re: Trivia - What is the SECOND bloodiest day in American history?

quote:

---

That's right. Five deaths and six other injuries was the second bloodiest day in US history.

---

That's considered a slow day in Chicago.

To whoever said the Boston Massacre, the Boston Molasses disaster was deadlier. Killed 21 people in literally a flood of molasses
LINK

No one has gotten close yet.

I'll give you a hint: it's a battle from the Civil War.

quote:

---

it's a battle from the Civil War

---

Battle of (or is it "at"?) the Wilderness?


Really neat historical site, if anyone reading has never been and is in the area. Definitely worth a stop.

Are we going to get the answer? I like the Galveston one.

Okay...I'll reveal the answer.

May 3, 1863. The third day of the Battle of Chancellorsville. It is estimated that 21,500 Americans were casualties on that day, making it the second bloodiest day in American history.

While Antietam and Chancellorsville have the Top 2 bloodiest days in American history, I don't think there was a more intense day of fighting than the second day of the Battle of Gettysburg. In less than 6 hours of combat, ended only by the coming of night, more than 18,000 Americans fell on those awful killing fields.

The Battle of Antietam and the third day of the Battle of Chancellorsville were all day affairs.

quote:

---

Including Jackson, who if he had been alive would have won Gettysburg

---

Disagree. When people spout this they ignore the fact that had Jackson been alive, the battle would not have played out like it did. The Confederate Army wouldn't have been re-organized in the wake of his death (as he would have still been alive) and thus the way the Confederates arrived at Gettysburg would have been much different.

Had Jackson and the Confederates somehow managed to capture the high ground south of town at the end of July 1, Meade would have simply ordered the Union army back to Union Mills, Maryland to make a stand. The ground around that area was superior to the ground around Gettysburg and was where Meade had planned to lure and fight Lee all along.

quote:

---

Those who "spout" also disregard that Jackson moved his army faster than anyone & understood the need to not fight against entrenched enemies.

---

You go where the roads go. If Meade had entrenched himself at Pipe Creek it was either attack or go home. It perfectly defended Baltimore and Washington, had a strong network of roads where Meade could shift around troops rather quickly, and had excellent fields of fire for artillery.

Lee couldn't risk turning his army around and moving back into Pennsylvania. Even with Jackson by his side, there would have been relatively few options. And Meade, unlike his predecessors, was a very competent army commander. He knew what he was doing and was the most formidable opponent Lee had taken on up to that point.

quote:

---

Wasn't the South invading/raiding the north at that point? Why head back south to fight an enemy behind you?

---

Because you will have then put 95,000 enemy soldiers into your rear, the most vulnerable part of any army. All Meade had to do was advance and attack Lee before he could get himself turned around. The war would have been over within hours at that point.

Off the top of my head, I would say in the Battle of Chickamagua.