More Americans were killed in the U.S. Civil War, 1861 (620,000) than in all the wars since then.
War of 1812 -----------20,000
Mexican American War 1846-----13,283
Spanish American War 1898-----2,446
WW 1 1917-------116,000
WW 2 1941-------416,000
Korea 1950-------36,914
Viet Nam 1964---58,169
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
It was a particularly nasty war and is still being argued about in the former Confederate states.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
I wonder whether it works the other way about - Americans killed more people in the Vietnam War, 1964 (2,500,000) than in all their other wars before or since.
I have my doubts but I'd not like to look up the figures, it would depress me.
I have my doubts but I'd not like to look up the figures, it would depress me.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. ... Hold no regard for unsupported opinion.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. [Fred Wedlock, "The Folker"]
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. [Fred Wedlock, "The Folker"]
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
bump
ALOHA!!
MOTTO TO LIVE BY:
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, champagne in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming.
WOO HOO!!, what a ride!!!"
MOTTO TO LIVE BY:
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, champagne in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming.
WOO HOO!!, what a ride!!!"
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
and here is another interesting fact about the US Civil war:
1.5 million horses killed.
(that is a lot of horses...)
1.5 million horses killed.
(that is a lot of horses...)
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
spot;1358335 wrote: I wonder whether it works the other way about - Americans killed more people in the Vietnam War, 1964 (2,500,000) than in all their other wars before or since.
I have my doubts but I'd not like to look up the figures, it would depress me.
mikeinie;1358389 wrote: and here is another interesting fact about the US Civil war:
1.5 million horses killed.
(that is a lot of horses...)
And naturally, every single horse was killed by a nasty American.
I have my doubts but I'd not like to look up the figures, it would depress me.
mikeinie;1358389 wrote: and here is another interesting fact about the US Civil war:
1.5 million horses killed.
(that is a lot of horses...)
And naturally, every single horse was killed by a nasty American.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
YZGI;1358394 wrote: And naturally, every single horse was killed by a nasty American.
I never said that, I am sure it was a mix of Yankees, Confederates and maybe even a few suicides… I don’t know, but what a mess it much have been after it was all over cleaning all that up.
Such destruction..
I never said that, I am sure it was a mix of Yankees, Confederates and maybe even a few suicides… I don’t know, but what a mess it much have been after it was all over cleaning all that up.
Such destruction..
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
mikeinie;1358395 wrote: I never said that, I am sure it was a mix of Yankees, Confederates and maybe even a few suicides… I don’t know, but what a mess it much have been after it was all over cleaning all that up.
Such destruction..
I'm sure they ate a bunch of them.
Such destruction..
I'm sure they ate a bunch of them.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
YZGI;1358397 wrote: I'm sure they ate a bunch of them.
You know what, I bet you are right. The conditions must have been hell
You know what, I bet you are right. The conditions must have been hell
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
My family tree was involved in all three sides of the Civil War: the powerful industrial north with its rich powerful men owning newspapers, the agricultural south resisting the takeover by the aforementioned rich guys, and those that said, "this has nothing to do with me - leave me alone". Okay, so the descriptions of the first two groups varies according to which school system is teaching the history, but the third group remains the same.
Some of my relatives were native Americans. There was pressure from both sides, telling them that they had to choose a side or be wiped out. Most chose to stay out of the conflict since both parties wanted to be oppressors, but still paid.
On one side of my family, two of the four sons fought for the north and two fought for the south. All were killed in the war. What is remembered most in the south is that after the outcome of the war was certain and the south was defeated, Gen Sherman began his systematic terrorist march to destroy all agricultural enterprise in an area of the south that the rich barons particularly wanted to control.
It was a very nasty war whose aftermath is not yet over. The northern schools teach one version of history, while the southern schools teach a quite different version.
Some of my relatives were native Americans. There was pressure from both sides, telling them that they had to choose a side or be wiped out. Most chose to stay out of the conflict since both parties wanted to be oppressors, but still paid.
On one side of my family, two of the four sons fought for the north and two fought for the south. All were killed in the war. What is remembered most in the south is that after the outcome of the war was certain and the south was defeated, Gen Sherman began his systematic terrorist march to destroy all agricultural enterprise in an area of the south that the rich barons particularly wanted to control.
It was a very nasty war whose aftermath is not yet over. The northern schools teach one version of history, while the southern schools teach a quite different version.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
Wandrin;1358401 wrote: My family tree was involved in all three sides of the Civil War: the powerful industrial north with its rich powerful men owning newspapers, the agricultural south resisting the takeover by the aforementioned rich guys, and those that said, "this has nothing to do with me - leave me alone". Okay, so the descriptions of the first two groups varies according to which school system is teaching the history, but the third group remains the same.
Some of my relatives were native Americans. There was pressure from both sides, telling them that they had to choose a side or be wiped out. Most chose to stay out of the conflict since both parties wanted to be oppressors, but still paid.
On one side of my family, two of the four sons fought for the north and two fought for the south. All were killed in the war. What is remembered most in the south is that after the outcome of the war was certain and the south was defeated, Gen Sherman began his systematic terrorist march to destroy all agricultural enterprise in an area of the south that the rich barons particularly wanted to control.
It was a very nasty war whose aftermath is not yet over. The northern schools teach one version of history, while the southern schools teach a quite different version.
That is very interesting, and you know what? Nothing has really changed, only now it is on a global scale. Large barons who are now corporations still rape and pillage people and resources around the world to gain control.
