The colonies rebelled against King George III over many things including unfair taxation, and simply wanted to be allowed to be left alone and on their own. Plus they won.
The South was fighting for states rights, but it was misplaced over defending slavery. Not really as good analogy to now. So I'd rather not see us talking about Grant and Lee.
I'd rather see us talking about Washington vs Cornwallis - Yorktown, Saratoga, Trenton, Crossing the Delaware. Only this time we won't need the french to help us win - expect they would be supporting zero, which would be good for our side. The french are excellent at training folks on the proper way to discard an unused weapon and surrender.
Noted, it is just I wanted equal time for General Grant. He is rarely mentioned when the topic of the Civil War comes up. Why has history casted him in such a negative light?/Just Asking - seoul62......
That was only a part of the reasons.
"There were many reasons which brought on the conditions which culminated in the war, which necessitated the vast expenditure of money which is exhibited in the table.
The doctrine of States rights, protective tariff, internal improvements, and in fact all the questions upon which the Democratic party differed with their political opponents, entered into the question; but as history seems to contend that the existence of slavery was the main cause ... "
From here