Why isn't there more education on the war between the states?
358974
Because the Victors (in the this case the Northern States) write the history books.  To that add another 146 years of revisioinist history ~ and the orgins etc get lost, to all but the true history buffs.\n\nBy definition it was NOT a civil war, for it to be a civil war, you would have to have one group trying to gain control of the government/nation from the other.  That is not what the South was attempting to do.  They did NOT want to seize control of the United States Government ~ they wanted to leave it ~ that is to say ~ succeed ~ and form a nation and a governmetn of their own.  \n\nAnoter mis-conception about the War Between The States is that it was fought over slawvery.  It wasn't.  It was fought over different opinoins about the Constitution and the interpetation of the same.  Its was fought over the same arguments that preceeded the actual war by decades, almost back to the foundation of the United States ~ which can be studied in the "Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers"  \n\nIf it had been at the time publically stated on either side, North or South, that the war was being fought over slavery, the average solider in the field on both sides would not have fought, this is evidenced in what historians refer to as "orginal documents" mainly lettters and such that were written by soliders on both sides of the conflict.  \n\nWhat the Northern solider was fighting for was to perserve the Union as it had exsisted prior to the succession of the Southern States, ~ they could care less about the slaves.  What the Southern solider was fighting for was to protect his "country" (The Confederate States of America) his home and family against a "foreign" invasion from another country.  They to, didn't care about the slaves ~ as you're average, typical Southerner didn't own slaves.  A very small percentage of the Southern population even owned a slave, with only about 1/10th of the Southern population owning 50 or more.\n\nWhat is left out of today's modern history books about the so-called "civil war" is that there were more than just a few "freed" Southern blacks, that owned other black slaves. And, they were not relatives ~ they were slaves, and were treated as slaves, and worked as slaves.  This is documented historial fact.
182454
I am a Canadian living in the US and have done substitute teaching here.  I have found through my work and my wife's statements of what she learned, that there is very little world history taught through basic education here.  They do learn a bit about Canada and Mexico, but it seems, that if it doesn't relate directly to the US, it isn't that important.
542857
Two sides with guns\n\nthe two were the North and the South\n\nThe two were at war in what was called the Civil War\nor\nThe War of Norhern Agression\ndepending on where you live...\n\nGeneral concensus says that the reason for the war was the issue of slavery,\nOr\nStates Rights depending on where you live.
174755
Well, war has always existed, it's a mean for states to expand their area of influence and to assume their security.  However, I do not understand why it is still a common occurrence.  Plenty of international mechanisms have been implemented to regulate relations between states which could resolve conflicts before they are carried on physically.  The bad faith some states constantly demonstrate put a strain on these organization (i.e. UN did not support the war in Irak but the US still carried on)\n\nBut the problem lies deeper, it's intolerance that is at the root of most wars.  States today do not carry wars for expansion (most of the time) but rather to impose their view on others that do not have the same lifestyle.  \n\nPart of the solution would be to allow every states to sit on the UN council whether it is considered democratic or not.  It would also be necessary to allow all ethnicity to use their native languages and practice their culture as long as it does not infringe others liberties.  Some regions of the world are not suited to become democracies, at least not yet, and it is something that westerners have to accept.   Maybe the common denominator should be that everyone should accept that the Western ways are not the absolute best and we should stop to impose them on unwilling populations.
32466
because the bush family like war for stupid reasons (oil) thy thing they have the power of god, so they declare war. i belive they should of got their facts right first. it was supposed to be wepons of mass destruction, what did they find, people hiding i holes in the ground that speak a different language. if thats a weapon i would hate to see what bush would of thought if they found a gun (prolly woulda nuked the hell outa them)
290666
Aparently we haven't learned anything, because we are still fighting in a war overseas.( the bible does say there will be rumors and rumors of wars ).
1147099
Not a popular war???\n\nWhy every redneck in the state of Texas is just sitting by the phone with a beer in one hand --- a 12 GA shotgun in the other, singin' "God Bless America" and just waiting for that call from the Government  to go to Iraq, \n\nI keep telling them...this is a bit different ----deer don't shoot back!!!!!\n\noh well,
487798
The battle was also for control of the rich lands in the West. Who would control them, the industrial North or the agrarian South. Further, States' Rights was a huge issue as well. Like most wars, economics was at the root of Civil War.
