Can anyone explain the Civil War Battle of Fredericksburg?
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.
249858
The Second Battle of Bull Run or the Second Battle of Manassas was waged between August 28 and August 30, 1862, as part of the American Civil War.\n\nIt was the final battle of Robert E. Lee's offensive against the north. The battle against Northern General John Pope was a victory but the Northern Army was relatively intact as compared to the first battle. Lee fought the battle to stop Pope's army joining George McLellan's army as it would have a considerable numerical advantage over his own. As a result, Lee was able to cross the Potomac River on the way to Antietam.
776406
You will find all your answers or links to your answers here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War - now do your homework yourself please.\n\nGood Luck!!!
111808
One of the largest battles ever to take place on US soil in Gettysburg PA during July 1,2,3 1863. This battle took place during the civil war and is considered the turning point of the civil war with respect to the Union forces under General Meade finally winning a large engagement and putting the Union on track to ultimately defeat the Confederate forces under Gen. Lee's command. You should go online and read about this impressive battle as it made many normal soldiers eternally famous throughout the anals of history (Joshua Chamberlain from Maine being one of them) By the way Allstar's answer below is partially correct. Lincoln's Gettysburg address was written and presented several months after the Battle of Gettysburgh and it was in fact the battle that happened first which is why Lincoln went there. The battle just happened to occur at Gettysburg as this is where the two large meandering armies happened to "bump into each other".
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.
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
845921
http://www.rickard.karoo.net/articles/battles_trenton.html
586248
Check this for all the info you need....\n\n\nhttp://www.civilwarhome.com/antietam.htm
999960
I would believe that the trogan war was a great battle, as far as original battle strategies. It depends on what you mean but "the greatest military battle." because there has been battle faught over time that you would even consider a battle. I believe that the best battle are faught before you even got to physical war. So you will not see these battles in history books.\n\nSun Tzu in the art of war says "Therefore, to gain a hundred victories in a hundred battles is not the highest excellence; to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is the highest of excellence. \n\nTherefore, the best warfare strategy is to attack the enemy's plans, next is to attack alliances, next is to attack the army, and the worst is to attack a walled city. ? \n\nLaying siege to a city is only done when other options are not available.\n\nIf you like to see more of this check this out . \nhttp://www.sonshi.com/index.html
580764
a) A larger army \n\nBecause the people in the South were united to defend their land from an invader. They didnt attack they just defended.
139255
Union:  at first, Winfield Scott led the forces, but "old fuss and feathers" was too old for the job...\nLincoln tried McClellan (and many others!!) but McClellan was nicknamed "tardy" for a reason--he didn't win decisively enough or pursue the Confederates\nUltimately, Lincoln gave the honors to Ulysses Hiram Simpson Grant\nfor the Confederacy---while there were many great generals (Johnston, for example) it was Robert E Lee who commanded (no pun intended) the greatest respect...and the one who surrendered for the CSA in April of 1865
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.
137018
The Battle of the Alamo was a 19th Century battle between the Republic of Mexico and the rebel Texan forces during the Texas Revolution. It took place at the Alamo mission in San Antonio, Texas (then known as "San Antonio de Béxar") in February and March of 1836. The 13-day siege ended on March 6 with the capture of the mission and the death of nearly all the Texian defenders, except for a few slaves, women and children. Despite the loss, the 13-day holdout allowed Sam Houston to gather troops and supplies for his later successful battle at San Jacinto.\n\nIt is important to note that the defenders of the Alamo, as with all of the early battles in the Texas Revolution, were technically fighting for restoration of the previous Mexican Constitution of 1824 and not necessarily for actual independence from Mexico. It is highly unlikely that any of the defenders were even aware that independence had been formally declared before the end of the battle.
993641
Logically, a vast majority of the later casualties on both sides can be directly attributed to McClellan's reluctance to fight early on. He could have dealt a devastating, and potentially war ending, blow to the confederates when their army was stranded out on the peninsula, however he wanted to wait, and allowed them to escape. \n\nLee was the best man in the war, and if he had been a Union General, the war wouldn't have been much more than police action LOL.
501467
The battle was over before it began.  Jesus Christ was slain before the foundation of the world.  God's purposes have all been accomplished. But time as we perceive it is playing it out.   \n\nGod is in all of time all at once.  There is no battle, it's already over.
844334
"Godoompah" & "Starry Eyes" are correct.  The Civil War was an unmitigated disaster for both sides.  If that doesn't make sense to you; if you really can't understand how both sides could lose, then just try this simple three-step process....\n\n1) Open your eyes and read the deathtoll:\n    \n    120,000 killed in action \n    240,000 died of other causes \n  ~360,000 TOTAL Union dead and/or missing \n\n     95,000 killed in action \n   165,000 died of other causes \n ~260,000 TOTAL Confederate dead and/or missing \n\n  ~620,000 Union and Confederate soldiers \n   UNKNOWN total Northern and Southern civilian\n   casualties \n  \n2) Open your mind and think about it....\n\n3) Open your heart and feel about it....\n\nIf you really do this, neither the Civil War nor any of the other Overklass-generated orgies of mass murder will ever look the same again.....\n\nBefore some damn fool says so, I'm not a pacifist, a communist, or even a liberal ; I'm just a middle-aged guy who lived long enough to see through some of the crap our Beloved Leaders keep throwing at us to keep us all permanently mind-f***ed....\n\nNimadan
977454
Welll, this site offers info about this battle, as well as an eyewitness account by an officer on George Washington's staff.  Scroll halfway down the page for the eyewitness account.\n\nhttp://theamericanrevolution.org/battles/bat_tren.asp\n\nAlso, the following site describes the lives of the soldiers and cites entries in their personal diaries about their conditions and view of the war:\n\nhttp://www.americanrevolution.org/soldier10.html