FILM REVIEW: C.S.A. The Confederate States of America

[pryor15]

Borodog,

kindly either discuss the film at hand or take the argument to politics.

[Borodog]

I did discuss the film at hand, didn't start an argument, and I'm done with this thread.

[pryor15]

if you say so, but it was quickly becoming a political thread based largely on semantics

[Overdrive]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who thinks slavery would exist in the South today if the CSA had won the civil war is living in an outright fantasy land. Technological advances in agriculture make the economics of housing and feeding slaves a bad proposition. Today one man operating a machine can do the work that used to require dozens or even hundreds. Also, as the 20th century progressed international pressure (by way of trade embargo or outright hostility) would have definitely sounded slaverys death knell.

I'm glad you enjoyed the movie. But the ideas the film maker is trying to get the viewer to swallow are so outlandish I won't waste my time. But what do I know, this movie will probably win an Oscar next year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Slavery would still exist in the south today if they had won. But instead of working on the farms, the slaves would be working at Wal-Mart and other places. Walmart workers are almost slaves anyway - they can't even afford food, shelter and clothing working there - but anyway, that's what the slaves would be doing today - working at walmart, mcdonalds and other places.

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lee didn't need the British and French...

[/ QUOTE ]

--I'm no war gamer, nor history buff.

But it's tough to agree that any army so out-manned and out-gunned didn't need any help.

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree, and yet Lee consistantly for 3 years outmanuevered and outfought a foe who outnumbered him. It helped that most of the Military Academies were in the South - LOL - and a lot of the Union Generals were borderline incompetent.

- Of course, he was initially just an advisor to the CSA, but was offered full command of the Union Army - but his duty to Virginia was higher.

WITH help, this would probably be a moot discussion - I guess part of me truly believes that had he not lost Stonewall Jackson, that he would have succeeded. I really think it came down to that - post Stonewall, he was really scrambling to make it work, and Gettysburg was his first major engagement after the loss of Stonewall Jackson. In fact, I've read more reasonable and possible alternate histories that suggest had Jackson survived his wound (friendly fire, BTW, in the arm) that he could have easily helped turn the tide at Gettysburg, as he would have wanted those heights the first day and wouldn't have stopped on the battlefield early the first day.

it was his snooping around at night that got him shot in the first place [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

RB

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
...a lot of the Union Generals were borderline incompetent.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a native Northerner (ironically, now living in Mississippi), I appreciate the kindness you show me by your use of the word "borderline". [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]