Were the Confederates as bad as ISIS?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
Yes, but it was still in every way an agrarian, feudal society built on slave labor. The south was extremely vulnerable and just too proud and insulated to see it.

Would agree with this. And they had at least some cities and ports so it is more or less their fault if they did not get at least some factories and other related industrial production. However the climate was also a bonus and that is probably why agriculture was so dominant in Southern America.

Was the North importing much of their food and textiles from the South in the 19th century?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
I read a half-decent book series about that once...

the north and south fought each other to a stand-still and ended as two separate, wary neighbors. the end result was that the Kaiser built nukes and turned Europe into a nuclear wasteland.

I fail to see the problem... :hmm:
 

Markbnj

Elite Member <br>Moderator Emeritus
Moderator
Sep 16, 2005
15,682
14
81
www.markbetz.net
However none of those battles including the Civil War were anything close to what ISIS is and is doing.

I thoroughly disagree :). How is burning farmhouses and killing entire families, hanging people, destroying businesses and infrastructure, etc. not "close to what ISIS is and is doing?"
 

Markbnj

Elite Member <br>Moderator Emeritus
Moderator
Sep 16, 2005
15,682
14
81
www.markbetz.net
Was the North importing much of their food and textiles from the South in the 19th century?

I couldn't say specifically about food. I don't think large-scale production was common at that point, nor was shipping food long distances common. If I recall correctly it was just in the mid 19th or so that cold cars began to be used to bring meat from the midwest into Chicago.

However, one general description of 19th century U.S. trade that sort of works might go like this: cotton, tobacco and goods from the U.S. to Europe; goods from Europe to the Caribbean; rum, sugar, slaves, and goods from the Caribbean to the U.S. Repeat until wealthy.

The only real trade power the south had at the outset of the war was that Britain badly needed their cotton. They tried to leverage that into recognition and assistance, but were unable.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,699
60
91
I thoroughly disagree :). How is burning farmhouses and killing entire families, hanging people, destroying businesses and infrastructure, etc. not "close to what ISIS is and is doing?"

In fact, you could argue Gettysburg is a battle much worse than anything ISIS has delivered to Iraq, as of yet.

One of the Civil War’s most infamous figures, William Quantrill spent most of his early life as a schoolteacher and gambler. Shortly after war broke out, Quantrill assembled a ragtag band of guerrillas and began harassing and killing Union forces and sympathizers along the Missouri-Kansas border. His exploits earned him the rank of captain from the Confederate Army, but he was also labeled an outlaw by the Union, which viewed his unconventional tactics as illegal and even murderous.

Quantrill’s most brutal attack came in 1863 when he led 450 guerrillas on a raid on the Union stronghold of Lawrence, Kansas. In one of the war’s great atrocities, Quantrill and his men burned the town and executed some 200 men.
 

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
However, one general description of 19th century U.S. trade that sort of works might go like this: cotton, tobacco and goods from the U.S. to Europe; goods from Europe to the Caribbean; rum, sugar, slaves, and goods from the Caribbean to the U.S. Repeat until wealthy.

The Triangle Trade was actually from the 17th and 18th centuries. Importing any slave into America was made illegal way back in the late 18th or early 19th century decades earlier than the Kansas troubles or the Civil War.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
I thoroughly disagree :). How is burning farmhouses and killing entire families, hanging people, destroying businesses and infrastructure, etc. not "close to what ISIS is and is doing?"

Scorched earth is sometimes a necessary evil. Burning buildings and businesses is a shitty thing to do but sometimes its the best option at the time.

I wasn't aware of entire families being killed or innocent people being hung. Or are you saying it was confederate (I refuse to capitalize that word) soldiers who were hung and whole families of them were part of the war effort and got killed?
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
In fact, you could argue Gettysburg is a battle much worse than anything ISIS has delivered to Iraq, as of yet.

And the bombing of Hiroshima was worse than anything ISIS has delivered to Iraq.

Your brain is scrambled man.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,699
60
91
Not even close dude, not even close.

The south did some pretty atrocious things. Executions, beheadings, lynchings, hangings, etc. I know they're not the same ideologically, just that it seems many of their battle tactics were just as rough as ISIS's.
 

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
180
106
The raid was less a battle than a mass execution. Two weeks prior to the raid, a Lawrence newspaper boasted, "Lawrence has ready for any emergency over five hundred fighting men...every one of who would like to see [Quantrill's raiders]" .[20] However, a squad of soldiers temporarily stationed in Lawrence had returned to Fort Leavenworth, and due to the surprise, swiftness, and fury of the initial assault, the local militia was unable to assemble and mount a defense. Most of the victims of the raid were unarmed when gunned down.

