@galndixie You're right. The South was amazing and did it's best to ensure that all humans were treated the best they could be. Too bad slaves weren't human. OH DAMN! You lost any pretense at moral superiority defending them.

@@NobodyNeedstoknow-bq5px Show me where the North claimed the slaves were 'human', since several of those states, long before and during the war did not allow free blacks to live within their borders, restricted their visitation and travel, and did not allow them to own any business or go into business with any white man. Also remember that it was the North that elicited the 'Three fifths compromise', declaring them less than a white man. Don't forget about the North's institution of the American Colonization Society, fully endorsed by the abolitionists, they were shipping them out of the country into Liberia. It was LIncoln himself who said they 'were not and never would be equal to whites in any way, and had no business mixing into white society." It was also Lincoln who wrote in the Emancipation Proclamation that the document in no way applied to slaves that were within areas controlled by the Union, they would remain slaves. It was the Union Army that listed slaves as "Contraband", nothing more than confiscated property to be used for the needs of the Union Army. There's just so much you completely ignore. Take some of that energy you throw into your keyboard, and apply it actually learning some history.

​@NobodyNeedstoknow-bq5px you're right, the north was amazing and did it best to ensure that all humans were treated the best they could be. Too bad after the war the north went out west and slaughter tens of thousands of Indians, you know the ones that US army called savages.OH DAMN,you lost any pretense at moral superiority .

AI with UK voice.

I’m from Liverpool

Only brainwashed liberals and leftists cares. The weak gets enslaved, that is the way of the world. Of course they outfitted slave ships, as black africans still sold other africans as slaves. (as they still do today.) No one but the african slavers should feel ashamed about slavery.

So am I 👍

There were more slaves in New York city ( wall street was a slave market) than most Southern states. I live in Philadelphia where slaves are still buried by thousands. No tomb stone. Camden new jersey was a port for drop off too. Each colonial city had slaves. It was not the reason for civil war.

I'm pretty sure that the narrator is a bot. I'd love to hear otherwise from the channel...

You heard wrong. Ninety MILLION people died during World War 2. Or more than 90 times as many as during the American Civil War.

Did the truth hurt your washed brain?

Strangely, there are very few documentaries forgetful war on film. They have photographs but I guess the needed to fill.

Early in the Civil War my great grandfather and his brother were captured by the Confederates in the Battle of the Wilderness. They were part of a prisoner exchange. The prisoner exchange stopped was stopped because the Confederates, such as General Forester, massacred black soldiers and their white officers after they had surrendered. This is a historical fact!😢

@@jameswoodbury2806 Black Union soldiers were not recognized by the confederates as being soldiers and the Union knew this. The North stopped the prisoner exchange April 1864. The reason is The Southerners exchanged were put back to fighting. This is why the exchange stopped. This is why so many Union and Confederate prisoners died in POW camps. I have many ancestors that were confederate soldiers. Most of them were poor Alabama dirt farmers with little education.Two were exchanged at Vicksburg belonging to the 40 Ala. Infantry. They were conscripted at 16 and 17 years old.

Not at all. Many freed black stayed where they were and continues working on their former owner's land. The "10 acres and a mule" promised to them by the US government never materialized.

It was purely done as retaliation for the treatment of the Northern prisoners. They "could" have fed and treated the captured rebels better, but why when the South wasn't making any effort to treat their prisoners humanely? You can't cry about a side treating prisoners no worse than the other without acknowledging that the South could just as easily released the prisoners it couldn't properly care for.

Rather, enunciated instead of enunced.

What year was that, again?

​@@AlbertaGeek We're still waiting for it since Democracy and the South still don't manage to mingle together.

Not really. Seceding from a state is not the same as taking up arms to secede from a nation, which is an act of treason.

Seceding from. Commonwealth by federal statute is MUCH DIFFERENT than seceding from USA THE UNION. What were you implying by your comment?? More NEO LOST CAUSE NONSENSE??

How about the Yankee boys now who were at Jan 6 and their ringleader? Do they get a pass?

@@stischer47 They should because you believe a lie. See the movie Capitol Punishment for the truth.

