I do have to take VDH to task though....technically "Civil War" is a misnomer...probably started by some newspaper describing what the editor thought was happening. The South didn't want to "take over" the North, they simply wanted fair taxes or they would secede from the Union. It was a War of Tariffs or a War Between The States or the War of Northern Aggression. Take your pick, but a Civil War it was not.
Sorry pal, but you are obviously deeply confused by somebody's lunatic propaganda.
Here is an entirely reasonable definition of "civil war." Note there is no sense in which the War of Southern Rebellion does NOT fit the definition.
"A civil war is a war between organized groups to take control of a nation or region, or to change government policies.[1] It is high-intensity conflict, often involving regular armed forces, that is sustained, organized and large-scale. Civil wars result in large numbers of casualties and the expenditure of large amounts of resource. A civil war involves two-sided violence; for example, a massacre of civilians by the state is not a civil war. Similarly, less intense forms of societal conflict, such as riots or social movements, are excluded from the definition.[2]"