NW Monk-These guys had balls of steel!😃Just watching a reenactment of this battle makes me truly appreciate the incredible fortitude and skill of the Union army.☺️
The thousands of re-enactors came with their own equipment (horses, cannon, rifles, ordnance, etc), uniforms (completely accurate), paid their own way, slept on the field in Civil War tents, ate Civil War food, JUST to be in the movie. It cost the production company NOTHING. Well, I guess they did get fed lunch from craft services.
Oddly enough the start of Gettysburg was an accident. A Confederate unit entered the town from the north because they heard there were shoes there, something they badly needed, a small union force entered from the south. Nether side knew the other was in the area.
@@spvillano negative, cruisers where the majority of the fire support on the beaches and the bunkers themselves were taken by troops, my grandfather was there in the 3rd wave.
@@FisforFenton growing up with a lot of native family, we loved that movie. gave way for the uniquely american dialects of the natives to have its place in WW2. such a good movie
@@markhohenbrink5230 Technically not submarines, the first successful submarine yes, however, as far back as the 1770's, experimental submarines existed.
@Wes Takahashi ...and a lot of southerners blamed Pickett in order to spare Lee the blame for the biggest boner of his military career...Lee had been full of himself at that point.
I feel bad for the man at that moment. To lose so many men and not achieve the objective. This is why history is important. To recognize when a past mistake presents itself again and to find a better different way and avoid that mistake.
Director: we need more money so we can cgi more cannons in the move. Some official with a clipboard: sir the unpaid actors brought their own. Democracy intensifies
I live just outside of Gettysburg, it's strange to walk around the town and realize just how many people where killed where you are standing. Cemetery hill is very beautiful. But it also is very eerie to stand at.
Zachary Cline Hey nice! I live in Waynesboro just 30 min of Gettysburg and visit Gettysburg at least once a week. In between Gettysburg and Waynesboro (Washington township) was where the battle of Monterey Pass took place
At Gettysburg there is a whole lot of ghost sightings and I really wanna go to Gettysburg’s because well ghosts, standing where thousands of men died etc etc
@@moonmicrowave9876 They have a lot of ghost tours and stuff in Gettysburg, too. I think it's supposed to be the most haunted place in America. Even haunted hotels you can stay in (of course).
Ive been going there since I was a little kid. The entire population of the town is like 7000 today so it really puts it into perspective. I've been there at night quite a few times and i can assure you if you don't believe in ghosts I can make you a believer
The scene there with the band with the little boy playing the drum, he was the last surviving person from the battle. He died in like 1950. He had been 16 at the time of the battle.
It's a powerful scene in the movie, but not the first time that had happened. At Antietam the previous September Lee asked Gen. Hood where his division was. "Dead on the field," came the reply.
Hi Mommy The puckle gun is more of a mini flintlock cannon revolver mix. Shooting far bigger rounds at a fire rate based on how fast they could light the next wick. I’m just saying the Gatling was the first automatic version of the mini gun.
James Puckle invented the puckle gun in 1718, but practical and economical repeaters were produced and used by the north before the end of the war, even the Monitor and the Merrimack weren't the first ironclads (arguably) but this was the first time these sorts of innovations were employed en mass and saw large scale battlefield use.
@@Fenris77 I didn't know that actually. I was quoting a Ken Burns documentary with that "obsolete" line I threw out there. I did do a bit of reading and they seem to be a bit more rudimentary in that they were still broadsides and masted ships but they were "clad with iron". I know the Monitor had that interesting turret design on it which seemed to be fairly innovative.
@@Synthetic-Rabbit I’m not sure if the Entire English navy would have become obsolete, bot iron clads had big flaws, and surly the first and second rate ships of the Royal Navy would have been able to deal a good amount of damage to the iron clads. Though this would probably never happen as both iron clads were kind of coastal, not really suited for the open oceans
@@DerCharacter I know it's Wikipedia, which has its flaws but there's a good history of them there and it goes over the advent of seafaring ironclads. I'm no expert but I did read through it before making my previous post in this thread.
I’ve been to Gettysburg several times. And I can assure you there is no way to walk that battlefield and not feel a sense of overwhelming gratitude for the men who died there. It’s humbling to say the least.
I highly recommend watching this if you can just for the musical score. That and much of what you see are reenactors, some of whom brought their own canons. Most of whom never got paid except maybe food while there on set. Thousands of people who helped make this movie possible. Picketts charge with those sweeping shots and that music blaring in the background before fading away right before the devastation sends chills down my spine every time.
@@thehowlinggamer5784 Oh yeah, I just trust that any Civil War history buff will have heard of it if not seen it and understand and appreciate it. I didn't really think that needed explaining. But yeah it is mini series. A good one though. I quite enjoy it.
This one of my favorite periods in history to learn about. Also, there was something around 30 million or so at the time. So for not just 1 side but both sides to draw on 100,000 men or better during just about any point in the war, is decidedly significant. 1 more fact is that though the uniforms were more, well for the lack of a better word, uniform by this point, it was not uncommon for blue to be on both sides of the war, which is what contributed to the mass confusion in early battles,namely the first battle of Manassass.
2:27 I mean, you gotta remember that our Civil War, even though it was fought pretty recently in history, still occurred less than a century after our country won its independence. Also, yes, the Civil War saw the invention of the ironclads, the first concepts of what would become the modern naval ships. The USS Monitor on the Union side was built from scratch, and was a low-profile iron ship (meaning its deck was just above the waterline) which made hitting it nearly impossible. On the Confederate side, you had the CSS Virginia, which was retrofitted from the USS Merrimack (a steam frigate that already had an engine to support the design) by cutting down to its lower hull and adding iron decking above, basically looking like a floating pill box. Both ships engaged at the Battle of Hampton Roads and... well, it was a stalemate. The Virginia was unable to hit the Monitor save for a strike on her pilothouse, and the Monitor was unable to penetrate the armor of the Virginia.
The US Civil War did not see the invention of ironclads. Britain and France already had bigger ones by the time the war started. It did however see the first combat between ironclads and also the first turreted ironclad in combat.
31:02 The American Revolution was about 80 years before the American Civil War, but the interesting thing about it was that the Southern states are the ones that were loyal to the British during the American Revolution.
The Corps from Maine: Chamberlaine had less than 400 men, including Officers. He was faced with several thousand Confederates. He was also one of the last Units from Maine, most of the others had been wiped out by this point of the war and had amalgamated into other units. He charged with next to no ammunition left and heavy casualties. He knew if he didn't hold that line, that the Confederates would win the battle if not the war. Chamberlaine was a school teacher, not a professional soldier and his courage his men's is something I still marvel at today.
Confederate were out manned the whole war........so why is this any more important than the southern sacrifice? Also the south and Mid west are still war fighters. Along with the few brave souls left from the north east and west coast. Patriotism never died, it just switched the flag it fights under. Down here the war of northern aggression is never forgotten. It's just forgiven. However the new gun push is about to ignite a powder keg.
@@zaneriley316 I did a lot of research on this topic and agree, it was mostly a move to solidify federal power over state's rights. Slavery and the like would of naturally run it's course and been a dissolved endeavor. The industrialization of the North and the trade embargoes and hyperinflation imposed on the south was both unnecessary and cruel.
@@CDC39A You are correct except the issue of slavery will forever overpower the discussion. So long as the Confederacy defended the institution of slavery there is ZERO chance of them claiming the moral high ground in the fight. I say that as someone who lived in the south and agrees with much of the Confederacy's cause. I also bear zero ill will to those brave men of the south who were defending their homes from what they saw as an invasion. Slavery trumps state's rights... I wish the South had been able to abolish slavery and THEN push for independence.
@@kennethfharkin and maybe they would have, given the lack of Northern Aggression, it may have provided time to reform in other ways. Unfortunately, we will never know. It would be neat to see a series on a reverse world.
Chamberlain was seriously injured during the siege of Petersburg, Va. His injuries were so damaging they thought he would die. To commemorate his military service he was promoted, while still on his "death bed" to Brig. General. Then...HE RECOVERED! Unfortunately that injury left him in pain the rest of his life. It never really healed.
When first watching the movie Gettysburg, I admired that so much attention to detail and research went into the uniforms and dialects used by the actors. Lee spoke like a Virginian, Hood spoke like a Texan, Chamberlain spoke like he was from Maine, and so on. It really added a lot to the movie for me.
Hood SHOULD have sounded like a Kentuckian. He was born and raised in Kentucky, spent a few years stationed in Texas with the 2nd Cavalry, and only renounced his Kentucky citizenship and adopted Texas as his new home state after the Civil War began.
Outside of the main actors the regular soldiers are civil war reenactors. We supply our own uniforms and equipment. Most men are also descendants of men that were there. We represent the same regiments of our ancestors and know the battle formations well.
Mainer here. Joshua Chamberlain is an absolute legend and the greatest man from our small and often forgotten state. Visited Gettysburg as a young kid and he's been a hero of mine since I was 9ish. He was wounded 6 times, had six horses shot out from under him, basically on his death bed, sighted for bravery 4 times and awarded the medal of honor. Check out his history, a couple of his wounds were pretty wild and lucky. He was greatly respected by leaders from both sides and an absolute gentleman to boot.
The first time I went in 94, I had probably seen the movie a good 10 times the prior year and was just in awe of the battlefield. I made sure to visit that epic spot the 20th Maine saved the federal left flank with the amazing BAYONEEEET charge.
Part of it was how the actor made that line real. The histrionical impact and what happened may have contributed but the man who played him, he made you feel like he really watched his men die and is devastated by it.
Hello from Little Rock Arkansas, U.S.A.. I come from a long line of military personnel, mainly Marines. I came across this video thought I'd check it out. It's great to see someone from another country watch something like this and enjoy it. Thank You for being interested in our history. And all your output. Respect to you. Stay healthy and safe. Happy Holidays.
The book the movie is based on is The Killer Angels. It is one of my favorites and won the Pulitzer Prize. Very worth the read. Love the channel. Keep rolling.
@@indy_go_blue6048 What Romance? It didn't seem forced, and it is nearly 100% accurate, I'd say it actually has the most realistic romance in war movies, but that's just my opinion.
