Started By
Message

re: 158 years ago this evening, Stonewall Jackson was shot by his own men...

Posted on 5/3/21 at 4:27 am to
Posted by ChewyDante
Member since Jan 2007
16923 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 4:27 am to
quote:

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.


War is far more complicated and unpredictable than this and have political factors that can influence outcomes. Will is always an intangible. I'm not saying that Stonewall living would have changed the ultimate outcome of the war, but to suggest the USA was an inevitable winner in any scenario is rather absurd and simplistic.
Posted by Napoleon
Kenna
Member since Dec 2007
69106 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 6:14 am to
Like others have said, the US could out produce the south. Still. It makes for a lot of interesting premises.

Harry Turtledove has like five different universes were the south won and how. All intersecting. His best selling was the one where time travelers supplied the south with crates of AK-47s.

The longest series the south won, then lost badly in a second war. Then WW1 was centered in America as was WW2.
In that series the Civil War takes 80 years to finish.









Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
27555 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 6:27 am to
Revisionists speak always of Lee and his essentially circuitous movements in NoVa. They tend to overlook the fact that the CSA was getting rolled up in the West. Virginia was more of a side show to the action in TN,Ms, LA and later GA. The worst thing Meade did at Gettysburg is not sucking Lee further in, prohibiting his retreat, avoiding any chance at supply .

Lee doesn't have the best record at invasion. HE gets chewed up at Antietam and ground down at Gettysburg. Jackson is good fighting on his own ground, but against larger numbers like the Peninsula, he is just another general...not bad, just not all that outstanding. He was fortunate in that his opposition at the time was inept. Grant however, was not inept.
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 6:44 am to
quote:

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.
Agree again. Lee would have been better served to keep tANoVa in the Cumberland Valley and proceed towards Baltimore further stirring anti-war sentiment. But he was a man of action. Once he regained the use of his cavalry (something we have not even discussed) he would have pursued Meade where ever he went. It was just the way Lee was.
Posted by antibarner
Member since Oct 2009
23721 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 6:50 am to
The South had an opportunity at Vicksburg and dumbassed themselves out of it.

They had an inept commander of the garrison(Pemberton) named by a meddling President(Davis) and an inadequate theater commander on top of it all(Joe Johnston)

Pemberton did not prepare for a siege, the warehouses had not been filled and this ultimately led to his surrender. Had the Rebs figured a way to supply that garrison and sufficiently harass Grant, he would have either been forced to abandon the siege or he'd still be trying to break into those fortifications, because he wasn't having any luck at it.

Vicksburg could have been the turning point, not Gettysburg. Hold it, bleed Grant and send everything they could there to Johnston to strike him from the rear. Force him to abandon the siege or bleed him dry.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 6:55 am
Posted by RollTide1987
Augusta, GA
Member since Nov 2009
65113 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 7:09 am to
quote:

Vicksburg could have been the turning point, not Gettysburg. Hold it, bleed Grant and send everything they could there to Johnston to strike him from the rear. Force him to abandon the siege or bleed him dry.


This is what Longstreet wanted to do. He was opposed to the Pennsylvania plan at the outset because he felt like the war would be won or lost along the Mississippi River and in Tennessee. He had CSA Secretary of War James Seddon agreeing with this proposal but then Lee sojourned to Richmond to argue his case for another invasion of the North and that was that.

Longstreet is without a doubt the most underrated military commander of the Civil War. He has long been remembered as a defensive general who preferred digging in to attacking. People forget, however, that he launched some of the most violent assaults of the entire war.

1. Gaines' Mill - Robert E. Lee's only victory during the Seven Days' Campaign.
2. Second Manassas - Longstreet launched the largest mass assault of the war with 24,000 men going in at once.
3. Gettysburg - Longstreet launched a ferocious assault on the left end of the Union line that he called the best fighting any army had ever done in three or four hours. He also launched Pickett's Charge - the most famous assault of the entire war.
4. Chickamuaga - Longstreet launched the assault that broke the Union line on the afternoon of the battle's second day, causing the Union army to collapse and retreat toward Chattanooga.
5. The Wilderness - Longstreet launched a massive assault reminiscent of Jackson's at Chancellorsville. The attack caused the collapse of the Union left flank under Hancock, who commented to Longstreet after the war: "You rolled me up like a wet blanket." The assault might have won the battle outright for the Confederacy if not for Longstreet being severely wounded by his own men, killing the attack's momentum in the process.

Longstreet's reputation with southerners suffered heavily after the war due to his politics. He became a Republican and worked hand-in-hand with the Johnson and Grant administrations during the military occupation of the South.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 7:13 am
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
27555 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:20 am to
The war was over in April/May of 1862 with Shiloh and New Orleans. Grant dumps about 63000 troops into the middle of enemy territory. Yeah, he loses about 13,000 people but the confederates lose about 10,000. Grant establishes himself in W. TN and Northern MS and controls both the Mississippi and Tennessee Rivers. He ends up bringing superior firepower to bear on the CSA and manpower overall. Plus the Union also holds Nashville.

