- 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: Another Civlil War Question
Posted on 8/10/20 at 9:19 am to cave canem
Posted on 8/10/20 at 9:19 am to cave canem
quote:
Briton had too many other fish to fry and decided the effort was not worth it at the time
This. Briton's prize overseas possessions were in the Caribbean. India was a distant second. They basically lost money on the 13 colonies which was why they started taxing more and more.
0
Posted on 8/10/20 at 9:21 am to tigerdup07
quote:
it's pretty well known that, if we don't accidentally kill stonewall, we probably would have won. most books i've read have stated the same thing. he was a math genius who put that cannon ball where he wanted. when artillery was accurate, the battle was half won
The minie ball and it’s accuracy (300+ yards) greatly decreased the effectiveness of artillery in the Civil War.
Jackson alone couldn’t have saved the confederacy.
Posted on 8/10/20 at 9:24 am to Sus-Scrofa
quote:
A lot could still happen. The 64 election could have been different, etc. But you still have Grant taking Vicksburg and being brought east. If Lincoln wins reelection and there's not a political end to the war, you have to figure the north wins anyway, even if it takes an extra year or two.
I believe the fall of Atlanta greatly aided Lincoln’s re-election, too.
Posted on 8/10/20 at 9:33 am to Tornado Alley
quote:
The minie ball and it’s accuracy (300+ yards)
300 is a bit of a stretch I think as far as accuracy on an unscoped weapon...but would definitely fly straighter than a smooth bore. I believe it’s more like 200-250 for a minie ball.
Btw, I’ve got two .69cal minie’ balls I dug out of field in LA across from Vicksburg...those things were massive. The damage had to be horrific.
This post was edited on 8/10/20 at 9:38 am
Posted on 8/10/20 at 9:46 am to doubleb
quote:
They believed they could withdraw from the union the same way they joined the Union.
So you're saying they believed the Constitution
Posted on 8/10/20 at 12:37 pm to lake chuck fan
quote:
The war never was about slavery.
Incorrect. The war was entirely about slavery. And most of the North was agriculture, too. But you’ll never hear the South admit they got their asses kicked by a bunch of farm boys from Ohio. Hurts too much to admit that the SEC lost a home game to the Big-10.
Posted on 8/10/20 at 12:49 pm to greenbean
What was the thought process behind making Richmond the confederate capital? Seems foolish to put the capital 100 miles from Washington.
Posted on 8/10/20 at 1:19 pm to greenbean
I think it was partly done to appease the state of Virginia, don’t quote me on that bc I can’t remember for sure
Posted on 8/10/20 at 1:19 pm to greenbean
The south lost because it failed to prepare. The writing was on the wall for a long time prior to hostilities.
Instead of being almost 100% agriculture they needed more factories that could produce the needed materials.
If they had had that they would have had a chance...
Instead of being almost 100% agriculture they needed more factories that could produce the needed materials.
If they had had that they would have had a chance...
Posted on 8/10/20 at 1:45 pm to CrownTownHalo
quote:
Link?
Don't need a link to tell you that Britain was the WORLD'S leading military power that had troop garrisons scattered throughout the colonies. Meanwhile, the colonies formed militia that eventually beat the greatest military force in the world.
The US at the time, was still reeling from several wars against the british, and trying to build an economy and a nation. It appears, that half of the states forming an army and battling the other half would have a better chance than say militia vs. the current greatest super power (the british) of the time.
This post was edited on 8/10/20 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 8/10/20 at 2:22 pm to BugAC
British had the mightiest navy. British have a good army , but the best at the time ? On land :
In the 1700s, china wasn't that weak. Ottomans
In the 1700s, china wasn't that weak. Ottomans
Posted on 8/10/20 at 2:28 pm to greenbean
quote:
preserving states rights in the south
Posted on 8/10/20 at 3:21 pm to Broski
quote:Go look up some Confederate victories and look at ratios of fighting men. I could see a small handful out of 150+ sizeable battles being won while heavily outnumbered, but the amount that the Confederates racked up in that manner is not pure luck. Either you're a terrible troll or you really should read more before posting.
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 8/10/20 at 3:27 pm to greenbean
quote:
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?
You have been brainwashed by revisionist history teachers that have swallowed that bs hook, line, and sinker.
The South kicked arse all considered. With the advantages the Yanks had it shouldn't have even been close.
They fought for a cause - not over skin color.
Can you still obtain a refund on your education?
Posted on 8/10/20 at 3:30 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Incorrect. The war was entirely about slavery. And most of the North was agriculture, too. But you’ll never hear the South admit they got their asses kicked by a bunch of farm boys from Ohio. Hurts too much to admit that the SEC lost a home game to the Big-10.
Most erroneous post in TD.com history
Posted on 8/10/20 at 4:38 pm to Bayou
quote:
You have been brainwashed by revisionist history teachers that have swallowed that bs hook, line, and sinker.
Actually the opposite. I've always heard, "If Lee would have flanked," or "if Stonewall wouldn't have been killed," or "if not for a rain storm," etc., the south would have won. I don't think the south ever had a puncher's chance.
Additionally, I was always taught the Civil War was not about slavery. That is also wrong at least for MS, see this from MS's Declaration of Secession:
"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. "
I think of it as a MSU/Bama football game, the Bulldogs may make it close through half time, but by the end of the 3rd quarter the outcome is no longer in doubt.
This post was edited on 8/10/20 at 5:12 pm
Posted on 8/10/20 at 10:16 pm to RockChalkTiger
quote:
Incorrect. The war was entirely about slavery
Then why didn't Lincoln say that until 18 months after the war started
Posted on 8/10/20 at 10:50 pm to greenbean
I don’t know what their plan was, but had the south marched onto DC after the first battle of bull run, they could have won the war.
Posted on 8/10/20 at 10:51 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
The south had better odds than the colonists had against the British.
bullshite, northern supply lines weren't across a vast ocean, the north wasn't more concerned with matters a continent away,and then north could place more troops in battle with superior supply to the British
Posted on 8/10/20 at 11:01 pm to Lithium
I'm going with the appeasement of the border states.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News