[Sherman Logan]

The distinguished Civil War historian James McPherson has estimated that there were 50,000 civilian deaths during the war, and has concluded that the overall mortality rate for the South exceeded that of any country in World War I and all but the region between the Rhine and the Volga in World War II.

Which merely indicates that wars have become less destructive, contrary to the popular POV.

The 30 Years War resulted in the deaths of 25% to 40% of Germans, with some provinces upwards of 75%.

Most Chinese changes of the Mandate of Heaven (one dynasty succeeding another) in the last 2000+ years resulted in death rates of 50% to 75%, usually over a few decades.

The Wars of the Three Kingdoms in 1600s Britain and Ireland resulted in the deaths of an estimated 10% of the English, 20% of the Scots, and 30% of the Irish.

The French and others had religious civil wars with similar death rates.

It is estimated that almost 300,000 CSA soldiers died, let's round up to that number. Add in the 50,000 claimed civilian deaths, almost all of whom were in the South for the obvious reason that's where the fighting was.

350,000 is around 3.8% of the 9M prewar population of the seceding states.

Most if not all seceding states showed an increase in population from the 1860 census to that of 1870.

[Democrat_media]

and has concluded that the overall mortality rate for the South exceeded that of any country in World War I and all but the region between the Rhine and the Volga in World War II.

U.S. population was much lower back then

25% of southern white men killed in the civil war. that is no walk in the park .and they didn't have modern weapons.of course Obama would send tanks against the people in the South like Clinton did in Waco. Obama would send the army to machine gun southerners