Zulu was a lesson in not taking spears to a gunfight. LOL There is a similar archaeological discovery in Sudan where large numbers of 12,000 year old sub-Saharan Negro skeletons were found with stone arrowheads embedded in the bones. Not far away they found Caucasian type skeletons buried with evidence that they died from blunt force trauma. Since there were many more Negro skeletons were found, it is assumed that they took sticks and clubs to an arrow fight. Yes, they were Eurasians in North Africa at least 40,000 years ago. The Negro isn't the oldest race since the oldest skeleton is only 13,000 years old.
"No Hollywood movie talks about the communications guy" There is a movie called "Codetalkers" about the Navajo communications men who served the US during World War II in the Pacific. These native Americans spoke in a coded version of their native language which was virtually unknown and served as a cipher that the Japanese could not break. It was so important that each Codetalker was assigned a partner to defend him and, if necessary, to ensure that he did not fall into Japanese hands alive.
Glad to see people actually liked that movie, it's one of those rare gems that seems to get buried under the other WWII movies, probably because Nazis weren't involved.
FUN FACT!!! I’m currently taking US history II with a pretty awesome professor, last fall I took US history I with him. He isn’t very old, but he’s an extreme history buff. Our community college hosts a “Roundtable meeting” where we as his students can go for extra credit. A lot of the members of the Roundtable were actually in the film! Not sure if my professor was, but he showed us the battle clip in class!
robin Guardabascio In my re-enactment group our commanding officer was an extra in Gettysburg and an extra in Saving Private Ryan. He told us that there was an overhead shot of the dead on the beach, so he tried to lay in an unnatural position so he could identify himself later. Turns out 30 other guys had the same idea, he’s watched the film 100 times and he still can’t identify himself
The tactics were evolving. The official manual for US armies at the time was written based on Napoleonic wars in which the majority of muskets and cannon were smoothbore and generally not that accurate. In the 50 years between Napoleon's time and the Civil War, nearly all muskets and a lot of artillery became rifled and much more accurate, but the tactics weren't changed until savvy commanders began to catch on. Longstreet was getting smart by Gettysburg but tradition and training still favored frontal assaults. Also, for the record, Chamberlain would eventually win the Medal of Honor for his tactics on Little Round Top.
" the majority of muskets and cannon were smoothbore and generally not that accurate." Their pretty damned accurate when you're shooting at targets within their effective range using the proper ball size. "In the 50 years between Napoleon's time and the Civil War, nearly all muskets and a lot of artillery became rifled" Most of the firearms used in the American Civil War, were smoothbore. The Springfield Model 1842 smoothbore was the more commonly seen musket on the battlefield, while the Springfield Model 1861 rifled musket being the latest and greatest in 1861 was reserved for specialist Federal "rifle companies" while the bulk of the Union Army was comprised of State Militias like the 54th Mass. Volunteer Infantry or the 14th Missouri Volunteer Cavalry who's need for such rifles was... superseded by aforementioned rifle companies. Same situation for the Confederates.
"I salute you, general who is dead by now!" LMAO!!! Dude, I just stumbled upon your channel, but this is such great commentary! Consider me subscribed!
Ian Malcolm Both sides are corrupt. If you really care about the country stop pointing fingers and picking one side and look at who’s best for the country. Picking a democrat or a republican just because they are part of that party isn’t what will improve the country, it’s a tactic used to divide the people so it’s easier to distract us. You’re buying into that with your statement. People are already talking about another civil war over stupid politics because they refuse to see the damage both parties are doing to the country. Killing fellow Americans will never solve the problems we face and anyone who thinks that isn’t a true American.
When you mentioned the iron ships used in the war and that you had only thought ships were made of wood back then, you'd pretty much be correct. The first two fully-iron ships, called Ironclads, were one of a kind at that time. The Union had one(The Monitor), and the Confederacy had one (the Merrimack). The ships actually came into combat with each other, and neither could score a good hit on the other because of their armor!
@@satsunada The Turtle was built in the American Revolution, but it failed to do damage. The Hunley was the first submarine to sink an opponent, but was also lost.
The Irony is that even though it was using some very advanced weapons for the times, the tactics hadn't changed as much since the Napoleonic war honestly.
@@donl5814 this isn't true at all, though it is an often repeated myth that is propagated by History Channel shows and documentaries. The truth is that the rifled musket, in practice, was no more deadly on the battlefield than the musket. There are many reasons for this. The most pressing is that a weapon is only as accurate as its user. North and South alike could not afford to supply soldiers with much ammunition for live fire drills and the vast majority of live fire drills was done in volleys so individual marksmanship could rarely be practiced. Other factors include the massive amount of smoke produced by these weapons. Your target is firing at you generating their own smoke screen and you are producing smoke in front of your own line. Many journal account describe only seeing dull flashes through smoke as any indicator where the enemy was. The parabolic flight pattern of minie balls makes aiming more difficult, judging range to the target is not easy without practice, and due to the volume of fire as well as the smoke, it would be almost impossible to know whether the shot you just fired hit a target so you would not know how to adjust your fire on follow up shots. The proof of all of this is that there are many anecdotes of regiments exhausting all of their ammunition in fire fights and battles that lasted all day. By modern logic, if the rifled musket were as devastating as claimed, casualties in these battles should have been horrendous with whole regiments destroyed in a matter of minutes. However, it is almost impossible to find any examples of this happening. There are a few, but the circumstances of those few incidents are that the firing occurred at EXTREMELY close range where missing would likely be more difficult than hitting, ie. the cornfield at Antietam, or Iverson's brigade at Gettysburg. The other proof is that if you examine the overall casualty % suffered by both the armies and individual units, the numbers very closely mirror the battles of the Napoleonic wars. In the confused conditions of a real battlefield, what truly makes a difference is not accuracy of fire, but volume of fire. Repeating rifles and machineguns are what made Napoleonic tactics obsolete, not the rifling of the small arms.
@@cycleplays2395 Yadda yadda yadda "the weapon is is only as good as the man" is all you needed to say. Still, you're incorrect. The adaptation of the minne ball over the musket ball made the weapon more accurate, even if the holes created were smaller. You'd be lucky to hit someone with a musket(if you were aiming at him, which also wasn't that common), but if you hit it was like a small cannon. The minne ball was more like a bullet, conical, causing less immediate damage, but it was more accurate. Not to mention, at this time they had repeater rifles and revolvers, much quicker to fire than muskets. Hell, even the founders knew about repeater, proto-semiauto guns available at the time. They were offered the opportunity to invest in such a gun, but they didn't have the cash.
Well... In US Army, yes. There were European Countries changed already or began to develop new doctrines. Napoleonic Tactics became in the 1840s, 1850s, less meaning; In the Italian War of Independence and Austro-Prussian War, it already showed in their doctrine, manuals and so on that they already began using loose formations, while the Union and Confederate Army stuck on the early 19th century tactics with little changes. Sure there were Close Order formations.
Artur, I am a US Army Veteran of 13 years. I extend a thanks for your service as an Ally from America. I find it highly respectful that you have decided to learn about our Civil War. Perhaps its since we were both Soldier's that take an interest in Military Wars from the past. I would like to see you talk about some Military history from Estonia, maybe from WW2 or earlier. Maybe you could do a video from a battle ground if you are well versed on the battle?
Hey, Artur. Just came across your channel and appreciate your interest in American military technology. Your being a soldier yourself and your good natured enthusiasm should continue getting plenty of interest.
Yeah. In fact there's a number of times towards the end of the war when he was leading the troops to a perceived victory, the troops were chanting "Lee to the rear!" Because they didn't want to see him hurt or killed. Also, if the movie Glory is accurate in this area, it was something around 3 times a minute.
Actually in both cases Lee had ordered counterattacks to save a desperate situation. And both times it worked. And yes in both cases the soldiers themselves ordered Lee to the rear.
@@mrspeigle1 they likely had a breach loader if they manage 6 shots a minute. I've used muskets, and 3 a minute is about the best that can be achieved.
@@ImperialGuard322nd I am referring to crack troops, and these are crack troops from the time period in question. What a modern person can achieve as a hobbyist even an enthusiastic one is likely substantially below a professional who grew up with the implements in question using them from a young age, before being handed off to a veteran drill instructor and worked to exhaustion for several months. Not sure how much time you've spent practicing.
My ancestor died in that battle along with almost 90% of his unit, the 44th Alabama Volunteer Infantry. The Confederate States gave a lot in the Gettysburg campaign, so did my own family for the south.
I hated that the south had slavery to begin with. But I respact those who died at Gettysburg, Fedralist, and Confederate alike. Respect to your ancestor, and all those who died at Gettysburg.
The Confederacy was willing to make any sacrifice to secure its freedom, even giving up the institution of slavery; this willingness was made evident by the president of the Confederacy himself and as he himself explains in his book “The Rise & Fall of the Confederate Government” the South was fighting for a Jeffersonian (Thomas Jefferson’s) America, slavery was never part of the Jeffersonian vision.
Zac Stuart enough with the revisionist history - the civil war was 100% about slavery. South Carolina threatened to secede before Lincoln was even elected, bc there was an erroneous belief that he was determined to abolish slavery.
@@Perfectly_Cromulent351 according to northren historians. The reality on the ground was northern industrialized states having the power to override the southern states and shape policy to favor them with little to no input from southern states. The election was just the spark to the powder keg.
The nice thing about Lee in this: He took full responsibility for this loss. He beeseched to his own men "This is my fault...I thought us invincible, and I was so very wrong, its my fault..." He screwed up, and he knew it. Props he could face himself and own up to it, at least. Most would take their protests to their grave. Seems ya got choked up near the end. Cant blame ya, NO-FILM even comes remotely close to this level of effort. And it shows
Grant had the same sort of character. He admitted that he underestimated Lee and the ANV and also said that Cold Harbor was a huge mistake. They both deserve their spots at the top of the pedestals of the ACW.
There IS a theory that Lee MIGHT have experienced a heart attack during those 3 days of battle at Gettysburg. If so it might have helped make up his mind to fight there rather than pick up stakes and move around the union army, in order to take up a defensive position between the Union Army and Washington D.C.
@@bobrisse9823 he was brought back to reality in the end. He felt more loyalty to his birth state. And even HE wasent the mpst fond supporter of slavery, only seeing ut as A means to an end at most. To him, the federals were fexing power over the states, in esscence saying "The states have no say where the federal powers are concerned" And to be fair...we still dont.
