- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Another Civlil War Question
Posted on 8/9/20 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 8/9/20 at 9:57 pm
Did southern leaders think they could defeat the union in a major war or was the goal to force the union into to a quick ceasefire, preserving states rights in the south for a little longer?
Looking at it through today’s lense, a path to military victory for the south seems impossible. Were the confederates grossly over confident? Did they expect the British to get involved?
What was the real goal as an out right military victory seems so unlikely?
Looking at it through today’s lense, a path to military victory for the south seems impossible. Were the confederates grossly over confident? Did they expect the British to get involved?
What was the real goal as an out right military victory seems so unlikely?
This post was edited on 8/9/20 at 9:58 pm
Posted on 8/9/20 at 9:59 pm to greenbean
quote:
Were the confederates grossly over confident?
Yes and they were all hopped up on Mountain Dew.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:00 pm to greenbean
They were hoping the French would get involved to help preserve the cotton trade.
This post was edited on 8/9/20 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:01 pm to greenbean
I respect that, with a question that has been analyzed by experts in great detail in many places readily available through a google search, you decided to come here to ask instead. I appreciate your level of faith in us.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:02 pm to greenbean
The initial goal was to force the government to negotiate with them. When Lincoln refused, and war escalated, the goal became to bring England and or France in to recognize and support the Confederacy. When that failed, the goal became to win enough battles to make the prospect of a protracted war seem unpalatable to the North. Which would bring about the defeat of Lincoln in the election of 1864. When that failed, the gig was up and the end came pretty quick.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:09 pm to greenbean
The south had better odds than the colonists had against the British.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:20 pm to greenbean
Had they not stopped at 1st bull run they may have been able to Take the capital and force an armistice before the union war machine could truly mobilize and make use of its superior numbers and industry.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:23 pm to greenbean
The South didn’t have to win, just not lose. Inflict enough pain that the Union quits.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:23 pm to greenbean
quote:
Did southern leaders think they could defeat the union in a major war or was the goal to force the union into to a quick ceasefire, preserving states rights in the south for a little longer?
Watched a documentary on Jefferson Davis a while back. Among the many problems the south faced, Davis was a ridiculous micromanager of the war who wouldn’t hesitate to fire anyone he felt wasn’t all in for the cause. Where many southern leaders were in it to defend their homelands or other reasons, Davis was absolutely sure that none other than god himself had ordained the cause. This caused ridiculous amounts of friction between Jefferson and the confederate army leadership because they were not invested in the war to the extent Davis was.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:25 pm to No Colors
That’s my understanding as well.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:27 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
The south had better odds than the colonists had against the British.
Really does put into perspective how shitty the south was, huh?
I thought we were supposed to be the ones who are good with guns.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:28 pm to greenbean
quote:
preserving states rights
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:33 pm to greenbean
Edited and still an insult to the English language.
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:38 pm to greenbean
quote:
Looking at it through today’s lense, a path to military victory for the south seems impossible
Had the South fought more of a guerrilla war, it could have been possible. I'm not just talking defensive battles exclusively in the South, but raids into Union territory as well. The war would have been extended and support for it in the North would have likely diminished, especially in border areas. People forget George McClellan won 45% of the popular vote in 1864 with no Confederate states participating. And if war is still being waged leading up to 1868, does a candiate become President on a pledge to end the war via truce?
Posted on 8/9/20 at 10:46 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
The south had better odds than the colonists had against the British
North didn’t have a 3000 mile supply line and a lack of familiarity with the geography
Posted on 8/9/20 at 11:05 pm to udtiger
quote:
North didn’t have a 3000 mile supply line and a lack of familiarity with the geography
They also didn’t have the world’s largest, most trained army and a broke frick enemy that was supported by less than half the population.
The colonists had little chance of beating Britain, but they did. Truly one of the more remarkable victories in human history. And for the record there’s no individual more responsible for that than that guy George Washington... which is why lots of stuff is named after ole GW
And for the record, Alexander Hamilton - G-Dub’s right hand man - was the guy who truly saw and developed the plan to win. And his genius was that it wasn’t militarily; he knew we couldn’t beat them head to head. So he flipped the script and changed the battlefield. He understood economics, banking, and human behavior like few others and realized we didn’t have to beat the British on the field; we just needed all the Dutch creditors to King George start to get nervous and lose confidence and really start to put a pinch on the Crown Treasury. And he knew we could eventually just make it not worth it to the Crown and they’d have no choice but to pull out.
Of course few people in history have ever had the amount of raw leadership and charisma needed to hold an army together while essentially getting their arse kicked all over the place for the time required for Hamilton’s plan to realize. But one of those people in human history was George Washington and he’s why we exist today
Posted on 8/9/20 at 11:15 pm to greenbean
They had hope to get recognition from some European countries and then force the Union to the table and get independence
Posted on 8/9/20 at 11:16 pm to greenbean
The British probably wouldn't have helped a cause, since they outlawed "slavery".
Maybe prussians, France( Napolen 3) would have gotten involved.
Could Ottomans have helped?
Maybe prussians, France( Napolen 3) would have gotten involved.
Could Ottomans have helped?
Posted on 8/9/20 at 11:18 pm to Boo Krewe
France was close to recognizing the CSA. But then the South lost a major battle and it made the French reconsider
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News