@@stischer47 The Capitol Hill police were letting the protesters in. Don't believe the Federal Bureau of Insurrection. It was staged, an inside job.

@@stischer47 Blame Nancy Pelosi for January 6th, Trump asked for National Guard protection and she said no.

@@stischer47 Trump is on tape telling the people to be peaceful. You're not what others do and neither is Trump.

@@Threedog1963 Do tell what it was about if not slavery. Taxes? NYC and Philadephia paid 93% of the federal tax income for the entire nation so not taxes. State rights? What right did Southern states not have? The right to tell Northern states what to do was certainly used by them when enacting federal legislation like the Fugitive Slave Act, so not state rights. Self-determination? I mean, sure, you could argue the war was over the states being able to declare a rebellion, since they did that when they started the war. Was there anything else neo-Confederate revisionists like to claim that I missed? Feel free to add another reason and I will be more than happy to educate you on how it wasn't.

@@Threedog1963 The Confederate states' own words were wrong? Okay, simp.

I​@@TruthFiction

Seriously, Slavery was an issue indeed. But, the real reason for the Civil War was "Greed". Northern Greed for cotton... Northern factories wanted the agricultural goods that were being sold to Europe. Slavery really didn't become the issue until "The Emancipation Proclamation ".

@@scottbettner-hz5ej Ignorance rears is head again. Northern "greed" for cotton? That is absolutely the most asinine claim ever made about the civil war, even stupider than pretending that it was about unfair taxation when the South paid NO taxes because they didn't exist. Northern textile industry was geared towards WOOL, not cotton. Cotton was grown to export to Europe. Northern factories produced hard goods from iron and coal, not textiles from cotton. If you honestly believe the war was about northern greed, then why the fk did the South secede? Clearly they could have sold their goods in the country and even saved the shipping costs. Slavery was the ONLY reason for the war. The Southern aristocrats felt that the election of an abolitionist leaning president threatened their wealth because the loss of slaves meant the loss of the single largest monetary asset in their states. The slaves were worth more than everything else in the South, and so they did what they felt was the only way to ensure that they could retain slaves for all eternity, and that was to start a war and form their own country where they explicitly included in their constitution that all negroes were slaves and that they could NEVER be freed. Do yourself a favor, read real history from the period, not revisionist bullshit being written by people too stupid to know how stupid they are.

Nearly 20% of Trump Fans Think Freeing the Slaves Was a Bad Idea this would be you

Wow, Southern education at it's finest. How about you read some real history for a change. The South started the war, and the intent behind it was that slavery would NEVER be "eased" out. It was, in fact, enshrined in their constitution and could never be repealed as it was written.

700,000

LoL! Either you're really ignorant or you think people are dumb enough to believe your explanation of the Civil War. Either way, you're full of s***.

Kind Sir, please refrain from spreading your secessionist nonsense and preferably insert it into the part of your body where the sun don't shine.

Says someone who knows nothing. Name one war crime that existed during the war except the murder of prisoners of war, which was pretty well documented as having been done by the South. Foraging by Sherman? Perfectly legal and in fact was done by Lee first. Burning homes? Not illegal. Seizing goods? Legal and done by both sides. Enslaving free people? Illegal, done only by the South. Not looking too good on the South here...

Southern propaganda.

Seems my original comment was deleted. The South, by executing foragers from Sherman's army committed more war crimes by number than the entire Union committed during the whole war.

Let me guess, you also believe that the southern states seceded because they were "invaded by the North," right? LMAO!

True. The Republicans sold the Freemen down the river for the Presidency.

Escaping Northern Tyranny.

@@wodenviking Hahahah, funny. Nice try.

@@TruthFiction Sad you are Ignorant to the truth .White people, North and South did not give two shits about slaves.

Brazil abolished slavery and actually kicked out a certain tribe that were responsible for bringing slaves there. That same same tribe fled to the US, changed their names and started slaving here.

@@stony_d What are you talking about? Brazil kept slavery until 1888. How would they have fled to the US then and started slaving.