223621
In the 1840s things started heating up between North and South over general states' rights against the rights of the federal government. The issues adressed generally dealt immediatly with slaves. New states admitted to the Union had to be judged as "slave states" (slaves allowed) or "free states" (slavery prohibited). \n\nBoth sides wanted new states to be whichever side they favored because it would give them more legislative power in the US Congress. This led to bloodshed in many areas, particularly in Kansas, which became known as "Bloody Kansas". \n\nIn 1861, South Carolina seceded from the Union (said they werent part of the US any more) and started seizing federal property, including arms and munitions. \n\nOther states started seceding as well. Soon the seceded states formed what they called the "Confederate States of America", which came to be headed by Jefferson Davis as President. They attacked Fort Sumner in South Carolina and seized the fort, capturing it's inhabitants. This was treason.\n\nAbraham Lincoln (President of the US) immediatly called for 75,000 troops to put down the uprising. Then the Civil War started, eventually involving millions of troops. 600,000 men eventually died in the conflict, and the US was shattered for decades after the war. Remember, this war was fought to unite the Union, NOT for slavery. In fact, slavery was only addressed in 1862 when Lincoln set forth the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing all slaves in the Confederate states. By 1863 there were armed black soldiers in Union armies, serving with distinction. In 1865 the CSA tried to use black troops, but they were destroyed before the plan could be implemented.\n\nIn 1865 the final Confederate forces surrendered (General Johnston was the last to surrender, but with the surrender of General Robert E. Lee the war was pretty much over). Richmond, VA, the Confederate capital, was seized. \n\nLincoln began steps to rebuild and reunite the US. He planned to be kind to the newly reunited South and not punish them for seceding. Before he could start, he was killed by a man named John Wilkes Booth. \n\nThe years following became years of anger and hate for Southerners. The North oppressed and punished Southern insurrection with high taxes and legal oversight. This period became known as Reconstruction, and it really only ended around the 1970s, one century after it started.\n\nHope I helped,\nThe Wise One\n\nP.S. For more information check out http://www.wikipedia.com\nThey are pretty good, but it's better to read books...however that takes more time than I think you want to spend.
1039999
I loved learning about the civil war, i was born in Atlanta and it is still to this day a big part of heritage in the south.  I think its great for ppl to learn to because most ppl believe that the whole war was based on slavery and that is totally not true it was just a minor detail.
491988
no one is still alive from the civil war. in my past life i was there, i was a southrener, hiding behind a stone wall. no, i'm studing it and i am not the kind of person who is interested in social studies/ history.
68337
Americans are taught a very narrow bit of information about the world.  Before the war, how many people knew the difference between Iraq and Iran?
763952
Well, one difference is that the U.S. Civil war began over the issue of State's rights.  The federal government wanted more control over what went on in the states and the southern states believed that the Federal government should have limited power (as outlined in the U.S. Constitution).  Although it is often thought of as a war over slavery, the real issue was whether or not the Feds could control the states.\n\nThe "civil war"  (not really offcially declared at this point) in Iraq has to do with groups of people who flat out don't like each other and don't want to live with each other.
413964
No, there isn't.  The person pulling up Wikipedia should have looked at the last line of the first paragraph.\n\n"It is not an independent state."
133223
Slavery had little to do with the Civil War. The prime issue was balance of power between Federal and State. Slavery happened to be the issue that fell along this divide. Could also throw in north-south economic disparacy.
1173828
Many wars are caused by hatred. Hatred is caused by ignorance.\n\nMy friend, you have a point.\n\nMake our students study history more......Make history more accessible to adults. We need to know our own history and the history of the world. That way we can understand each other and hopefully avoid another big crisis.
1013372
Here are some reasons\n!) Not anough Americans even know about the war and why we are there.\n\n2) The media keeps hitting us up with all these "important" things like gay marriages, burning of the flag, and Brad breaking up with Jen ( like all that important). \n\n3) I dont think the government really wants us to concentrate on the war.  If Americans do, they would have to give us  "more" reasons why we are there (If ya didnt know the reason keeps changing and distractions keep comming like the other one Bush talked about, about going to Mars).