Bob Risse Christmas Day 1865 Address from President Andrew Johnson: The president extended “unconditionally, and without reservation ... a full pardon and amnesty for the offence [sic] of treason against the United States, or of adhering to their enemies during the late Civil War, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws....(which would) renew and fully restore confidence and fraternal feeling among the whole, and their respect for and attachment to the national [e.g., federal] government, designed by its patriotic founders for the general good.” You, sir, have a spirit of division and animosity not befitting an American. Hell, at this point, the Estonian Soldier has a better idea of what it means to be an American.
14:08 yea the union army had standard uniforms..... the confederate also had standard uniforms.... however these were in very high demand with a very low supply, causing confederate soldiers to improvise... the uniforms that the confederates did have were given to the more senior officers first before it was handed down to enlisted men Just a nice little history fact :)
Art, you have to understand that the tactics taught in the military academies at the time, were the tactics of Napoleon. Tactics made for using smoothbore muskets, and not the rifles that were issued to the troops. Therefore; march at the enemy in a long line, fire a shot, and then use the bayonet. They didn't figure out the folly of this until late in the war.
The widespread use of the rifled barrels and the conical minie ball made those old, even ancient, line battle tactics obsolete. But they had yet to figure that out. It came at the expense of huge casualties due to the newfound industrial revolutionary leap in weapon accuracy at the time.
Again, ur vids are not only entertaining and educational, and u seem like a crack up but a great dude!! I love that you pay attn to the details and explain it, just like, a word, 1 word, can make a mispsoke, taken the wrong way, or simply the WRONG WORD can and does change things, meanings!! O and MANY Congratz on Engagement!!
No the Incompetence of b the Federal Generals in the East, McClellan, John Pope, Burnside, FJHooker., and a Meade. Once Grant got overall command, the war was basically over....
@Bergelicious75 Also STUDY Grant's Campaigns in the West. They were ones of Movement. Ft Henry and Donaldsonnm Shiloh (with the Confederate Surprise Attack and the Hallack "Digging: his wat to Corinth). But, Once Grant becane Overall Commander of the Department of the Mississippi, it was Really Campaigns of movement. In the Vicksburg Campaign, Finally, crossing the Mississippi River at "Hard Times Palantation" (with Briliant moves by Grant to take Comfederate eyes off this Amphibious Crossing, ie Griesson;s Raid) then moving not on Vicksburg, but atJackson , while living off the land. It was a Campaign of novement, then Fighting his way back towards Vicksburg with the Battles of Champion Hill, Raymond and Big Black. Cattanooga : Lookout Mnt and Missinary Ridge were also battles of movement. As Overall Commander, he along with Sherman and Sheridan were the ONLY Generals to see that to win the war was not take cities and hold then, but DESTROY the Armies opposing them... I had two Great grandfather's fight under Grant in the Army of the Tennessee. Arnold Rader (46th Illinois and John Wedeward (42nd Illinois)
@Bergelicious75 Actually Most of Eastern Tennessee was Pro Union, but Lincoln COULD NOT get any of these early Generals to see that, Then the Confederates finally can down HARD on these peoplem trying to snuff this resistance, despite this, they never suceeded and Eastern Tennesse basically remained loyal to the Union. At first Private Property was was basicaly NOT encouraged to be damaged by Union Forces. but as the war went on, this policy changed, hardened by the attituded to civilian property led basically by Northern soldiers, especially as they got further south and more exposed to the horrors of Slavery . Yes. Sherman on his march through Georgia and Sherridan in the Shannandoa Valley, but they practiced "Hard War":, BUT NOT TOTAL War against Civilians, like World War II would become,,,
@Bergelicious75 I have Bachlors Degrees in History and Pre-Law, Masters Degree in Civil War Studies and MLS (Masters in Library Science) and "Almost" a PhD in American History (need to finish the Dissertation: "Stephan Foster and the Rise in Popular Music in America) Work as an Interpretor for The NPS at National Battlefields..
As a Latvian American I'm proud of my Baltic roots and people. But having visited Gettysburg and walked that sacred ground that holy ground where North and South gave their lives in their beliefs.. Gettysburg makes me proud to be American and having been born in such a country. Arthur if you get a chance you should see the entire movie they talk about. It will give you a perfect insight into the soul of Americans people.
Yeah it was shit. Like all civil wars. The south couldn't free their slaves without loosing the support of their upper class. And the north convinced it's citizens it was a moral war because of it.
@@blurzzmelo9547 true. And they massed troops on the Canadian border so the North had too split their forces. The civil war was most likely started by British agitators who wanted their American colonies back. It backfired hilariously. Kinda like the CIA starting shit in all over the world now.
Hardly true. The civil war was never over slavery, but it certainly played a part. In fact, slavery was a dying tradition in the south. Not to mention, most slave owners were Jewish anyway, and not the stereotypical European-American as many believe.
Here's something one must understand about Lee and his position: Lee's strategy was dependant on the understanding that his side could never produce the resources or manpower that the North could. With that context, and the fact that his scouting was cut off, I can understand why he thought that making this a decisive engagement was essential. The Union army could replenish its losses in ways that he could not, so he had to try to not only win, but win in such a way that destroyed the North's will to fight. So Lee tried to force a decisive engagement under circumstances that he forced himself to believe were favorable, in order to justify the losses he had already suffered. In short, he fell victim to the "Sunk Cost Fallacy".
That was always the Japanese strategy in WWII also. Always looking for the decisive engagement. Even though JN25 had been cracked.... Midway and Leyte Gulf were the big losses for Japan.
You so need to watch/do a reaction to the full movie, it is so worth watching - I do it atleast 1-2 a year and I’m not even a yank, I’m a Scot. Oh and I’d also suggest watching History Buffs Waterloo as well as Shawn Beans history on it (yes Shawn bean has a couple episodes on the battle thanks to his roll as the iconic Richard Sharpe from Cornwells books)
Just discovered your channel and really enjoying it. Very much appreciate your insight and perspective The wife has even watched a few episodes with me. Congratulations on the engagement :-)
19:28 One important thing to remember is that as mentioned much earlier in the video the Confederate cavalry had been missing for about 2 weeks at this point. The cavalry was a strength of the Confederate army and was very good at using the kind of asymmetrical tactics you're talking about, raiding, hit and run attacks, etc. Without it present they lacked a lot of the mobility needed to employ that kind of strategy most effectively. For the same reason they were also in enemy territory without sufficient scouting which is vital for such precise tactics. In other battles they were able to make much better use of different tactical maneuvers. Obviously, a frontal assault still didn't work and ideally Lee should have found some other avenue to gain an advantage (i.e. the idea of leaving the battlefield and moving on Washington to force his opponent's hand like his subordinate suggested), but it's easier to understand why Lee might have felt like it was their best chance of winning the battle given the circumstances. Lee was also probably overconfident in his men as they'd won battle after battle against the union forces in the last two years, almost always doing so while outnumbered.
Stuart did that because his ego was wounded by the Union Cavalry over running his camp a few weeks before. He brought a pirated Union wagon train as a trophy,...but it " is an impediment to me now"..
@ Yep...I think Longstreet wanted to advance out towards Pipe Creek.. Might have been different But then, later......Lee... had to deal with Grant....and it was all changed.
Overconfident? Maybe. For Lee, the whole war was a race. He knew the South had no real chance to win against the Union, which had more men and a much better industrial base than the South. He had to act boldly to hand the Union a devastating defeat early, in the hopes the North's will to fight would collapse and they would sue for peace. His hope was to crush the Union's eastern army at Gettysburg and leave Washington, DC threatened, because if the war went on much longer, the South's defeat was inevitable.
@James Mcn Incorrect, the reason that there is only one United States is because we had superior tech, money, and over twice as many soldiers. The Confederate generals were much more intelligent than the ones from the Union. Why do you think the Union had 40% more deaths than the Confederacy, despite the fact that we outnumbered them 2.6 to 1 and had superior weapons and supplies? Why do you think President Lincoln constantly fired and replaced his generals for the position of General and chief of the US army?
@James Mcn we wasn't a total idiot the union had more men and more supplies. Most of these victories came against that total idiot McClullen. At Gettysburg the Union army was between him and Richmond. If he didn't fight he wasn't getting home.
@James Mcn Ricker is right! General Lee was many things, but an idiot was not one of them the main reason he and the rest of the Confederacy had so much success in the first two years of the war is because most of the unions most experience military leaders including Lee were Southerners and that experience is why he was able to constantly prevail against an enemy with greater numbers, supplies and technology. Even after Richmond had fallen General lee was still able to hold his army together that's why he's so well respect in the north and the south.
@@noahorakwue2653 Lee was a master of the Jomini School of Warfare. He never adjusted to Total War. Grant and Sherman did; Or rather, created it. Lee fought and won using the foil. Grant, Sherman, and for that matter Meade (at Gettysburg) used the broadsword. With that weapon, they only had to win once.
General Sherman was a racist and white supremacist. He was in agreement that there should be slavery. General Sherman killed over 5,000 slaves. Check Out Massacre At Ebenezer. General Sherman was a failed Military officer in his early years. Once Pres Lincoln told the General the only way the United States survives is by the whole Union. General Sherman went to work. The biggest thing Sherman had in favor besides men military power and supplies....is the fact that General Sherman had been to North Georgia in his younger years. He remember everything about the area. He was fighting against a pussy Southern General who refused to take on General Sherman at his weakest moment. Which was when the Southern General had Sherman's army surrounded pretty much.The Southern General thought he could outlast Sherman. General Sherman burnt down most everything from Atlanta to close to Savannah.The Final battles were fought at my front door. Want to know more about those battles look up The Battle Of Monteith Swamp. It was a battle of 800 Southern Soldiers to Sherman's 12,000.It was not easy for Gen Sherman's men. Once Sherman broke though At The Chatham/Effingham Line The Civil War was over.The City Of Savannah Meet Sherman at the outskirks of Town and begged him not to burn their City. The city Of Savannah Surrender.(Fun Fact Savannah ahs Surrender Several Times In It History) General Sherman wire Pres Lincoln that he was giving the city of Savannah to him as a Christmas Gift. It did take Sherman 12 weeks to take Georgia. He encounter much better fighting than he thought there would be. It took Sherman 9 weeks to take Atlanta.
