Well, the poor man never admits to the rich man that he envies his wealth. I'll leave you with this thought: the vast majority of Europeans want to own their home - property values in Europe are very high for this reason. Yet about half as many Europeans own their own home as Americans do.
The Civil war is not comparable to WWI, WWII, Vietnam War, the wars in the Mid East.
A larger percentage of America's population died in the Civil War than that of Europe in either WWI or WWII. There were no neutral Swedens or Switzerlands in the Civil War either - every American community was touched by the horror of that war in some way. And an enormous amount of territory was devastated.
Additionally, America, unlike Europe, did not have a friendly ally across the sea who was willing to rebuild the whole country out of its own pocket for free. America had to rebuild by itself, from scratch.
The Civil War wasn't like WWI where the Italians could just give up after a few battles without dire consequences, or WWII where Hungary or France could just throw up their hands, surrender and wait.
Both sides fought until the bitter end.
The Civil war is not comparable to WWI, WWII, Vietnam War, the wars in the Mid East.Why not?
How are:
1) a hugely signifdicant number of horried human deaths (what was the level of medical competancy in 1865?) and
2) a completely ravaged countryside (in the south) and
3) the fact that brother fought brother in a lot of cases
- completely different than WWI or WWII?
Are you referring to the simple refinement in the techniques of mechanization for killing the enemy's soldiers?
You will find, that, except for aircraft "The Civil War" poineered or introduced a lot of what was seen in those other conflicts ...