If the south had taken DC New York Boston an won totaly would it be one nation?
483214
Well considering that didnt happen no one can tell you for sure what the world would be like today.\nThey can guess or even imagine...but how are they to know for sure.\n\nI bet back then if you told people what the world would be like today you would have been tarred and feathered!
426718
Would you have stayed in the south if you were a slave?  No.  They were looking for jobs and racial tolerance by going north.
214016
i went to school in the north and the south but i can tell you this most ppl do not really know what they were fighting over they fought for pride and sence of duty. slavery was an issue and in todays opinion the only one that matters or that was worth all the loss of life. the average person did not own slaves. it was about polics and trade. i have heard ppl from the south tout that they lost because they were out numberd and more yankees died the rebs. this is true however the south in most battles stood their ground as the north charged the battle field leaving them vulnerable during the attack
629609
The Confederacy (Virgina) bordered DC across the Potomac, so it had to be defended from attack. Abe Lincoln went to observe the fighting, and became the only sitting President to come under enemy fire.
423761
The US Constitution mandates that the seat of the Government be its own idependant entity, not part of any state.  The land that is DC now used to be part of Maryland and part of Virginia. One big chunk of it was actually given back to Virginia--- that is now Arlington county and part of Alexandria--- in the mid-1800's for various reasons and most of what is now DC actually used to be part of Maryland.
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.
7293
England, France and Spain colonize N. America.  England's colonies do the best, and they rebel and form their own country (USA) and slowly take over the rest of the country.  During this time, the south decides they don't like the national govt. and rebel.  The south loses and the country is unified.  WWI and WWII, now the US is a superpower.  The USSR collapses and the US is the most powerful nation in the world.  Terrorists fly planes into Trade Towers/Pentagon and then we invade Afghanistan and Iraq.  To be cont...\n\nEach state gets the number of electors equal to the number of senators and represenatives combined.  All electors vote for whoever the popular vote of the state chose.  Whichever candidate gets the majority of the electoral votes, wins.\n\nThere are three branches.  The executive (prez.), legislative (congress with two houses), and judicial (courts).  They each have power over the others in some way (balance of power) so that neither can control the nation by itself.
1092100
No. The founders were concerned about divided loyalty between their nation of origin and the US.
166559
No, it would be considered either a Midwest state or a Great Plains state. Nothing like the south at all.
575999
Yes it was terrorism at the time.\nBut you don't judge the winners.\nIf the terrorists win and form their own Country they stopp being terrorists.\nSo consider this, if American Revolution would have failed, George Washington would be known as a terrorist.
928460
No, it was not viable then nor is it now.  The overarching point of the Civil War was whether a state could decide not to do something, and if it didn't like what the rest of the Union was doing, whether it could just stop being in the Union.  The answer was no.  That was not the point of our constitutional democracy (as opposed to the system under the Articles of Confederation, where the states were basically autonomous units.)  \n\nOn a personal note, would I myself be happier if, perhaps, Alabama, South Carolina, and Louisiana seceeded from the Union?  Perhaps.  Would the North have been economically better off if we had let the South go? Perhaps (save Texas and its oil, Florida and its tourism, and a few other resources). But we're all in this together.  The North would not have tackled the racial issues that sparked the civil war until much, much later.  The South probably would have imploded due to their lack of non-slave economy and innovation.  Certainly today a number of states could function as (much) less powerful independent states -- if Georgia (the former soviet republic) can do it, then Georgia (the state) can do it.  But once again, that's not the point.  America is great because of its bountiful natural resources and its diversity.  Once we fall into the trap of the Yugoslavias, the Iraqs, the "-stan" countries and fractionalize ourselves based on religion, poltiical belief, geography, etc., we become much much weaker.  The whole truly is greater than the sum of the parts in America, and we must keep it that way.
1086971
I wouldn't say America was undefeated.  I would say we have a right to protect ourselves from outside colonists.
