How many soldiers died in the US Civil War?

[RemunRemun]

Originally Posted by alexora

The comparison consisted of equating the number of the Fallen to that of the nation's population at the time: the US population has increased greatly since the 1860s, so the article showed what the proportion of casualties would be today, taking into account the current population.

I know that. I still find it disrespectful to compare the dead like that.
Any person with an IQ above 90 can fully realise the impact of so much suffering on a comparably smaller society.
Those that can not....well maybe they should go back to finding porn instead of reading serious articles.

[CrimsonMaster]

I've served the United States of America proudly as a soldier and was willing to fight & die if necessary. I didn't however fight in any war since there wasn't one going on when I was in the army. But I can say that the only thing good about war.....is it's end.

With that being said I can also say that sometimes war is necessary. America as we know it wouldn't exist without the Revolutionary War. Who knows just how the world would be now if World War II hadn't been fought. War has always been and always will be apart of our world.

[brokensaphire]

Why were men and boys of the Union and the Confederacy willing to go to war?
There were two primary factions:
1. Those that were willing to kill for their way of life(plantation work which relied upon slavery).
2. Those that were willing to kill and die for freedom for all Americans under the Constitution set forth by the 'Founding Fathers'.

The origins of the Democrat and Republican parties can and should be traced to the 1860's.

Democrats back then and even now would rather rely on the work of others to sustain their way of life, promote their agendas and garner votes(i.e.slavery).

Republicans then and now understand and promote the worth of self-reliance, independence and self-determination under the Constitution of the United States of America. Abraham Lincoln(Republican from Illinois) understood this difference, executed a Civil War and lost his life over this notion. He understood the battle of his time: freedom v.s. slavery.

Modern Republicans(so-called conservatives) despise slavery and have for over 150 years. To work and pay taxes to subsidize those that are incapable is one matter, if not charitable. To work and pay taxes to subsidize those that are unwilling and/or lazy is abominable.

Modern Democrats want others to work in order to pay for those that don't, or can't OR CHOOSE NOT TO = modern day slavery. per government regulation
I will vote for anyone who stands against modern-day slavery.

wake up to this ongoing American history: Slavery(socialism) v.s. Freedom(capitalism)

[alexora]

Originally Posted by brokensaphire

Why were men and boys of the Union and the Confederacy willing to go to war?
There were two primary factions:
1. Those that were willing to kill for their way of life(plantation work which relied upon slavery).
2. Those that were willing to kill and die for freedom for all Americans under the Constitution set forth by the 'Founding Fathers'.

The origins of the Democrat and Republican parties can and should be traced to the 1860's.

Democrats back then and even now would rather rely on the work of others to sustain their way of life, promote their agendas and garner votes(i.e.slavery).

Republicans then and now understand and promote the worth of self-reliance, independence and self-determination under the Constitution of the United States of America. Abraham Lincoln(Republican from Illinois) understood this difference, executed a Civil War and lost his life over this notion. He understood the battle of his time: freedom v.s. slavery.

Modern Republicans(so-called conservatives) despise slavery and have for over 150 years. To work and pay taxes to subsidize those that are incapable is one matter, if not charitable. To work and pay taxes to subsidize those that are unwilling and/or lazy is abominable.

Modern Democrats want others to work in order to pay for those that don't, or can't OR CHOOSE NOT TO = modern day slavery. per government regulation
I will vote for anyone who stands against modern-day slavery.

wake up to this ongoing American history: Slavery(socialism) v.s. Freedom(capitalism)

And what party was it, Republican or Democrat, that sought to end apartheid in the Southern US during the 1960s?

Also, since socialism opposes private property, and slaves are by definition private property, in what way can slavery be described as a socialist policy?

Does this mean that the Southern plantation owners a la 'Gone With The Wind' were nothing more than un-American socialists...?

[brokensaphire]

[QUOTE=alexora;6085918]And what party was it, Republican or Democrat, that sought to end apartheid in the Southern US during the 1960s?

Many Southern Democrats of the 1960's fought a physical and political war in order to keep segregation. Many Northern Republicans sought to end it in a myriad ways. Northern Republicans and their allies eventually ended segregation.

As a citizen of the United States of America I can tell you that Democrats divide people into groups that can be politicized.

Republicans see only individuals no matter the sex, creed or national origin.

Perhaps some have been browbeaten to believe otherwise based upon how they are educated.

I educate myself as a critical citizen of my Nation by learning about the representatives in which I cast a vote for in all 3 branches of government: do you?

[alexora]

Originally Posted by brokensaphire

I educate myself as a critical citizen of my Nation by learning about the representatives in which I cast a vote for in all 3 branches of government: do you?

I'm a citizen of two nations, and yes: I do research the various candidates, only twice as much since I vote in the elections for two different governments...

The only difference is that in Italy we vote for two branches of government (the House of Deputies and the Senate), and in the UK for only one (the House of Commons).
In neither of these countries do the voters directly elect the head of state nor the prime minister.

[RemunRemun]

Alexora, you are very friendly indeed by trying to debate with him. But some people just have a tendency to find all possibly ways to try and confirm their bias.

/offtopic

[brokensaphire]

Well over 600,000 citizens of the United States of America fought and died during the Civil War in the United States of America during the 1860's. Why they fought is now a relevant and modern day question which leads to the issue of our time in The United States of America: Whom do you serve? Personal Freedom with lesser gov't or gov't induced 'slavery' upon the people?

[alexora]

Originally Posted by brokensaphire

Well over 600,000 citizens of the United States of America fought and died during the Civil War in the United States of America during the 1860's. Why they fought is now a relevant and modern day question which leads to the issue of our time in The United States of America: Whom do you serve? Personal Freedom with lesser gov't or gov't induced 'slavery' upon the people?

Actually, almost half of those who died in that conflict were not citizens of the United States of America: they were citizens of the Confederate States of America.

A small detail, but it was because of this detail that they died in the first place...

If you traveled back in time and showed up in Richmond, Virginia during the Civil War and started telling people that they are US citizens, they would probably lynch you...

[brokensaphire]

Originally Posted by alexora

Actually, almost half of those who died in that conflict were not citizens of the United States of America: they were citizens of the Confederate States of America.

A small detail, but it was because of this detail that they died in the first place...

If you traveled back in time and showed up in Richmond, Virginia during the Civil War and started telling people that they are US citizens, they would probably lynch you...

ok, alex