Have you ever seen “flags of our fathers” or “letters from Iwo Jima”? Both are about WW2 and directed by Clint Eastwood. Iwo Jima takes a Japanese perspective. Both are great films and well worth it.
The US Civil War was very influential to the modern European concept of war. The first use of trench warfare influenced ww1 generals, and ironclad ships revolutionized naval warfare for America and European powers coming into the 20th century.
@Evalation Yes, fieldworks have been used since at least the days of the Roman legion. However, the defenses used in the siege of Vicksburg and Petersburg were extensive, and they proved to influence the commanders of the second Anglo Boer war/ Russo-Japanese war. My thesis concludes that the tactical advantage of advancing trenches lines seen in WW1 was influenced directly by these wars. The US civil war was one of the most thoroughly observed wars in the 19th century, and, while I can go on for hours about its global influence, I infer that American use of trench warfare and modern naval strategy influenced the wars of the 21st century more than what you're giving credit.
Evalation Yes, but this was the first time those ships were ever used in a pitched battle. This was also the 1st war to show what happens when Napoleonic tactics were used against modern minie balls and cannon..
@Evalation yeah, common misnomer due to shit American history education. I'm still pissed off at my teachers to this day for some of the crap they told me.
Great movie, based on the novel Killer Angels. It could not cover everything Gettysburg, but I think it should have given Major General George Gordon Meade more screen time.
Movie named Windtalkers During World War II when the Americans needed to find a secure method of communicating they devised a code using the Navajo language. So Navajos were recruited to become what they call code talkers. They would be assigned to a unit and would communicate with other units using the code so that even though the enemy could listen they couldn't understand what they were saying.
Kimberly Craven finely a google translate for southerner But on a more serious note I feel as if the war was more of a game for Lee as he would have fought for the Union if Virginia didn’t secede Also he got rid of a lot of his slaves so I don’t think he cared much for that reason ( yes I know it wasn’t the only reason)
I'm fascinated by the battle of Gettysburg and I love the Gettysburg movie. But I first get to know it from the Power Metal band Iced Earth on their Gettysburg Trilogy. Really epic and powerful.
Fun fact, the opening battles of the Civil War actually drew crowds of people who showed up with their families to watch what was going on. Obviously once the reality of the horrors of war set in, these crowds went away.
Artur, look into American communications during ww2. We had wind talkers, native Americans who spoke unknown and undecifered language. There's a few movies about them.
React to the “Lone Survivor” story. He was a Navy Seal and just react to what he had to go through. There was also a movie made about him called the “Lons Survivor”
@@bryguysays2948 He only lost one. It was the Battle of Kernstown, it was a tactical defeat but a strategic victory. He thought he was attacking a small detachment that turned out to be a main force. It forced the Union command to keep troops in the Shenandoah Valley and protecting Washington instead of helping McClellan against Lee around Richmond.
I have been lucky enough to visit the battlefield. Seeing the field that Picketts men charged across left me in awe at the bravery a person must have to move forward knowing that in all probability you wont survive the assault. I stood there looking across the field and felt fear for them.
I bring my kids to Gettysburg every year. My son wants to move there because he says it's so peaceful with all the hills. I can never walk through the battle grounds and not shed a tear or 2 for what happened there. It was such an important battle, yet at the same time, such a tragedy.
One more thing I love about this movie is that it breaks down the historical aftermath in a 'where are they now' kind of way. True fact, Chamberlain, the colonel who ordered the charge at Little Round Top, became the last casualty of the war. During the battle and subsequent siege of Petersburg I think, he received a wound that nicked his bladder that slowly poisoned him and effectively dying from it years later, even though he had lived a fairly long life for the time. Also, this July will be the 160th anniversary of the battle of Gettysburg.
Canister shot was actually more of a homemade round where they would put thousands of nails and needles it actually isn’t the same as shrapnel shot which is made out of tiny musket balls
Estonian watches British man talk about American historical movie.
This is why UA-cam exists.
Americans watching Estonian watch British history buff talking about filmed American history.
@@timmholl9238 This is why UA-cam exists.
Calvin Bauer *THE INTERNETTTTT* ~Morty
@@timmholl9238 American reading American's comment on a video of an Estonian watching a Brit describing a film made by Americans on American history
@@timmholl9238 the mind fuckery
I’m a US Army infantry veteran. Whenever you hear “fix bayonets”, you know shit just got real. Love your channel.
NW Monk how long did you serve?
What are the requirements to join? And what is the qualifications and disqualification?
Lol that or Engineers up!
NW Monk-These guys had balls of steel!😃Just watching a reenactment of this battle makes me truly appreciate the incredible fortitude and skill of the Union army.☺️
Im currently a US army combat engineer. This guy’s channel is interesting I love it. Subscribed to this guy.
The thousands of re-enactors came with their own equipment (horses, cannon, rifles, ordnance, etc), uniforms (completely accurate), paid their own way, slept on the field in Civil War tents, ate Civil War food, JUST to be in the movie. It cost the production company NOTHING. Well, I guess they did get fed lunch from craft services.
You can tell that the Reactors worked hard too keep everything pried current. They did a good job of it as well.
@@fristnamelastname5549 including period spellun. 😄
@Matt Horkan Good for you, Sparky! I was there.
Oddly enough the start of Gettysburg was an accident. A Confederate unit entered the town from the north because they heard there were shoes there, something they badly needed, a small union force entered from the south. Nether side knew the other was in the area.
@@davidmarquardt2445 And they were wrong. The shoes were in Hanover PA, 15 miles away.
"You can't climb up hill and attack!"
The U.S. on D-Day: "oh ya? check this out.."
How would win? A bunch of heavily fortified German bois, or some Americans with grappling hooks?
Iwo Jima comes to mind (Mt Suribachi)
@@PdPete11795 destroyers closed dangerously close to grounding and eliminated the gun fortifications.
@@spvillano negative, cruisers where the majority of the fire support on the beaches and the bunkers themselves were taken by troops, my grandfather was there in the 3rd wave.
Also the British and the Canadians
"Nobody talks about the communications officers in wars. I haven't seen any Hollywood movies about them." Check out the movie "Windtalkers"
The Navajo Code Talkers from WWII, for clarity
Yes, was just thinking about that movie when he said that.
Awesome story....aaaannd not to bad a movie about it.
nice, I just wrote this also I feel like a lot of people forgot this movie existed
@@FisforFenton growing up with a lot of native family, we loved that movie. gave way for the uniquely american dialects of the natives to have its place in WW2. such a good movie
Code Talker! Great book
The U.S. Civil war was the first war to use iron clad ships in battle.
Battle of the Ironclads.
And submarines, and true conventional trench warfare.
I find it fascinating that the south had a enormous spy network
@@markhohenbrink5230 Technically not submarines, the first successful submarine yes, however, as far back as the 1770's, experimental submarines existed.
And did not have effective guns to pierce their own armor.
"General Lee... I have no division." This is a direct historical quote from General Picket. He actually said this to Lee
@Wes Takahashi ...and a lot of southerners blamed Pickett in order to spare Lee the blame for the biggest boner of his military career...Lee had been full of himself at that point.
@@dutchray8880 And Lee never understood what went wrong!
@Wes Takahashi Lee never won an offensive battle without Stonewall Jackson. He was probably the only one that would have corrected Lee at Gettysburg.
@@robertstark8965 I think the loss of Stonewall was the downfall of the Confederates.
I feel bad for the man at that moment. To lose so many men and not achieve the objective. This is why history is important. To recognize when a past mistake presents itself again and to find a better different way and avoid that mistake.
Director: we need more money so we can cgi more cannons in the move.
Some official with a clipboard: sir the unpaid actors brought their own.
Democracy intensifies
It's legal in America to own a tank if you can afford it. Not sure if the ammo is legal though...
Zombied77 if the gun is disabled and you put rubber tracks on it you can own it and drive it down the road.
@@joeyhamilton6854 you can get one without a problem if you pay for a destructive device permit same thing that lets you put a stock on a rifle.
@@Zombied77 you cannot own a tank with functional artillery as a civilian.
@@Saberjet1950 so you can't own it then
I live just outside of Gettysburg, it's strange to walk around the town and realize just how many people where killed where you are standing. Cemetery hill is very beautiful. But it also is very eerie to stand at.
Zachary Cline
Hey nice! I live in Waynesboro just 30 min of Gettysburg and visit Gettysburg at least once a week. In between Gettysburg and Waynesboro (Washington township) was where the battle of Monterey Pass took place
At Gettysburg there is a whole lot of ghost sightings and I really wanna go to Gettysburg’s because well ghosts, standing where thousands of men died etc etc
@@moonmicrowave9876 They have a lot of ghost tours and stuff in Gettysburg, too. I think it's supposed to be the most haunted place in America. Even haunted hotels you can stay in (of course).
Ive been going there since I was a little kid. The entire population of the town is like 7000 today so it really puts it into perspective. I've been there at night quite a few times and i can assure you if you don't believe in ghosts I can make you a believer
Ayyyyy I grew up and lived in new oxford till I was 23 (im 26 now) now I live in lancaster
The scene there with the band with the little boy playing the drum, he was the last surviving person from the battle. He died in like 1950. He had been 16 at the time of the battle.
It's always interesting to see a foreigner react to another foreigner react to American history
@@bobrisse9823 yikers
Bob Risse Dude get over yourself.
@Bob Risse. Do you think most Southerners don’t realize that? I’m from the south and I sure as heck do.
The fact that The Estonian UA-camr is ignorant of what hes reacting to and that he knows this most of the time is why it is entertaining
@@bobrisse9823 cuz the south would lose all their income and ability to run their farms which the south still hasnt recovered
25:24
“I have no Division”
“Damn”
Damn is right, powerful stuff
It's a powerful scene in the movie, but not the first time that had happened. At Antietam the previous September Lee asked Gen. Hood where his division was. "Dead on the field," came the reply.
Revolvers, and repeaters, were invented in this war along with Gatling guns, the first version of the mini gun.
have you ever heard of a puckle gun I'm pretty sure that was the first minigun correct me if I'm wrong but look it up
@@himommy4098 1715 if I remember correctly.