If if we're a skiff we'd all be boating. The North had overwhelming numbers. Industrial might that makes the South look impotent and ultimately naval assets that could starve the South out. Grant could be resupplied a lot easier than the confederates. Owning the navigable rivers is checkmate. A.S. Johnson, had he lived would have soon been ground down by numbers and material.

Longstreet as good as he was would have been ground down. You speak of Chickamauga, but Grant shows up and kicks a Confederate army off a mountain. Let that sink in. You control the high ground and still Grant shows up and pushes you off. After that it's just wanton destruction and there was nothing Longstreet or Lee or Johnston could do. He'll, there would be nothing Jackson could have done to counteract the Union advantage....NOTHING.
Posted by Mr. Misanthrope
Cloud 8
Member since Nov 2012
5491 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:44 am to
quote:

Longstreet is without a doubt the most underrated military commander of the Civil War.

Agree. He spent considerable time working on ratios of attackers to defenders; impact of fortifications on the mathematics of attack and defense. It goes a long way to explain his successes in attack and defense and why Lee should have heeded Longstreet’s reluctance to continue at Gettysburg after the Federal troops gained and held the high ground of the fishhook.
Posted by StrongOffer
Member since Sep 2020
4355 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:46 am to
3 pages and no ghost of Stonewall Jackson gif
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
51296 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:47 am to
quote:

Had the Rebs figured a way to supply that garrison


There was no way.

quote:

Vicksburg could have been the turning point


Mississippi was already in flames by the time Grant arrived at Vicksburg.
Posted by Big_Slim
Mogadishu
Member since Apr 2016
3977 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 9:00 am to
quote:

I'm not a Civil War buff at all, but even I know this is a dumb take.


Shelby Foote makes a case for it
Posted by RancherReb
MS
Member since Jan 2021
1052 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 9:00 am to
Stonewall should have been sent west to take command of the army Pemberton had in Vicksburg.

At least, that is my opinion and it sounds good.
Posted by 14&Counting
Eugene, OR
Member since Jul 2012
37641 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 9:00 am to
quote:

It would have been interesting to see how he responded during the first day of Gettysburg. Would he have given Lee a tactical advantage that was lost by his other commanders, particularly Ewell and AP Hill.

That was the whole point to the Pennsylvania campaign, to force the North to sue for peace.


I think the South wins the Battle of Gettysburg with Jackson. He would have taken Little Roundtop and the held the high ground.

Having Jackson in command likely would have extended the war, but it was a war the South couldn't win.
Posted by HeadSlash
TEAM LIVE BADASS - St. GEORGE
Member since Aug 2006
49678 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 9:18 am to
quote:


If Stonewall doesnt die, the CSA wins the war (or at the very least, avoids defeat)


Romantic sentiment. The South had no chance in a protracted conflict. The North's advantage in population and industrial might was to great to overcome.
Posted by geauxbrown
Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
19475 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 9:23 am to
All the comments about the South not having any chance remind me that it’s difficult to view history from a modern day perspective and be certain of outcomes.

There were multiple times during that war where the South was within striking distance of DC, Bull Run being a great example.

Granted, taking DC would be no guarantee of the Union losing, but it would have had huge ramifications throughout the anti war North.
Posted by RollTide1987
Augusta, GA
Member since Nov 2009
65113 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 9:51 am to
quote:

There were multiple times during that war where the South was within striking distance of DC, Bull Run being a great example.


True...but more often than not the South did not have the reserves to exploit their opportunities. This plagued the Army of Northern Virginia time after time. They'd achieve a breakthrough but by the time they had their units were exhausted and running low on ammunition.

People say the Confederate army could have marched on Washington, D.C. after their victory at First Manassas. What they fail to take into account is that the Confederates were just as exhausted and disorganized in victory as the Union was in defeat. They had also just gotten done fighting the largest and bloodiest battle in American history up to that point in time. The psychological shock alone must have been crazy.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 9:53 am
Posted by windshieldman
Member since Nov 2012
12818 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 10:20 am to
quote:

south won and how. All intersecting. His best selling was the one where time travelers supplied the south with crates of AK-47s.


Posted by EvrybodysAllAmerican
Member since Apr 2013
11165 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 10:20 am to
quote:

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.


This is what people dont understand about the War of Northern Aggression. The goal wasnt to conquer the yankee army but to force a peace settlement and be left alone. There were times that it was very close. Many think Stonewall couldve helped win Gettysburg, stayed on the offensive and forced that settlement.

Vietnam is a good comparison. The war wasnt popular in northern states.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 10:23 am
Posted by Wolfhound45
Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan
Member since Nov 2009
120000 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 10:40 am to
quote:

He would have taken Little Roundtop and the held the high ground.
He would have been the lead Corps (Ewell and AP Hill took the remnants of his command) into Gettysburg. That would have placed him on the Confederate left/Union right throughout the fight (you cannot easily disengage and cross Corps). Longstreet arrived second (less some of his divisions) and flowed to the Confederate right/Union left. That is why his Corps fought in the Devil’s Den and at Little Round Top on the second day (even though there was a long delay as they made the march to position themselves).
Posted by ZULU
Member since Sep 2009
1003 posts
Posted on 5/3/21 at 11:03 am to
Need to put a monument there.
Oh wait.... nevermind
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram