Sam Watkins was correct in saying that the Civil War was a rich man's war and a poor man's fight. There were more poor farmers fighting than rich plantation owners.
I believe so. The Civil War was fought because men with money both in the government and not couldn't settle major issues and that lead to war. Those rich men didn't fight the war. They let middle-class and poor men who didn't really care about the issues at hand because they didn't affect them fight it.
Linkin Park
John Stamos
maybe
Sam Watkins was correct in saying that the Civil War was a rich man's war and a poor man's fight. There were more poor farmers fighting than rich plantation owners.
The war cost a lot, but was fought by poor farmers.
Rich men could pay a man to take their place in the draft. Therefore poor men fought in a rich man's place.
Rich man's war, poor man's fight
I believe so. The Civil War was fought because men with money both in the government and not couldn't settle major issues and that lead to war. Those rich men didn't fight the war. They let middle-class and poor men who didn't really care about the issues at hand because they didn't affect them fight it.
Badly. Differently. Significantly.
Linkin Park
They didn't!
A rich merchant would likely be a loyalist in the Revolutionary War.
Because, as with most wars, it was funded and run by the rich but the fighters on the front lines were often poor farmers and other middle class civilians.
During the Civil War a rich man had numerous ways to avoid military service, and numerous opportunities to turn a profit on the war. Hence, it was the rich man's war, and the poor man's fight.
John Stamos