Hi Mommy The puckle gun is more of a mini flintlock cannon revolver mix. Shooting far bigger rounds at a fire rate based on how fast they could light the next wick. I’m just saying the Gatling was the first automatic version of the mini gun.
James Puckle invented the puckle gun in 1718, but practical and economical repeaters were produced and used by the north before the end of the war, even the Monitor and the Merrimack weren't the first ironclads (arguably) but this was the first time these sorts of innovations were employed en mass and saw large scale battlefield use.
@@warnpeace5294 it wasn't automatic, you had to turn a crank
The "Iron Clads" were actually created during the American Civil War. Overnight the entire English Navy became obsolete.
Actually both France and England had allready their own early ironclads by this time.
@@Fenris77 I didn't know that actually. I was quoting a Ken Burns documentary with that "obsolete" line I threw out there. I did do a bit of reading and they seem to be a bit more rudimentary in that they were still broadsides and masted ships but they were "clad with iron". I know the Monitor had that interesting turret design on it which seemed to be fairly innovative.
@@Synthetic-Rabbit I’m not sure if the Entire English navy would have become obsolete, bot iron clads had big flaws, and surly the first and second rate ships of the Royal Navy would have been able to deal a good amount of damage to the iron clads. Though this would probably never happen as both iron clads were kind of coastal, not really suited for the open oceans
@@DerCharacter I know it's Wikipedia, which has its flaws but there's a good history of them there and it goes over the advent of seafaring ironclads. I'm no expert but I did read through it before making my previous post in this thread.
@@Fenris77 that is true. But the American Civil War was the first war that they were so prevalent.
I’ve been to Gettysburg several times.
And I can assure you there is no way to walk that battlefield and not feel a sense of overwhelming gratitude for the men who died there.
It’s humbling to say the least.
I had a family member from my dad’s side of my family. He was in the 149th Pennsylvania Division. I was there for the 160th anniversary of the battle.
I highly recommend watching this if you can just for the musical score.
That and much of what you see are reenactors, some of whom brought their own canons. Most of whom never got paid except maybe food while there on set. Thousands of people who helped make this movie possible.
Picketts charge with those sweeping shots and that music blaring in the background before fading away right before the devastation sends chills down my spine every time.
I wholeheartedly agree. Gettysburg and Gods and Generals are my two favorite Civil War movies. The Blue and The Grey is another good one too.
@@ironman98
Yes, that is a good one, though that's more of a mini series than q movie, it's still enjoyable.
@@thehowlinggamer5784 Oh yeah, I just trust that any Civil War history buff will have heard of it if not seen it and understand and appreciate it. I didn't really think that needed explaining. But yeah it is mini series. A good one though. I quite enjoy it.
@@ironman98 yeah, it is an good one.
Gregory Peck as Lincoln if I remember right. Good actor.
@@thehowlinggamer5784 Yeah he's pretty great, he makes a good Lincoln actually.
This one of my favorite periods in history to learn about.
Also, there was something around 30 million or so at the time.
So for not just 1 side but both sides to draw on 100,000 men or better during just about any point in the war, is decidedly significant.
1 more fact is that though the uniforms were more, well for the lack of a better word, uniform by this point, it was not uncommon for blue to be on both sides of the war, which is what contributed to the mass confusion in early battles,namely the first battle of Manassass.
2:27 I mean, you gotta remember that our Civil War, even though it was fought pretty recently in history, still occurred less than a century after our country won its independence.
Also, yes, the Civil War saw the invention of the ironclads, the first concepts of what would become the modern naval ships. The USS Monitor on the Union side was built from scratch, and was a low-profile iron ship (meaning its deck was just above the waterline) which made hitting it nearly impossible. On the Confederate side, you had the CSS Virginia, which was retrofitted from the USS Merrimack (a steam frigate that already had an engine to support the design) by cutting down to its lower hull and adding iron decking above, basically looking like a floating pill box.
Both ships engaged at the Battle of Hampton Roads and... well, it was a stalemate. The Virginia was unable to hit the Monitor save for a strike on her pilothouse, and the Monitor was unable to penetrate the armor of the Virginia.
The US Civil War did not see the invention of ironclads. Britain and France already had bigger ones by the time the war started. It did however see the first combat between ironclads and also the first turreted ironclad in combat.
31:02
The American Revolution was about 80 years before the American Civil War, but the interesting thing about it was that the Southern states are the ones that were loyal to the British during the American Revolution.
Incorrect
infact george washington was from the south
I came here to watch, in reality I spent half an hour staring at your beard and three minutes giggling about fish.
I regret nothing.
The Corps from Maine:
Chamberlaine had less than 400 men, including Officers. He was faced with several thousand Confederates. He was also one of the last Units from Maine, most of the others had been wiped out by this point of the war and had amalgamated into other units. He charged with next to no ammunition left and heavy casualties. He knew if he didn't hold that line, that the Confederates would win the battle if not the war. Chamberlaine was a school teacher, not a professional soldier and his courage his men's is something I still marvel at today.
On this day a mere school teacher rose to the level of the greatest heroes of legend and history.
Confederate were out manned the whole war........so why is this any more important than the southern sacrifice? Also the south and Mid west are still war fighters. Along with the few brave souls left from the north east and west coast. Patriotism never died, it just switched the flag it fights under. Down here the war of northern aggression is never forgotten. It's just forgiven. However the new gun push is about to ignite a powder keg.
@@zaneriley316 I did a lot of research on this topic and agree, it was mostly a move to solidify federal power over state's rights. Slavery and the like would of naturally run it's course and been a dissolved endeavor. The industrialization of the North and the trade embargoes and hyperinflation imposed on the south was both unnecessary and cruel.
@@CDC39A You are correct except the issue of slavery will forever overpower the discussion. So long as the Confederacy defended the institution of slavery there is ZERO chance of them claiming the moral high ground in the fight. I say that as someone who lived in the south and agrees with much of the Confederacy's cause. I also bear zero ill will to those brave men of the south who were defending their homes from what they saw as an invasion.
Slavery trumps state's rights...
I wish the South had been able to abolish slavery and THEN push for independence.
@@kennethfharkin and maybe they would have, given the lack of Northern Aggression, it may have provided time to reform in other ways. Unfortunately, we will never know. It would be neat to see a series on a reverse world.
Joshua Chamberlain was from my hometown, we have a statue of him at the end of Maine Street, next to the College he was a professor at.
Hunter Labbe He also served as Governor of your state for 4 terms post-war.
Chamberlain was seriously injured during the siege of Petersburg, Va. His injuries were so damaging they thought he would die. To commemorate his military service he was promoted, while still on his "death bed" to Brig. General. Then...HE RECOVERED! Unfortunately that injury left him in pain the rest of his life. It never really healed.
Hello from Raymond! Nice to see a fellow Mainer.
When first watching the movie Gettysburg, I admired that so much attention to detail and research went into the uniforms and dialects used by the actors. Lee spoke like a Virginian, Hood spoke like a Texan, Chamberlain spoke like he was from Maine, and so on. It really added a lot to the movie for me.
Hood SHOULD have sounded like a Kentuckian. He was born and raised in Kentucky, spent a few years stationed in Texas with the 2nd Cavalry, and only renounced his Kentucky citizenship and adopted Texas as his new home state after the Civil War began.
I thought Hood was from Kentucky
Outside of the main actors the regular soldiers are civil war reenactors. We supply our own uniforms and equipment. Most men are also descendants of men that were there. We represent the same regiments of our ancestors and know the battle formations well.
Mainer here. Joshua Chamberlain is an absolute legend and the greatest man from our small and often forgotten state. Visited Gettysburg as a young kid and he's been a hero of mine since I was 9ish. He was wounded 6 times, had six horses shot out from under him, basically on his death bed, sighted for bravery 4 times and awarded the medal of honor. Check out his history, a couple of his wounds were pretty wild and lucky. He was greatly respected by leaders from both sides and an absolute gentleman to boot.
The first time I went in 94, I had probably seen the movie a good 10 times the prior year and was just in awe of the battlefield. I made sure to visit that epic spot the 20th Maine saved the federal left flank with the amazing BAYONEEEET charge.
“Windtalkers” is a movie about radio operators in ww2
That's a good one he should review that
I thought of this one as soon as he mentioned radio men.
the movie's horribly inaccurate in almost every way
It was also the nickname of my unit after 40 days of MREs in the field.
@@loganinkosovo Sing me the songs of your people :)
"I have no division."
God that line hurts.
roughly 70% casualties
Part of it was how the actor made that line real. The histrionical impact and what happened may have contributed but the man who played him, he made you feel like he really watched his men die and is devastated by it.
Friendly reminder that the Civil War had a submarine.
Even the revolutionary war had a submarine.
It was the Hunley... President Bush post posthumously awarded the crew the Medal Of Honer.
There were actually two submarines only one had a name though.
First successful submarine.
The H.L. Hunley was the first submarine to attack, and sink, an enemy combatant.
Hello from Little Rock Arkansas, U.S.A.. I come from a long line of military personnel, mainly Marines. I came across this video thought I'd check it out. It's great to see someone from another country watch something like this and enjoy it. Thank You for being interested in our history. And all your output. Respect to you. Stay healthy and safe. Happy Holidays.
The book the movie is based on is The Killer Angels. It is one of my favorites and won the Pulitzer Prize. Very worth the read. Love the channel. Keep rolling.
“Battle of Gettysburg”, “Tora! Tora! Tora!”, and “Zulu” were pretty damn good movies.
"Midway" would fit up there if not for the stupid romance part of it.
@@indy_go_blue6048 What Romance? It didn't seem forced, and it is nearly 100% accurate, I'd say it actually has the most realistic romance in war movies, but that's just my opinion.
Zulu was a lesson in not taking spears to a gunfight. LOL There is a similar archaeological discovery in Sudan where large numbers of 12,000 year old sub-Saharan Negro skeletons were found with stone arrowheads embedded in the bones. Not far away they found Caucasian type skeletons buried with evidence that they died from blunt force trauma. Since there were many more Negro skeletons were found, it is assumed that they took sticks and clubs to an arrow fight.
