re: Did the South ever really have a chance (Civil War)?

quote:

---

If they could have regrouped after First Bull Run, they could have taken DC and likely made USA sue for peace.

---

This... The South's posture was basically defensive and that ended up being a strategic mistake. The North was never more vulnerable than during the 1st part of the war...

quote:

---

I do know that if the South would of won, we'd of had it made.

---

That's a typical southern education right there. No one "has it made" with that, Pal.

quote:

---

This... The South's posture was basically defensive and that ended up being a strategic mistake. The North was never more vulnerable than during the 1st part of the war...

---

Just ignore the fact that when they went on the offensive they promptly got their arse kicked.

Pragmatically speaking? No probably not. Really needed more bone head decisions from northern generals, Lee not to screw up at Gettysburg and Lincoln to lose re election in 1864.

That’s the Cliff notes. It was next to impossible

quote:

---

Confederates also suffered a 20-25% casualty rate in that first battle in Gettysburg.

---

then it may not have been gettysburg, its been a long time since history class

but it was the battle in washington where the union was completely routed on day one, and they ran away in an unorganized retreat, scattered accross the countryside with no leadership, and they didnt regroup until mid morning of the next day when reinforcements arrived. the path into washington was wide open and had lees troops simply marched into washington, they would have had the president and congress as their prisoners, well before the next morning sun rose.

it was one of the biggest military blunders in history and made the war drag on when it could have been over in that 24 hr period

quote:

---

at gettysburg (i think it was gettysburg) they won large on the first day, the union retreated and was in shambles and they could have just walked into the capital unopposed, after that they could have arrested lincoln and congress and forced their surrender and the war would be won. instead, they just fricked around and got drunk celebrating winning the battle rather then march unopposed right into washington and finish winning the war. all because they never expected to win so easily and they had no orders what to do after taking gettysburg

---

This sounds like the first Bull Run. And who knows how the North’s citizens would’ve felt about the South invading D.C. For most of the war, and maybe a century afterwards, the South was seen as the lovable underdog, possessing élan and justification in their pursuit of freedom. But Lee was right I believe; he didn’t not want to be seen as a conqueror or aggressor, and had his eye on relations after the war. Sort of the same strategy you would take if you planned on divorcing your spouse but intended to move next door.

The North needed to agree to quit, because had the South forced the issue upon them under duress, there would’ve been civil wars into perpetuity.

In a parlor in A mansion in New Orleans about 4 months before Fort Sumpter this exact discussion occurred with my ancestors being present, according to family history. (Minor family statewide but had considerable influence in some of the Florida Parishes)

I am told they were opposed to the war and thought it would be a disaster. (They were former shipbuilders from the North, and keep close contacts with English etc )

They didn’t believe that the English or French would ever become involved, thought the possibility of a blockade was real and we didn’t have enough ships to handle it, and the lack of foundries etc was a real problem, and that they would fight to keep us whole. This was a minority view but not by a ton and everyone was concerned.
It was pointed out that we only had a few dozen slaves etc, and maybe our ties to the North were too much, etc by some of the big plantation guys, which was true, but the storm was already on the horizon.

The majority view was that they would back down when they saw we were serious, it would never last more than 6 months before they decided it wasn’t worth it, we were the vastly superior woodsman and fighters, had all the good commanders and that if the war cuts off cotton etc to Europe they French and/or English would intervene force a treaty or something.

Whether that’s really the truth or not, who knows.

We all fought and died like everyone else, but family letters etc, definitely showed that people weren’t all stupid down here we knew it was uphill battle, it was simply a storm that couldn’t be avoided.

But hell 150 years later this USSC is looking like it’s going to say we were right

Nope not at all. The British would’ve gotten wrecked if they even attempted so. The fact that DC was across the river and the south couldn’t even threaten it says a lot.

quote:

---

The South's posture was basically defensive and that ended up being a strategic mistake.

---

There was absolutely no way in hell the Confederate army could have successfully regrouped to make an assault on Washington, D.C. in the aftermath of First Bull Run. This alternative history also ignores the fact that there was another Union army of about 12,000 men within marching distance of the capital to defend against just such an attack.

People also seem to forget that Washington, D.C. sits on the opposite side of the Potomac River from Virginia and is an imposing natural barrier to any potential assaulting force.