149586
There is a new movie out right now about this: CSA.  It is a documentary about life in the US after the South wins, and defeats the North, so that the whole country is run by the South (rather than having two separate countries, a different scenario of a Southern victory.)\n\nThe premise of the movie is that the differences would be surprisingly small.\n\nIt is hard to know how things would be now.  Perhaps of the CSA had been a separate country, it would have faced an eventual and successful slave revolt (funded and supported by the remains of the Republican party in the North) and the CSA would be known as New Uhuru, or something.
50691
Only a part of it. England controls Northern Ireland, while the South is what we know as the Republic of Ireland.
880066
Yorktown\nAmerican Revolution, 1781\n\nThe Battle of Yorktown was the climax of the American Revolution and directly led to the independence of the United States of America. While others may have been larger and more dramatic, no battle in history has been more influential. From the days following their victory at Yorktown, Americans have steadily gained power and influence up to their present role as the world's most prosperous nation and the only military superpower.\n\nThe idea that a group of poorly armed, loosely organized colonists would have the audacity to challenge the massive, experienced army and navy of their rulers seemed impossible when the revolution's first shots rang out at Lexington and Concord in 1775. The rebels' chances of success seemed even more remote when the American colonies formally declared their independence from Great Britain on July 4, 1776.\n\nDespite the huge imbalance of power, the Americans understood that time was on their side. As long as George Washington and his army remained in the field, the newly declared republic survived. Washington did not have to defeat the British; he simply had to avoid having the British defeat him. The longer the war lasted, the greater the odds that the British would become involved in wars that threatened their own islands and that the British public would tire of the war and its costs.\n\nDuring the first year of the war, Washington had lost a series of battles around New York but had withdrawn the bulk of his army to fight another day. Many British commanders had unintentionally aided the American effort with their military ineptness and their belief that the rebels would diplomatically end their revolt.\n\nParticipants on both sides, as well as observers around the world, had begun to take the possibility of American independence seriously only with their victory at Saratoga in October 1777. The poorly executed plan by the British to divide New England from the southern colonies by occupying New York's Hudson River Valley had resulted not only in the surrender of nearly six thousand British soldiers but also in the recognition of the United States as an independent nation by France. The American victory at Saratoga and the entrance of the French into the war also drew Spain and the Netherlands into the fight against England.\n\nBy 1778, neither the British nor the Americans could gain the upper hand, as the war in the northern colonies had come to a stalemate. The British continued to occupy New York and Boston, but they were too weak to crush the rebel army. Washington similarly lacked the strength to attack the British fortresses.\n\nIn late 1778, British commander General Henry Clinton used his superior sea mobility to transfer much of his army under Lord Charles Cornwallis to the southern colonies, where they occupied Savannah and then Charleston the following year. Clinton's plan was for Cornwallis to neutralize the southern colonies, which would cut off supplies to Washington and isolate his army.\n\nWashington countered by dispatching Nathanael Greene, one of his ablest generals, to command the American troops in the South. From 1779 to 1781, Greene and other American commanders fought a guerrilla-like campaign of hit-and-run maneuvers that depleted and exhausted the British. In the spring of 1781, Cornwallis marched into North Carolina and then into Yorktown on the Virginia peninsula flanked by the York and James Rivers. Although his army outnumbered the Americans two to one, Cornwallis fortified the small town and waited for additional men and supplies to arrive by ship.\n\nMeanwhile, more than seven thousand French infantrymen, commanded by Jean Baptiste de Rochambeau, joined Washington's army outside New York, and a French fleet led by Admiral Paul de Grasse waited in the Caribbean, preparing to sail northward. Washington wanted de Grasse to blockade New York while the combined American-French armies attacked Clinton&#39
552661
South half of the United States of America there was a lot of slavery in New York.
601161
There has only been one US capital city. There were none before Washington D.C. Before that, Congress worked in buildings in various cities, none of which were the capital.