Yes, they were Eurasians in North Africa at least 40,000 years ago. The Negro isn't the oldest race since the oldest skeleton is only 13,000 years old.
What about waterloo thats the og film the father
@@afriendlycadian9857 Haven't had the pleasure just yet, but it's on the list.
"No Hollywood movie talks about the communications guy"
There is a movie called "Codetalkers" about the Navajo communications men who served the US during World War II in the Pacific. These native Americans spoke in a coded version of their native language which was virtually unknown and served as a cipher that the Japanese could not break. It was so important that each Codetalker was assigned a partner to defend him and, if necessary, to ensure that he did not fall into Japanese hands alive.
*Windtalkers
But yes and it's a fantastic film
dc4457 Yes! I was gonna talk about that one! That movie was so good and really highlighted communications groups
Glad to see people actually liked that movie, it's one of those rare gems that seems to get buried under the other WWII movies, probably because Nazis weren't involved.
FUN FACT!!!
I’m currently taking US history II with a pretty awesome professor, last fall I took US history I with him. He isn’t very old, but he’s an extreme history buff. Our community college hosts a “Roundtable meeting” where we as his students can go for extra credit. A lot of the members of the Roundtable were actually in the film! Not sure if my professor was, but he showed us the battle clip in class!
robin Guardabascio In my re-enactment group our commanding officer was an extra in Gettysburg and an extra in Saving Private Ryan.
He told us that there was an overhead shot of the dead on the beach, so he tried to lay in an unnatural position so he could identify himself later. Turns out 30 other guys had the same idea, he’s watched the film 100 times and he still can’t identify himself
Charlie Theanteater
Poor guy was uncomfortable for nothing? that honestly must suck 😂
The tactics were evolving. The official manual for US armies at the time was written based on Napoleonic wars in which the majority of muskets and cannon were smoothbore and generally not that accurate. In the 50 years between Napoleon's time and the Civil War, nearly all muskets and a lot of artillery became rifled and much more accurate, but the tactics weren't changed until savvy commanders began to catch on. Longstreet was getting smart by Gettysburg but tradition and training still favored frontal assaults. Also, for the record, Chamberlain would eventually win the Medal of Honor for his tactics on Little Round Top.
" the majority of muskets and cannon were smoothbore and generally not that accurate."
Their pretty damned accurate when you're shooting at targets within their effective range using the proper ball size.
"In the 50 years between Napoleon's time and the Civil War, nearly all muskets and a lot of artillery became rifled"
Most of the firearms used in the American Civil War, were smoothbore. The Springfield Model 1842 smoothbore was the more commonly seen musket on the battlefield, while the Springfield Model 1861 rifled musket being the latest and greatest in 1861 was reserved for specialist Federal "rifle companies" while the bulk of the Union Army was comprised of State Militias like the 54th Mass. Volunteer Infantry or the 14th Missouri Volunteer Cavalry who's need for such rifles was... superseded by aforementioned rifle companies. Same situation for the Confederates.
"I salute you, general who is dead by now!" LMAO!!! Dude, I just stumbled upon your channel, but this is such great commentary! Consider me subscribed!
"Americans vs. Americans... everybody died!" Artur perfectly summed up current American politics in one sentence
Brandon Leo
Nobody puts up a fight against Americans like fellow Americans
I feel that the "... everybody died!" Has yet to come. Although, it may happen soon.
Everyone’s corrupt
Ian Malcolm Both sides are corrupt. If you really care about the country stop pointing fingers and picking one side and look at who’s best for the country. Picking a democrat or a republican just because they are part of that party isn’t what will improve the country, it’s a tactic used to divide the people so it’s easier to distract us. You’re buying into that with your statement.
People are already talking about another civil war over stupid politics because they refuse to see the damage both parties are doing to the country. Killing fellow Americans will never solve the problems we face and anyone who thinks that isn’t a true American.
We're a bunch of 🐱 compared to the men in the Civil War
LOVE THIS FILM THANK YOU IM SUCH A CIVIL WAR BUFF and I had ancestors who fought with the iron brigade and Barksdale’s Mississippians and hoods Texans
When you mentioned the iron ships used in the war and that you had only thought ships were made of wood back then, you'd pretty much be correct. The first two fully-iron ships, called Ironclads, were one of a kind at that time. The Union had one(The Monitor), and the Confederacy had one (the Merrimack). The ships actually came into combat with each other, and neither could score a good hit on the other because of their armor!
The Civil War also saw the first submarine. It didn't work properly and was almost impossible to use but it existed.
@@satsunada oh yeah! the Hunley right? Freaky looking thing
@@satsunada The Turtle was built in the American Revolution, but it failed to do damage. The Hunley was the first submarine to sink an opponent, but was also lost.
No. The ironclads used in the civil war wernt the first ironclads. Thats the french Gloire. They were the first ironclads to fight eachother.
@@robertharris6092 Really? You're right, I remember now!
Union: it’s over Lee I have the high ground.
Lee: you under estimate my power.
*Chamberlain sound increases*
Then anakin sings the Rebel Yell!!! cus we want more more more ya.
For some reason I was legitimately happy when he said he was engaged, good for the homie Artur.
Congratulations on the new sponsor Artur. You're a great salesman, I definitely want to try some of that fish now.
Are they available in the USA?
@@SuperDrLisa check Amazon they started doing groceries
The Irony is that even though it was using some very advanced weapons for the times, the tactics hadn't changed as much since the Napoleonic war honestly.
Yes, the transitional period where weapon advancements had accelerated beyond tactical advancements.
@@donl5814 It's funny though because during the revolution the us used guerrilla warfare a lot
@@donl5814 this isn't true at all, though it is an often repeated myth that is propagated by History Channel shows and documentaries. The truth is that the rifled musket, in practice, was no more deadly on the battlefield than the musket.
There are many reasons for this. The most pressing is that a weapon is only as accurate as its user. North and South alike could not afford to supply soldiers with much ammunition for live fire drills and the vast majority of live fire drills was done in volleys so individual marksmanship could rarely be practiced. Other factors include the massive amount of smoke produced by these weapons. Your target is firing at you generating their own smoke screen and you are producing smoke in front of your own line. Many journal account describe only seeing dull flashes through smoke as any indicator where the enemy was. The parabolic flight pattern of minie balls makes aiming more difficult, judging range to the target is not easy without practice, and due to the volume of fire as well as the smoke, it would be almost impossible to know whether the shot you just fired hit a target so you would not know how to adjust your fire on follow up shots.
The proof of all of this is that there are many anecdotes of regiments exhausting all of their ammunition in fire fights and battles that lasted all day. By modern logic, if the rifled musket were as devastating as claimed, casualties in these battles should have been horrendous with whole regiments destroyed in a matter of minutes. However, it is almost impossible to find any examples of this happening. There are a few, but the circumstances of those few incidents are that the firing occurred at EXTREMELY close range where missing would likely be more difficult than hitting, ie. the cornfield at Antietam, or Iverson's brigade at Gettysburg. The other proof is that if you examine the overall casualty % suffered by both the armies and individual units, the numbers very closely mirror the battles of the Napoleonic wars.
In the confused conditions of a real battlefield, what truly makes a difference is not accuracy of fire, but volume of fire. Repeating rifles and machineguns are what made Napoleonic tactics obsolete, not the rifling of the small arms.
@@cycleplays2395 Yadda yadda yadda "the weapon is is only as good as the man" is all you needed to say.
Still, you're incorrect. The adaptation of the minne ball over the musket ball made the weapon more accurate, even if the holes created were smaller. You'd be lucky to hit someone with a musket(if you were aiming at him, which also wasn't that common), but if you hit it was like a small cannon. The minne ball was more like a bullet, conical, causing less immediate damage, but it was more accurate.
Not to mention, at this time they had repeater rifles and revolvers, much quicker to fire than muskets.
Hell, even the founders knew about repeater, proto-semiauto guns available at the time. They were offered the opportunity to invest in such a gun, but they didn't have the cash.
Well... In US Army, yes. There were European Countries changed already or began to develop new doctrines. Napoleonic Tactics became in the 1840s, 1850s, less meaning; In the Italian War of Independence and Austro-Prussian War, it already showed in their doctrine, manuals and so on that they already began using loose formations, while the Union and Confederate Army stuck on the early 19th century tactics with little changes. Sure there were Close Order formations.
Artur, I am a US Army Veteran of 13 years. I extend a thanks for your service as an Ally from America. I find it highly respectful that you have decided to learn about our Civil War. Perhaps its since we were both Soldier's that take an interest in Military Wars from the past. I would like to see you talk about some Military history from Estonia, maybe from WW2 or earlier. Maybe you could do a video from a battle ground if you are well versed on the battle?
“General Pickett, sir, you must look to your division!”
“General Lee....I have no division!”
Hey, Artur. Just came across your channel and appreciate your interest in American military technology. Your being a soldier yourself and your good natured enthusiasm should continue getting plenty of interest.
The movie these clips are from, “Gettysburg” is a great movie.
Yeah. In fact there's a number of times towards the end of the war when he was leading the troops to a perceived victory, the troops were chanting "Lee to the rear!" Because they didn't want to see him hurt or killed.
Also, if the movie Glory is accurate in this area, it was something around 3 times a minute.
Crack troops could manage 6 per minute, though 3 per minute was probably more realistic
@@mrspeigle1 probably.
Also more likely since they were an all black unit, they weren't expected to do a lot of fighting anyway.
Actually in both cases Lee had ordered counterattacks to save a desperate situation. And both times it worked. And yes in both cases the soldiers themselves ordered Lee to the rear.
@@mrspeigle1 they likely had a breach loader if they manage 6 shots a minute. I've used muskets, and 3 a minute is about the best that can be achieved.
@@ImperialGuard322nd I am referring to crack troops, and these are crack troops from the time period in question. What a modern person can achieve as a hobbyist even an enthusiastic one is likely substantially below a professional who grew up with the implements in question using them from a young age, before being handed off to a veteran drill instructor and worked to exhaustion for several months.
Not sure how much time you've spent practicing.
My ancestor died in that battle along with almost 90% of his unit, the 44th Alabama Volunteer Infantry. The Confederate States gave a lot in the Gettysburg campaign, so did my own family for the south.