With revenge a principal motive, Quantrill&#8217;s raiders entered Lawrence with lists of men to be killed and buildings to be burned. Senator James H. Lane was at the top of the list. Lane was a military leader and chief political proponent of the jayhawking raids that had cut a swath of death, plundering, and arson through western Missouri (including the destruction of Osceola) in the early months of the Civil War.[21] Lane escaped death by racing through a cornfield in his nightshirt. John Speer had been put into the newspaper business by Lane, was one of Lane&#8217;s chief political backers, and was also on the list.[22] Speer likewise escaped execution, but two of his sons were killed in the raid. (One of Speer's sons may have been the same John L. Speer that appeared on a list of redlegs previously issued by the Union military.[23]) Speer&#8217;s youngest son, fifteen-year-old Billy, may have been included on the death lists, but he was released by Quantrill&#8217;s men after giving them a false name. The Speer boy later shot one of the raiders during their exit from Lawrence, causing one of the few casualties among Quantrill&#8217;s command while in Lawrence.[24] Charles L. Robinson, first governor of Kansas and a prominent abolitionist, may also have been on the list, though he maintained he was spared because Quantrill respected his efforts to keep peace on the border at the start of the war.[25]

While many of the victims of the raid had been specifically targeted beforehand, executions were more indiscriminate among segments of the raiders, particularly Todd's band that operated in the western part of Lawrence.[26] The men and boys riding with "Bloody Bill" Anderson also accounted for a disproportionate number of the Lawrence dead. The raid devolved into extreme brutality. The survivors reported that one man was shot while in the arms of his pleading wife, that another was killed with a toddler in his arms, that a group of men who had surrendered under assurances of safety were then gunned down, and that a pair of men were bound and forced into a burning building where they died in horrible agony.[27] Another dramatic story was told in a letter written on September 7, 1863 by H.M. Simpson, whose entire family narrowly escaped death by hiding in a nearby cornfield as the massacre raged all around them: "My father was very slow to get into the cornfield. He was so indignant at the ruffians that he was unwilling to retreat before them. My little children were in the field three hours. They seemed to know that if they cried the noise would betray their parents whereabouts, & so they kept as still as mice. The baby was very hungry & I gave her an ear of raw green corn which she ate ravenously."[28]

The youth of some of the victims is often characterized as a particularly reprehensible aspect of the raid.[29] Bobbie Martin is generally cited as being the youngest victim; some histories of the raid state he was twelve years old,[30] while others state he was fourteen.[31] Most accounts state he was wearing a Union soldier uniform or clothing made from his father&#8217;s uniform; some state he was carrying a musket and cartridges.[32] (For perspective on the age of participants in the conflict, it has been estimated that about 800,000 Union soldiers were seventeen years of age or younger, with about 100,000 of those being fifteen or younger.[33]) Most of Quantrill&#8217;s guerrilla fighters were teenagers. One of the youngest was Riley Crawford, who was thirteen when brought by his mother to Quantrill after her husband was shot and her home burned by Union soldiers.[34]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Massacre

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Talking with some friends about the confederate flag issue, and after thinking about it, I started drawing quite a few parallels with ISIS and the Confederate Army in their tactics and reasoning for starting a war.

One person (a white guy who's a prison guard, fyi) said this in response to my assertion that ISIS and the confederacy had some similarities.

"The Confederates were succeeding from an established country. They wore uniforms, they had battles. Were there atrocities? Sure there were. It was war time. ISIS is killing a race of people. They will kill anyone who does follow their point of view. As far as rather being beheaded, anyone of the methods that you suggested can be a slow and painful death. It is my wish that no one would ever have to chose any of these."

Now, I don't pretend to be an expert in American history but roughly 600,000 Americans died in the US civil war, started because a bunch of racist old white men didn't want to give up slavery, thought they were a supreme people, were incredibly racist, etc. This group of people attempted to secede and start their own country, and fought a bloody, terrible war to get it.

Sounds similar to ISIS, imho. They're attempting to secede from Iraq and establish their own state where they can have slaves and be psychotic racist extremists.

Unless of course it was ok for the confederates to start a war because of racism, and it's bad for ISIS to do it because it's about religion?

I'm confused. The confederacy was a really bad people that almost split American in half with bloody war. ISIS is doing the same damn thing, right? I totally agree that they are not exactly similar.

Thoughts?


Moved from OT.

Perknose
Forum Director



this is what passes for education today. not worth a comment. :rolleyes:
 

MetalMat

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2004
9,687
36
91
The south did some pretty atrocious things. Executions, beheadings, lynchings, hangings, etc. I know they're not the same ideologically, just that it seems many of their battle tactics were just as rough as ISIS's.

So did many many many other societies in history. During WW2 Japan committed a crazy amount of war atrocities and used brutal tactics but to compare them to ISIS would be short minded.
 

Phoenix86

Lifer
May 21, 2003
14,644
10
81
Ok. Do you have anything constructive to add? Or do you just need this as a punching bag?

Constructive to add? To you, no, because...
The confederacy was a really bad people that almost split American in half with bloody war. ISIS is doing the same damn thing, right?

You already formed your opinion. Is there a point in carrying on a discussion about it? Based on your post history, not really.

Now if you want to rub two brain cells together and have a discussion, don't start by forming baseless opinions.

To anyone else? No. Because most people aren't stupid enough to compare the two, which is exactly what everyone in the thread is saying.
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,684
5,228
136
Let's see....ISIS is religiously motivated, the Confederacy used religion/the Bible as their basis for slavery, so I guess in using religion for twisted ends, sure.
 

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
My education in history is pretty limited and it was from the 90's. I only cared about music and computers back then.

Well, then this would be a good place to start:

http://www.amazon.com/Impending-Crisis-1848-1861-David-Potter/dp/0061319295
 

cabri

Diamond Member
Nov 3, 2012
3,616
1
81
And what is the difference between what Sherman did and what ISIS is doing? :confused:
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,884
10,204
136
Let's see....ISIS is religiously motivated, the Confederacy used religion/the Bible as their basis for slavery, so I guess in using religion for twisted ends, sure.

Religious moral grounds is the reason the North opposed slavery.
Economic grounds is the reason the South required slavery.

Do not apply today's politics to the world 150+ years ago.