- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- 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
re: 158 years ago this evening, Stonewall Jackson was shot by his own men...
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:01 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:01 pm to RollTide1987
quote:More accurately, Longstreet’s Assault (it was his Corps that made up the majority of the forces - Pickett was only one division commander who participated). However, I absolutely agree with your assertion. Once they had failed the day previous to flank the left side of the Union line (Devil’s Den, Little Round Top et al) the overall battle had been lost. He would have been better served to maneuver to his right and try to superimpose himself between Meade and DC. Played to the Union political powers rather than winning a tactical fight.
Pickett's Charge, from a strategic and operational perspective, was anti-climatic.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:02 pm to tWildcat
quote:
It always amazes me how some people can pass by an area unaware of the historical significance that place has in history. Like the white car in that photo
Rather harsh assumption of the driver of the white car for no reason
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:07 pm to Hester Carries
quote:
If Stonewall doesnt die, the CSA wins the war (or at the very least, avoids defeat)
The what if regarding Stonewall is one of those great mysteries.
I personally don’t think the CSA would’ve won the war with him, the Union had the tremendous manpower and industrial advantage. I think at most they could’ve forced public support in the North towards to the war to completely collapse, it was already teetering at this point.
Maybe the South could’ve forced an Armistice or something, but an outright victory even with Stonewall seems unlikely. Even with a CSA victory at Gettysburg the Union could’ve just regrouped, they had the manpower to. Also, everyone always forgets Grant was running roughshod in the West at the same time anyways. The Deep South was effectively beaten, all that would’ve remained was the Army of Northern Virginia.
This post was edited on 5/2/21 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:09 pm to Frac the world
The south didn’t need to win. They needed to make the north go home.
Just like Vietnam. They didn’t defeat the US. They made the US get sick of it and go home.
Just like Vietnam. They didn’t defeat the US. They made the US get sick of it and go home.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:14 pm to The Boat
quote:This.
The south didn’t need to win. They needed to make the north go home.
People view this as a tactical struggle. They fail to take into account how unpopular the war was in the North. That was the purpose of the Pennsylvania campaign. To create a political climate where the Union would sue for peace. Problem is, people also fail to take into account how iron-willed Lincoln was. He would not have been cowed into a peace settlement.
Don’t have to like the facts, but you do have to acknowledge them.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:15 pm to The Boat
quote:
The south didn’t need to win. They needed to make the north go home.
Which I said in my post (i.e. "avoid defeat")
But this board thinks yelling "i disagree you idiot" with no actual substance makes them smart.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:18 pm to The Boat
I didn’t say they did, I said they may not in the same sentence.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:22 pm to tWildcat
What if Stonewall survived
I think Shelby Foote said the CSA would have won with Stonewall, therefore I believed it. After watching this video I changed my mind.
As people have noted in this thread, this video shows the CSA was just flat out of resources for a war to continue.
I think Shelby Foote said the CSA would have won with Stonewall, therefore I believed it. After watching this video I changed my mind.
As people have noted in this thread, this video shows the CSA was just flat out of resources for a war to continue.
This post was edited on 5/2/21 at 12:24 pm
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:29 pm to West Palm Tiger561
The biggest fallacy people make in the alternative history scenario of Jackson being at Gettysburg is thinking the battle would have been fought at Gettysburg at all if, presumably, Jackson managed to take either Cemetery Hill or Culp's Hill on the evening of July 1. They fail to take into account Meade's desire to lure the Confederate army into Maryland and have the decisive battle be fought at Pipe Creek, near Union Mills.
The only reason why the Battle of Gettysburg went down the way it did is because the Union retained possession of those two vital hills. Had Ewell (or Jackson, assuming he survived Chancellorsville) managed to take them, Meade would have simply ordered the Union army to retreat back into Maryland. Gettysburg, therefore, would have gone down in history as a prelude to the larger and more decisive battle.
The only reason why the Battle of Gettysburg went down the way it did is because the Union retained possession of those two vital hills. Had Ewell (or Jackson, assuming he survived Chancellorsville) managed to take them, Meade would have simply ordered the Union army to retreat back into Maryland. Gettysburg, therefore, would have gone down in history as a prelude to the larger and more decisive battle.