Some of my relatives were native Americans. There was pressure from both sides, telling them that they had to choose a side or be wiped out. Most chose to stay out of the conflict since both parties wanted to be oppressors, but still paid.
On one side of my family, two of the four sons fought for the north and two fought for the south. All were killed in the war. What is remembered most in the south is that after the outcome of the war was certain and the south was defeated, Gen Sherman began his systematic terrorist march to destroy all agricultural enterprise in an area of the south that the rich barons particularly wanted to control.
It was a very nasty war whose aftermath is not yet over. The northern schools teach one version of history, while the southern schools teach a quite different version.
That is very interesting, and you know what? Nothing has really changed, only now it is on a global scale. Large barons who are now corporations still rape and pillage people and resources around the world to gain control.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
I also heard that up until WW1 (I think) the majority of death in war was actually caused by disease and infection. Very likely the current wars have a very low death rate only because the medical advances. Though in cases of brain injury we might count this as a 1/2 casualty at the very least. If a person goes into war, does the same person come back out?
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
yaaarrrgg;1358423 wrote: I also heard that up until WW1 (I think) the majority of death in war was actually caused by disease and infection. Very likely the current wars have a very low death rate only because the medical advances. Though in cases of brain injury we might count this as a 1/2 casualty at the very least. If a person goes into war, does the same person come back out?
Seldom, if ever.
Most carry scars the rest of their lives, and most of the scars are not visible to the casual observer.
Seldom, if ever.
Most carry scars the rest of their lives, and most of the scars are not visible to the casual observer.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
There are some that claim that the Civil War was not about slavery, but just succession. Consider, there were about four million slaves in 1860 worth about FOUR BILLION DOLLARS, more than the combined value of shipping, railroads and much manufacturing.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
yaaarrrgg;1358423 wrote: I also heard that up until WW1 (I think) the majority of death in war was actually caused by disease and infection. Very likely the current wars have a very low death rate only because the medical advances. Though in cases of brain injury we might count this as a 1/2 casualty at the very least. If a person goes into war, does the same person come back out?
The 1918 flu epidemic killed more people than the battlefields of ww1 but ww1 was unique up to that point in that it was the fuirst war where more people were lost in combat than to disease.
I make that total to be 662812. In the battle of the Somme in 1916 By the end of it the British Army had suffered 420,000 casualties including nearly 60,000 on the first day alone. The French lost 200,000 men and the Germans nearly 500,000. France lost 11% of it's pre war population, germany 9%. Might give an inkling why european attitudes to warfare are a bit different from the US. In particular the sometimes perceived american militarism makes people nervous. In the UK you would find it almost impossible to find a family who didn't have somebody kilkled in the armed forces somewhere in ww1 or ww2 in particular.
History is always written by the victors and simplified, it's only decades later those who come later can go back and look "objectively" at what went on. It's always fascinated me about the history of warfare. What would make men walk to within a hundred yards of each other and stand in a line of battle exchanging musket fire or charge uphill against entrenched positions knowing they have a very good chance of getting killed. It wasn't simply that deserting would get you shot. Medeival battles are big gang fights in comparison.
Ask yourself, had you been alive in those days what would you have done? It's really hard to keep away from a 21st century perspective and attitude to things. Out of curiosity what do you think you would have done, assuming not getting involved wasn't an option.
The 1918 flu epidemic killed more people than the battlefields of ww1 but ww1 was unique up to that point in that it was the fuirst war where more people were lost in combat than to disease.
I make that total to be 662812. In the battle of the Somme in 1916 By the end of it the British Army had suffered 420,000 casualties including nearly 60,000 on the first day alone. The French lost 200,000 men and the Germans nearly 500,000. France lost 11% of it's pre war population, germany 9%. Might give an inkling why european attitudes to warfare are a bit different from the US. In particular the sometimes perceived american militarism makes people nervous. In the UK you would find it almost impossible to find a family who didn't have somebody kilkled in the armed forces somewhere in ww1 or ww2 in particular.
History is always written by the victors and simplified, it's only decades later those who come later can go back and look "objectively" at what went on. It's always fascinated me about the history of warfare. What would make men walk to within a hundred yards of each other and stand in a line of battle exchanging musket fire or charge uphill against entrenched positions knowing they have a very good chance of getting killed. It wasn't simply that deserting would get you shot. Medeival battles are big gang fights in comparison.
Ask yourself, had you been alive in those days what would you have done? It's really hard to keep away from a 21st century perspective and attitude to things. Out of curiosity what do you think you would have done, assuming not getting involved wasn't an option.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
May I just throw in a complete irrelevance, on the grounds that it's rarely remembered? During one battle of England's War of the Roses at Towton in Yorkshire, around one in thirty of the entire adult English male population died and you can be pretty certain some of them were your direct ancestors.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. ... Hold no regard for unsupported opinion.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. [Fred Wedlock, "The Folker"]
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. [Fred Wedlock, "The Folker"]
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
This Is Not A Well Known Fact
spot;1358634 wrote: May I just throw in a complete irrelevance, on the grounds that it's rarely remembered? During one battle of England's War of the Roses at Towton in Yorkshire, around one in thirty of the entire adult English male population died and you can be pretty certain some of them were your direct ancestors.
OK, take it elsewhere if you like. English civil war. Which side would you have been on?
OK, take it elsewhere if you like. English civil war. Which side would you have been on?