promotion image of download ymail app

How was Andersonville similar to the war going on now!!??

still working on my paper......i need help with my stupid teachers new topic bout andersonville and how it is realated to the iraqi war. justice back then and now and treatment and rules of war! my teacher is really stupid so plz help me!!! im so desperate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

6 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Dear Mr. Desperate,

    As far as I am concerned there are very little to no similarities between the current conflict and how it relates to Andersonville.

    Andersonville was a Confederate run POW camp in Georgia during the Civil War (but you know that part already) . Union Soldiers were held prisoner there under inhumane conditions with little or no medical care, little or no food, under the dirtiest of conditions. 30 or 40% (I forget exactly) of the prisoners died in the camp. The place was a house of horrors, the exact opposite of Southern Hospitality.

    The Union were appalled by the stories that came out of Andersonville after the war, however in a general sense it was not held against them that badly mostly because the South was in shambles at the time as they were broke, cut off and losing the war by late 1863 and in 1864. They had a tough enough time feeding their own soldiers and citizens. The Yankee Prisoners were not a priority.

    Fast forward 140 years later. Lets look at it from a couple of angles.

    First the terrorists: They willfully torture and execute anyone they can get their hands on. They are bound by no moral code (or even religious code, although they would disagree). They are hating and killing machines that have no value for human life. War conventions do not apply to them as they are not a Nation and have not signed any International Treaties banning mistreatment of prisoners.

    Next, the Americans: Obviously some mistreatment of prisoners has occurred here but compared to Andersonville, the prisoners are leading a country club existence. They have plenty to eat, excellent medical care, shelter and international monitors to check in to make sure they are in one piece.

    Even in Guantanamo, where the hardcore Al Queda and Taliban screwballs are being held, the International Red Cross can check in on them and make sure they are being treated well.

    So let's compare the Confederate's who ran Andersonville to the Americans running Guantanamo as bringing the terrorists into the comparison doesn't seem to apply.

    1.The U.S. government is held to a high international standard for humanely treating prisoners while the South was not.

    2. The U.S. has the resources to care for the prisoners while the South did not.

    3. 2 Armies were fighting each other in the Civil War while in this case the Coalition of Allied armies is fighting smaller groups of terrorists not part of a formal army.

    In closing I will again state that I see no connection but I have a feeling your teacher does. This kind of makes me feel uneasy about the folks educating our young people today. LOL.

    Seriously though, If you follow my logic here he may not agree with you, but you will have enough of an argument where he can't say you are wrong.

    Good Luck!

    Edit-To RBLWRITER-As far as Civil War history is concerned, I will defer to your knowledge. After reading your answer and seeing your name, I looked at other questions you have asked and answered and this appears to be a main area of interest for you. Even if it is slightly tilted to a Confederate point of view, I have no doubt that as far as the facts go, you seem like the real deal. I do feel a need to answer your comments in regard to my answer. You state in the beginning that you are in disagreement with my answer, but then seem to rebut assertions that I haven't even made. While I did not realize the extent of the mortality rate at Union camps nor did I have knowledge of the "Avenge Andersonville" aspect of that rate, I don't feel I misrepresented Andersonville.

    In addition, the crux of my answer was a comparison of Andersonville and how it relates to the current conflict in Iraq. I was simply using certain facts about Andersonville to paint a picture for the purposes of stating how I believe it is in no way relevant to iraq. If in the process, I seemed unsympatheitc to what Confederate POW's experienced or that I ignored Union attrocities, it certainly was not my intention. That information (even if I was ignorant to it) I feel is simply was not relevant to the question.

    Either way RBLWRITER, this beats answering questions about the current state of politics, singles & dating, Immigraton or religion. Let's do it again sometime. Regards.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I don't know where you did your research, Stymie, but it's way off.

    The Union's own official records, easily accessible to anyone at most public libraries today, damn them for their hypocrisy and treatment of Confederate POW's.

    Have you ever, for instance, asked yourself, "Why didn't Sherman send even a cavalry detail to free the prisoners at Andersonville?" He knew it was there, yet he avoided it.

    There is a great deal of official correspondence on record proving what the Confederates attempted to do to alleviate the overcrowding and suffering at Andersonville, including offering to let doctors from the North travel to Andersonville to treat the men, as well as allow food shipments directly to the prison. These requests were denied, along with all attempts at trading the prisoners for Confederate POW's.

    Grant wrote several letters to different people, including Sherman, about the matter. As an instrument of war, the camp favored the Union. It took men and supplies away from the Confederate Army. He wrote that while it was hard on the men in the prisons, it had to be done in order to defeat the South.

    As you pointed out, the North didn't suffer from a lack of supplies and medical care, yet the death rate of Confederates in Northern prisons was very close to the same, because mistreatment of Confederate POW's was law. Yes, law. It was official retribution for the treatment of Union POW's, treatment which could not have been made better because of the conditions in the South.

    If Henry Wirtz was such a devil, why did sympathetic prisoners try to testify IN HIS BEHALF at the kangaroo court which was held to hang him? They were not allowed to do so, but a deserter testifying under an assumed named, provided the false testimony they used to send him to the gallows.

    This project by the said teacher is a load of biased horse crap.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Andersonville was a Confederate POW camp for Union prisoners. The conditions were terrible. Overcrowding, disease, insufficient rations, and thugs known as "The Raiders", Union prisoners who preyed on their own fellow prisoners.

    Part of the problem was that the Confederacy was very short on supplies, even for its own army. This does not excuse the fact that CPT Wirz, the Andersonville commandant made little effort to ameliorate the sufferings of the prisoners.

    I presume that you are speaking of the situation in Iraq. I really don't see a similarity. There have been abuse of prisoners, but this apperently was done on purpose. Surely, there is no shortage of food or medical facilities.

    The mistreatment of prisoners (I don't say POWs, since there has been no declaration of war) is one of the worst things a nation can do. First, it tarnishes the image of that nation. It vilifies all members of that nations armed forces. I was in Iraq, and I was pretty vocal (as I usually am) in my opinion. Secondly, when enemy prisoners are mistreated, the enemy fights harder. And third, American prisoners can now expect to be treated the same, or worse.

    The rules of war (but as I said, Congress has not declared war) specify that enemy prisoners are entitled to sufficient food, medical treatment, freedom from torture & c. An enemy prisoner is helpless. He is unable to resist. To subject him to torture is not done by civilized people.

    When the rules of war are not followed, it makes the transgressors subject to war crimes. War crimes include stealing the property of prisoners, beating or torturing them, committing unnecessary damage to property, attacking religious or cultural buildings or monuments & c.

    I hope this helps you.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    if your teacher is so stupid, then you don't have to write a good paper, but then knowing your luck, she will probably choose you to read your paper in front of the class and then you would have nothing to read, or she might not even care if no one writes a paper if she is that stupid...........anyway, the answer to your question......Andersonville is similar to the war going on right now in the respect that there are 2 sides fighting a losing battle that will go on and on for years and then one side will eventually win, hopefully the US, but you never know, at the rate our soldiers are being killed, there might not be enough of them left to win the war

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Tony
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Think Abu Graib and Gunatanamo and how the prisoners there were and are being treated. Read the wiki article it might help you you get some ideas.

    Compare how the two prisons are similar and how they are dissimilar.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.