The North had a population of 22 million people against the 9 million in the South (of whom almost half were slaves.)
The North was more industrial and produced 94 percent of the USA’s pig iron and 97 percent of its firearms. The North even had a richer, more varied agriculture than the South.
The Union had a larger navy, blocking all efforts from the Confederacy to trade with Europe.
The Confederacy hope that France and Britain would come to their aid due to their need of cotton, but these countries had enough cotton and a bigger need for Northern corn.
The North controlled both the shipping and railroad avenues, allowing them to trade and to get supplies fairly quickly.
The Union had more support: four slave states still remained loyal and not everybody in the 11 Confederate states were on the Confederate side. There were still plenty of people in the South that supported the Union.
Many slaves fled to the Union armies, providing even more manpower.
The South squandered their resources early in the war by focussing on conventional offensives instead of non-conventional raids on the Union’s transportation and communication infrastructure.
Lee’s offensive war strategy had a high cost in casualties, destroying a large part of the Confederate army.
C or d hope this helps I would reckon d<3
Answer:
lado muji kati lamo question hi harr
In the United States immigrant communities became a larger political influence in the early 19th century because of their dramatically increasing numbers. There were a large number of Irish and German immigrants coming to the US at this time due to famine in Ireland and political persecution in Germany. In response to the large influx of immigrants and their potential to influence the political system different groups of Americans took on anti-immigrant or "nativist" views, being strongly against the influx of immigrants and feared that these new immigrants would take their jobs. In response the Know-Nothing Party was formed to opposed this increased immigration politically.
<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, <span>the correct response would be the one having to do with a historian comparing the "Middle Ages to the Renaissance," since this is compartmentalizing two very distinct periods in time. </span></span>
