Sunday, April 22, 2012
The south had a small chance of winning
The south had no chance of winning the north because the north had more people to fight for them. They also had factories and railroads for transportation, this would help them obtain weapons and other equipment faster than the south. The south did have better generals, but when you have to fight against an army two times yours their really isn't much you can do. If the south was able to get Britain or France on their side they would have had a chance of winning the war, but they were unable to do so. The leader of the south Jefferson Davis was unable to show how great of a leader he was because of states' rights. He was unable to draft an army, which made it impossible for the north to win the was. That is why the north had a large of winning than the south because they had many resources that the south didn't have which gave them an advantage in the war.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Although the army was larger, it just depends on the generals who are leading them. The South had better generals in leading and planning attacks. Whereas the North had mistake prone generals who messed up too much. The South also had more experienced soldiers than the North. So don't you think a better quality army plus even better generals are better than less experienced soldiers led by mistake making generals as their leader whom they had to follow instructions from.
ReplyDelete