Not in this video. You want the one titled: "Shocking fate of Federals after the Civil War in USA".

It is also the case that Lincoln was well aware that International Law judged that secession was perfectly legal, but as he said himself, this war is not about slavery, it is about the Union ( legal or not).

Dont forget lincoln was willing to pass the corwin amendment which was drafted for its main purpose to stop the south from seceding the bill was gaining traction and the southern states seceded anyway

You know the truth. Well said. Hurrah for Dixie!

Very poignant points few conceptualize.

A very salient point! I don't know why schools teach that the war was about slavery. It's completely wrong. It's sort of like how they still teach that Thanksgiving was about Plymouth Rock and the natives when it was really Lincoln who made it a national holiday in 1863 because they needed "a day of penitence and mourning," *not* from any real desire to mark the date because that's when the puritans supposedly landed in Plymouth.

Agreed. Especially since many of them in their last words, may have said something like they'd "rather die than live in a country as equals of colored". Statements like that let all the honorable air out of the heritage balloon. Very few people today would say something like that, because today they'd get 'cancelled'. But back in the 19th century, people that said that shit said it because they meant it, or they wanted to sound cool. Either way, no ONE country can sweat such internal division that names schools, parks, roads and military bases in that country after military men who did their best to DESTROY that country; while establishing the lost cause narrative to restore 'honor' to their cause...by diluting slavery and its importance from history.

and make racist remarks!

I would love for you to discuss why you hang a flag that actual Confederates refused to use after Vicksburg surrendered under it. It was only in use by the Southern forces around Vicksburg for a period of about 4 months, while Grant quite handily beat their asses so bad they just gave up and surrendered to city to him. July 4, 1863 was the last day that flag was ever flown by a true Confederate because it represented nothing they wanted to repeat, so they burned them all. Good job not knowing the heritage you pretend to care about so much.

You mean the Holy Cross of St. Andrew, right?

Especially that. NO religious bullshit.@@TheGuitarReb

Actually, those flags with the CSA Battle Banner did occur until the 1950s in response to the Civil Rights movement. Do you really think the US would have allowed them back in WITH such a symbol? Check your history.

My history indicates that many of our founding fathers were Southern people including George Washington & Thomas Jefferson whose 2nd spouse was a mulatto.@@stischer47

I have a feeling you'll be melting down in November...

@conveyor2 ooooooor Maybe YOU ? Why don't you donate to YOUR buddy , you know ? Defense attorneys , law suits losses , you know , like the 83 million $ loss he just swallowed ?

@@Ralphie5023. Only lunatics like the present status quo.

I have a feeling that you have a double digit IQ

@@user-ff5ge7hx2c Moron

The victors write the history. If the victor fails, the blame is all his.

@@ziggystardust1122 - Lol! The South lost, but they still went ahead and wrote their own version of the war, and now, more than 150 years later, there a bunch of you "Johnny Rebs" going on about a "lost cause" or something to make you feel better about your treasonous ancestors.

Yup, sore losers.

@@Philmoscowitz Na...y'all just butt hurt cause your attempts to write some half-baked propaganda history didn't work out the way you wanted. Every victor writes the history. Y'all just failed.

There was no comparison between the way the North treated their prisoners and Andersonville. Read a few books on it and you will never compare them again.

They won .The south lost .

@@apiii73 the North did some awful things to civilians in the South. Some of the earliest examples of "total war" in modern warfare where civilians are deliberately targeted. Sherman did this.

@@JGD185 Yes, Sherman's march was brutal, destroying property . But still not comparable to the horrors of Andersonville.

​@@apiii73 yes I agree it was terrible. It's not a competition as to who suffered more. And Sherman's march was a lot more than just property burned, there were rapes and murders too.

Obviously you do not know History.

@@wodenviking Yeah! They were also slavers!

@@AlbertaGeek Slave states North of the Mason Dixon were not affected. Bet you didn't know that. Grant was a slave owner also. My ancestors owned over 600 slaves.

@@wodenviking Knew that, and also know that nothing in your post has any relevance to anything.

grant freed his last slave @@wodenviking