My family is from the northeast we support the ideas of the south
I hated that the south had slavery to begin with. But I respact those who died at Gettysburg, Fedralist, and Confederate alike.
Respect to your ancestor, and all those who died at Gettysburg.
The Confederacy was willing to make any sacrifice to secure its freedom, even giving up the institution of slavery; this willingness was made evident by the president of the Confederacy himself and as he himself explains in his book “The Rise & Fall of the Confederate Government” the South was fighting for a Jeffersonian (Thomas Jefferson’s) America, slavery was never part of the Jeffersonian vision.
Zac Stuart enough with the revisionist history - the civil war was 100% about slavery. South Carolina threatened to secede before Lincoln was even elected, bc there was an erroneous belief that he was determined to abolish slavery.
@@Perfectly_Cromulent351 according to northren historians.
The reality on the ground was northern industrialized states having the power to override the southern states and shape policy to favor them with little to no input from southern states. The election was just the spark to the powder keg.
3:15
Lmao, he hasn't realized yet those people on screen were volunteers and took no pay
To be fair he didn’t even watched it yet and wouldn’t even have known. Only based on previous war films he most likely have seen.
Congratulations on your engagement Artur! may you both have much happiness, long life and good health to you both! im very happy for you my friend!
The nice thing about Lee in this: He took full responsibility for this loss. He beeseched to his own men "This is my fault...I thought us invincible, and I was so very wrong, its my fault..."
He screwed up, and he knew it. Props he could face himself and own up to it, at least. Most would take their protests to their grave.
Seems ya got choked up near the end. Cant blame ya, NO-FILM even comes remotely close to this level of effort. And it shows
Grant had the same sort of character. He admitted that he underestimated Lee and the ANV and also said that Cold Harbor was a huge mistake. They both deserve their spots at the top of the pedestals of the ACW.
There IS a theory that Lee MIGHT have experienced a heart attack during those 3 days of battle at Gettysburg. If so it might have helped make up his mind to fight there rather than pick up stakes and move around the union army, in order to take up a defensive position between the Union Army and Washington D.C.
@@bobrisse9823 he was brought back to reality in the end. He felt more loyalty to his birth state. And even HE wasent the mpst fond supporter of slavery, only seeing ut as A means to an end at most. To him, the federals were fexing power over the states, in esscence saying "The states have no say where the federal powers are concerned"
And to be fair...we still dont.
@@bobrisse9823 lee was given slaves as a inheritance, and he instantly freed them. cut that shit.
Bob Risse Christmas Day 1865 Address from President Andrew Johnson: The president extended “unconditionally, and without reservation ... a full pardon and amnesty for the offence [sic] of treason against the United States, or of adhering to their enemies during the late Civil War, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws....(which would) renew and fully restore confidence and fraternal feeling among the whole, and their respect for and attachment to the national [e.g., federal] government, designed by its patriotic founders for the general good.” You, sir, have a spirit of division and animosity not befitting an American. Hell, at this point, the Estonian Soldier has a better idea of what it means to be an American.
14:08 yea the union army had standard uniforms..... the confederate also had standard uniforms.... however these were in very high demand with a very low supply, causing confederate soldiers to improvise... the uniforms that the confederates did have were given to the more senior officers first before it was handed down to enlisted men
Just a nice little history fact :)
Art, you have to understand that the tactics taught in the military academies at the time, were the tactics of Napoleon. Tactics made for using smoothbore muskets, and not the rifles that were issued to the troops. Therefore; march at the enemy in a long line, fire a shot, and then use the bayonet. They didn't figure out the folly of this until late in the war.
The widespread use of the rifled barrels and the conical minie ball made those old, even ancient, line battle tactics obsolete. But they had yet to figure that out. It came at the expense of huge casualties due to the newfound industrial revolutionary leap in weapon accuracy at the time.
Artur: "nobody cares about the communications guy"
1917: allow me to introduce myself
true haha
@@benpearson49 did I ask?
Jk bruh
@@FilthyPeasant6 you had me for a sec, i almost gave you a paragraph of salt.
@@twojacksandanace3847 BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH HE GOT YOU THERE XD
Gallipoli is another good movie about communication soldiers
Again, ur vids are not only entertaining and educational, and u seem like a crack up but a great dude!! I love that you pay attn to the details and explain it, just like, a word, 1 word, can make a mispsoke, taken the wrong way, or simply the WRONG WORD can and does change things, meanings!! O and MANY Congratz on Engagement!!
Army veteran here thank you for caring enough about our history to check it out. I subbed!
You should visit the battlefield, the land is awesome.
Gettysburg is also the largest battle ever fought in the Western Hemisphere.
midway and pearl harbor are both in the western hemisphere
@@mytech6779 Both are smaller than Gettysberg, by casualties.
3:55 General Lee is the Reason the Civil war lasted 4 years
No the Incompetence of b the Federal Generals in the East, McClellan, John Pope, Burnside, FJHooker., and a Meade. Once Grant got overall command, the war was basically over....
@@jmweed1861 Agreed. The US always had the resources to win quickly, their commanders just kept choking.
@Bergelicious75 Also STUDY Grant's Campaigns in the West. They were ones of Movement. Ft Henry and Donaldsonnm Shiloh (with the Confederate Surprise Attack and the Hallack "Digging: his wat to Corinth). But, Once Grant becane Overall Commander of the Department of the Mississippi, it was Really Campaigns of movement. In the Vicksburg Campaign, Finally, crossing the Mississippi River at "Hard Times Palantation" (with Briliant moves by Grant to take Comfederate eyes off this Amphibious Crossing, ie Griesson;s Raid) then moving not on Vicksburg, but atJackson , while living off the land. It was a Campaign of novement, then Fighting his way back towards Vicksburg with the Battles of Champion Hill, Raymond and Big Black. Cattanooga : Lookout Mnt and Missinary Ridge were also battles of movement. As Overall Commander, he along with Sherman and Sheridan were the ONLY Generals to see that to win the war was not take cities and hold then, but DESTROY the Armies opposing them... I had two Great grandfather's fight under Grant in the Army of the Tennessee. Arnold Rader (46th Illinois and John Wedeward (42nd Illinois)
@Bergelicious75 Actually Most of Eastern Tennessee was Pro Union, but Lincoln COULD NOT get any of these early Generals to see that, Then the Confederates finally can down HARD on these peoplem trying to snuff this resistance, despite this, they never suceeded and Eastern Tennesse basically remained loyal to the Union. At first Private Property was was basicaly NOT encouraged to be damaged by Union Forces. but as the war went on, this policy changed, hardened by the attituded to civilian property led basically by Northern soldiers, especially as they got further south and more exposed to the horrors of Slavery . Yes. Sherman on his march through Georgia and Sherridan in the Shannandoa Valley, but they practiced "Hard War":, BUT NOT TOTAL War against Civilians, like World War II would become,,,
@Bergelicious75 I have Bachlors Degrees in History and Pre-Law, Masters Degree in Civil War Studies and MLS (Masters in Library Science) and "Almost" a PhD in American History (need to finish the Dissertation: "Stephan Foster and the Rise in Popular Music in America) Work as an Interpretor for The NPS at National Battlefields..
Young Estonians are the best! I really enjoyed my few days there a decade ago. Excellent perspective.
As a Latvian American I'm proud of my Baltic roots and people. But having visited Gettysburg and walked that sacred ground that holy ground where North and South gave their lives in their beliefs.. Gettysburg makes me proud to be American and having been born in such a country. Arthur if you get a chance you should see the entire movie they talk about. It will give you a perfect insight into the soul of Americans people.
Union: Free slaves and keep the union!
Confederates: Keep the slaves and fight for our rights!
Britain: Tea anyone?
Yeah it was shit. Like all civil wars.
The south couldn't free their slaves without loosing the support of their upper class. And the north convinced it's citizens it was a moral war because of it.
Britain gave supplies to the south
@@blurzzmelo9547 true.
And they massed troops on the Canadian border so the North had too split their forces.
The civil war was most likely started by British agitators who wanted their American colonies back.
It backfired hilariously. Kinda like the CIA starting shit in all over the world now.
If so then why did the north keep slaves after the civil war but made the south free theirs
Hardly true. The civil war was never over slavery, but it certainly played a part. In fact, slavery was a dying tradition in the south. Not to mention, most slave owners were Jewish anyway, and not the stereotypical European-American as many believe.
Here's something one must understand about Lee and his position:
Lee's strategy was dependant on the understanding that his side could never produce the resources or manpower that the North could. With that context, and the fact that his scouting was cut off, I can understand why he thought that making this a decisive engagement was essential. The Union army could replenish its losses in ways that he could not, so he had to try to not only win, but win in such a way that destroyed the North's will to fight. So Lee tried to force a decisive engagement under circumstances that he forced himself to believe were favorable, in order to justify the losses he had already suffered.
In short, he fell victim to the "Sunk Cost Fallacy".
That was always the Japanese strategy in WWII also.
Always looking for the decisive engagement.
Even though JN25 had been cracked....
Midway and Leyte Gulf were the big losses for Japan.
You so need to watch/do a reaction to the full movie, it is so worth watching - I do it atleast 1-2 a year and I’m not even a yank, I’m a Scot.
Oh and I’d also suggest watching History Buffs Waterloo as well as Shawn Beans history on it (yes Shawn bean has a couple episodes on the battle thanks to his roll as the iconic Richard Sharpe from Cornwells books)
Love your channel, my Estonian neighbor. Much support from a Lithuanian-American
Just discovered your channel and really enjoying it.
Very much appreciate your insight and perspective
The wife has even watched a few episodes with me.
Congratulations on the engagement :-)
19:28 One important thing to remember is that as mentioned much earlier in the video the Confederate cavalry had been missing for about 2 weeks at this point. The cavalry was a strength of the Confederate army and was very good at using the kind of asymmetrical tactics you're talking about, raiding, hit and run attacks, etc. Without it present they lacked a lot of the mobility needed to employ that kind of strategy most effectively. For the same reason they were also in enemy territory without sufficient scouting which is vital for such precise tactics. In other battles they were able to make much better use of different tactical maneuvers. Obviously, a frontal assault still didn't work and ideally Lee should have found some other avenue to gain an advantage (i.e. the idea of leaving the battlefield and moving on Washington to force his opponent's hand like his subordinate suggested), but it's easier to understand why Lee might have felt like it was their best chance of winning the battle given the circumstances. Lee was also probably overconfident in his men as they'd won battle after battle against the union forces in the last two years, almost always doing so while outnumbered.