This post was edited on 5/2/21 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:40 pm to RollTide1987
The souths best chance was squandered at the beginning of the war when they didn't take DC after Bull Run.
Also while it would still be a long shot, if Jackson was still alive and the south had been able to cause a draw or win at Gettysburg there is an argument this would have hurt Lincoln's reelection chances. There was strong sentiments in the north to reach an agreement with the south and end the war prior to Gettysburg.
Also while it would still be a long shot, if Jackson was still alive and the south had been able to cause a draw or win at Gettysburg there is an argument this would have hurt Lincoln's reelection chances. There was strong sentiments in the north to reach an agreement with the south and end the war prior to Gettysburg.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 12:43 pm to RollTide1987
quote:Very plausible considering the lack of forceful, decisive Union leadership in the East up until that point. Live to fight another day.
Had Ewell (or Jackson, assuming he survived Chancellorsville) managed to take them, Meade would have simply ordered the Union army to retreat back into Maryland. Gettysburg, therefore, would have gone down in history as a prelude to the larger and more decisive battle.
Highly recommend to all of the armchair historians that they read Lincoln and His Generals by T. Harry Williams. Lincoln was hamstrung from the outset with inept leadership at the operational and strategic level. Also, though it is sacrilege to point this out, Jackson had demonstrated failings as well, particularly much earlier during the Peninsula Campaign. It is not a foregone conclusion that he would have won the heights on the first day of fighting.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:06 pm to tWildcat
quote:The reason I have few problems with some historical markers proclaiming " X Civil War battle was fought at this site & Stonewall Jackson was mortally wounded ...." .
It always amazes me how some people can pass by an area unaware of the historical significance that place has in history
But I have problems with statues & monuments( on public property) to ANY soldiers & Politicians who are supposed to be mere public servants . Some complain that Politicians are arrogant , think they are " above the law" & "Elites who look down on flyover states". Yet some literally place Politicians on pedestals with statues / monuments & then wonder why Politicians are full of themselves or feel so self righteous about their profession. (End rant)
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:11 pm to sugar71
Isn't there some debate about the origin of the nickname "Stonewall"? I think some take it as he was an impenetrable force, while others claim he often showed the inability to act, stood there like a stone wall.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:13 pm to RollTide1987
Thar he stands, steadfastly, like a stone wall!!
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:21 pm to sicboy
quote:
Isn't there some debate about the origin of the nickname "Stonewall"? I think some take it as he was an impenetrable force, while others claim he often showed the inability to act, stood there like a stone wall.
I thought it was a soldier saw him standing on the front lines with bullets going by him, calm and unbothered by the circumstances around him.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:21 pm to sicboy
quote:The officer attributed with the nickname, Brigadier General Bernard Elliott Bee, Jr., died that day. It is commonly stated he was referring to the stedfast courage of Jackson. However, there are some (not many) that say he was referring to Jackson in a derisive manner.
Isn't there some debate about the origin of the nickname "Stonewall"? I think some take it as he was an impenetrable force, while others claim he often showed the inability to act, stood there like a stone wall.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:24 pm to Wolfhound45
I came across a snippet about it in Battlecry of Freedom so I was curious.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:34 pm to Penrod
quote:you are so ignorant of the truth. Jackson would have burned DC to the ground before any of that mattered. That's just a fact. I couldn't care less who won but they were able to take plenty of weapons and ammunition from the union soldiers.
Absurd! The CSA had no chance against the USA. The asymmetry in factories, etc meant it was a matter of time. Their ports were blockaded, and they had no means to sustain themselves in a protracted war.
Posted on 5/2/21 at 1:45 pm to RollTide1987
Had Meade retreated back to Maryland it is then possible Lee threatens a larger metro area of the north. This could have also lead to the negotiating table. Just so many variables. Only certainty is losing Jackson was a crushing blow.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 2:14 am to Yaz 8
quote:
Had Meade retreated back to Maryland it is then possible Lee threatens a larger metro area of the north.
Doubtful.
Lee's main objective was to draw the Union army into battle. Once that battle commenced, there would be no turning back. He would have followed Meade into Maryland and would have either a) attempted to maneuver Meade out of his Pipe Creek position or b) attacked.
Popular
Back to top



0