Stuart did that because his ego was wounded by the Union Cavalry over running his camp a few weeks before. He brought a pirated Union wagon train as a trophy,...but it " is an impediment to me now"..
@ Yep...I think Longstreet wanted to advance out towards Pipe Creek..
Might have been different
But then, later......Lee... had to deal with Grant....and it was all changed.
Overconfident? Maybe. For Lee, the whole war was a race. He knew the South had no real chance to win against the Union, which had more men and a much better industrial base than the South. He had to act boldly to hand the Union a devastating defeat early, in the hopes the North's will to fight would collapse and they would sue for peace. His hope was to crush the Union's eastern army at Gettysburg and leave Washington, DC threatened, because if the war went on much longer, the South's defeat was inevitable.
I love how this dude keeps giving Robert E Lee, one of the most intelligent American generals in history, advice on how to fight wars.
@James Mcn Incorrect, the reason that there is only one United States is because we had superior tech, money, and over twice as many soldiers. The Confederate generals were much more intelligent than the ones from the Union. Why do you think the Union had 40% more deaths than the Confederacy, despite the fact that we outnumbered them 2.6 to 1 and had superior weapons and supplies? Why do you think President Lincoln constantly fired and replaced his generals for the position of General and chief of the US army?
@James Mcn we wasn't a total idiot the union had more men and more supplies. Most of these victories came against that total idiot McClullen. At Gettysburg the Union army was between him and Richmond. If he didn't fight he wasn't getting home.
@James Mcn Ricker is right! General Lee was many things, but an idiot was not one of them the main reason he and the rest of the Confederacy had so much success in the first two years of the war is because most of the unions most experience military leaders including Lee were Southerners and that experience is why he was able to constantly prevail against an enemy with greater numbers, supplies and technology. Even after Richmond had fallen General lee was still able to hold his army together that's why he's so well respect in the north and the south.
@@noahorakwue2653 Lee was a master of the Jomini School of Warfare. He never adjusted to Total War. Grant and Sherman did; Or rather, created it. Lee fought and won using the foil. Grant, Sherman, and for that matter Meade (at Gettysburg) used the broadsword. With that weapon, they only had to win once.
General Sherman was a racist and white supremacist. He was in agreement that there should be slavery. General Sherman killed over 5,000 slaves. Check Out Massacre At Ebenezer. General Sherman was a failed Military officer in his early years. Once Pres Lincoln told the General the only way the United States survives is by the whole Union. General Sherman went to work. The biggest thing Sherman had in favor besides men military power and supplies....is the fact that General Sherman had been to North Georgia in his younger years. He remember everything about the area. He was fighting against a pussy Southern General who refused to take on General Sherman at his weakest moment. Which was when the Southern General had Sherman's army surrounded pretty much.The Southern General thought he could outlast Sherman. General Sherman burnt down most everything from Atlanta to close to Savannah.The Final battles were fought at my front door. Want to know more about those battles look up The Battle Of Monteith Swamp. It was a battle of 800 Southern Soldiers to Sherman's 12,000.It was not easy for Gen Sherman's men. Once Sherman broke though At The Chatham/Effingham Line The Civil War was over.The City Of Savannah Meet Sherman at the outskirks of Town and begged him not to burn their City. The city Of Savannah Surrender.(Fun Fact Savannah ahs Surrender Several Times In It History) General Sherman wire Pres Lincoln that he was giving the city of Savannah to him as a Christmas Gift. It did take Sherman 12 weeks to take Georgia. He encounter much better fighting than he thought there would be. It took Sherman 9 weeks to take Atlanta.
Have you ever seen “flags of our fathers” or “letters from Iwo Jima”? Both are about WW2 and directed by Clint Eastwood. Iwo Jima takes a Japanese perspective. Both are great films and well worth it.
What is the movie called where there are a Japanese division inside a jungle? The war is over and they didnt surrender.
They also used armored trains ,Gatling guns,real bullets,bolt action rifles ,revolvers,modern artillery,and modern tactics
I went to Gettysburg a while back with my Aunt over a weekend, I learned a lot about the history, I am very grateful I was able to go there.
Longstreet: Its over Lee. They have the high ground
Lee: You underestimate our power?
Longstreet: Dont try it
**Lee tried it**
Probably the inspiration for that dialogue
You should react to the Battle of Midway during WW2. The outcome of that entire battle was decided in a matter of minutes
The US Civil War was very influential to the modern European concept of war. The first use of trench warfare influenced ww1 generals, and ironclad ships revolutionized naval warfare for America and European powers coming into the 20th century.
@Evalation Yes, fieldworks have been used since at least the days of the Roman legion. However, the defenses used in the siege of Vicksburg and Petersburg were extensive, and they proved to influence the commanders of the second Anglo Boer war/ Russo-Japanese war. My thesis concludes that the tactical advantage of advancing trenches lines seen in WW1 was influenced directly by these wars. The US civil war was one of the most thoroughly observed wars in the 19th century, and, while I can go on for hours about its global influence, I infer that American use of trench warfare and modern naval strategy influenced the wars of the 21st century more than what you're giving credit.
Evalation Yes, but this was the first time those ships were ever used in a pitched battle. This was also the 1st war to show what happens when Napoleonic tactics were used against modern minie balls and cannon..
@Evalation yeah, common misnomer due to shit American history education. I'm still pissed off at my teachers to this day for some of the crap they told me.
The other thing is the use of railroads in both tactical and strategic as well as logistics for future wars.
Great movie, based on the novel Killer Angels. It could not cover everything Gettysburg, but I think it should have given Major General George Gordon Meade more screen time.
Movie named Windtalkers
During World War II when the Americans needed to find a secure method of communicating they devised a code using the Navajo language. So Navajos were recruited to become what they call code talkers. They would be assigned to a unit and would communicate with other units using the code so that even though the enemy could listen they couldn't understand what they were saying.
"I'm fightin' for my rats" = "I'm fighting for my rights."
Rat lives matter!
@@bobkebob9980 As a southerner who has a very thick accent, I find this hilarious.
Kimberly Craven finely a google translate for southerner
But on a more serious note I feel as if the war was more of a game for Lee as he would have fought for the Union if Virginia didn’t secede
Also he got rid of a lot of his slaves so I don’t think he cared much for that reason ( yes I know it wasn’t the only reason)
I'm fascinated by the battle of Gettysburg and I love the Gettysburg movie. But I first get to know it from the Power Metal band Iced Earth on their Gettysburg Trilogy. Really epic and powerful.
Thay three part song is so epic
It's not about Gettysburg, but I loved clear the way by them. That song gives me goosebumps.
Too bad they didn't have Barlow on vocals
If you liked this then I recommend watching the full movie. As well as the Prequel Gods and Generals
I love your respect and enthusiasm you have for history.
One thing that needs to be pointed out in all this is just how dynamic an actor Jeff Daniels is. Hugely underrated.
Great actor, terrible person.
@@bjohnson4902 Isn't that a qualification for being a mainstream actor anyway?
You should react to the battle of Antietam, bloodiest single day battle of the civil war
The largest loss of American life in one day also, beating the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Keep the good work Arthur
Four score and seven years ago, Artur created this universe
It's awesome you got a local sponsor! No matter where you live, you gotta support local!
Fun fact, the opening battles of the Civil War actually drew crowds of people who showed up with their families to watch what was going on. Obviously once the reality of the horrors of war set in, these crowds went away.
I had to like this video because of the cat🐱
She's adorable
13:19 Now Russia knows your Tactics
Not exactly military top secret is it?
"Blood That is What I want and America" - Estonia is now on a Watch List
Artur, look into American communications during ww2. We had wind talkers, native Americans who spoke unknown and undecifered language. There's a few movies about them.
The American civil war was actually where the ironclad ship first fought.
The title makes it sound like he traveled back in time and went to record the battle and react to the events
10:35
Obi Wan:Heavy Breathing
Oof Time
Lol
React to the “Lone Survivor” story. He was a Navy Seal and just react to what he had to go through. There was also a movie made about him called the “Lons Survivor”
If you want a movie about communication guys there is an American ww2 movie called “code talkers”
You should watch “Glory”! It’s about the first black regiment in the US army that served during the Civil War. It’s a great movie 🍿
If you get interested in the civil war and want to see strategic brilliance, you should look up Thomas Jackson's Valley Campaign.
True, considering Stonewall Jackson took on overwhelming odds and still won the majority of his battles.
@@bryguysays2948 He only lost one. It was the Battle of Kernstown, it was a tactical defeat but a strategic victory. He thought he was attacking a small detachment that turned out to be a main force. It forced the Union command to keep troops in the Shenandoah Valley and protecting Washington instead of helping McClellan against Lee around Richmond.
Huh what’s this?, an Estonian reacting to something that occurred in my home state and only 30 minutes away from me......IM HONORED
I was born and raised in Gettysburg.
I have been lucky enough to visit the battlefield. Seeing the field that Picketts men charged across left me in awe at the bravery a person must have to move forward knowing that in all probability you wont survive the assault. I stood there looking across the field and felt fear for them.
I bring my kids to Gettysburg every year. My son wants to move there because he says it's so peaceful with all the hills. I can never walk through the battle grounds and not shed a tear or 2 for what happened there. It was such an important battle, yet at the same time, such a tragedy.
As for communications movies Wind talkers , about the Navajo Codes during WW2
One more thing I love about this movie is that it breaks down the historical aftermath in a 'where are they now' kind of way.
True fact, Chamberlain, the colonel who ordered the charge at Little Round Top, became the last casualty of the war.
During the battle and subsequent siege of Petersburg I think, he received a wound that nicked his bladder that slowly poisoned him and effectively dying from it years later, even though he had lived a fairly long life for the time.
Also, this July will be the 160th anniversary of the battle of Gettysburg.
Canister shot was actually more of a homemade round where they would put thousands of nails and needles it actually isn’t the same as shrapnel shot which is made out of tiny musket balls
Steven yep your right and I never thought somebody would actually read that comment