- 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: Did the South ever really have a chance (Civil War)?
Posted on 7/18/22 at 11:47 am to prplhze2000
Posted on 7/18/22 at 11:47 am to prplhze2000
No doubt. But, you couple a superior strategy with an overwhelming edge in men and raw materials and the infrastructure in place to use the materials, you have a potential rout on your hands.
Really, I don't know what took the North so long to leverage it like they finally were able to. The only thing that explains it was probably the fact that in VA and the East, there are demonstrably better commanders for the Confederacy in the beginning of the war.
Really, I don't know what took the North so long to leverage it like they finally were able to. The only thing that explains it was probably the fact that in VA and the East, there are demonstrably better commanders for the Confederacy in the beginning of the war.
1
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:08 pm to SaintlyTiger88
You didn't learn this at Gettysburg?
Rebels take Little Round Top, get behind Union lines and it's over. The battle and then shortly afterward, the war.
Rebels take Little Round Top, get behind Union lines and it's over. The battle and then shortly afterward, the war.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:25 pm to LB84
quote:
The US lost its capitol to the enemy in the American Revolution and the War of 1812. Neither time did it finish them off or cause them to come to the negotiating table.
the Capitol had been in DC for barely a decade and the country was much smaller. You are right, capitols didn't mean much then, but meant a lot more in 1861.
the ,majority of the north was not at all interested in war with the south and if DC had fallen that quickly, their opposition would have steeled against it.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:42 pm to LSUinMA
quote:
You didn't learn this at Gettysburg?
Rebels take Little Round Top, get behind Union lines and it's over. The battle and then shortly afterward, the war.
Let's say the Confederates take LRT and force Meade to withdrawal (it most likely wouldn't have). Meade simply falls back to the prepared Pipe Creek defensive line.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:47 pm to udtiger
quote:
but meant a lot more in 1861.
DC hardly made anything for warfare. Unless you somehow capture all the politicians and generals it means about nothing (they would have evacuated). Now Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, or Philadelphia where each of those cities had more manufacturing capabilities than any 3 southern cities put together would be more worthwhile.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:48 pm to LSUinMA
quote:
Rebels take Little Round Top, get behind Union lines and it's over.
So you're alleging that one regiment (the 15th Alabama) could have taken the entire Union army from the rear if they got around the 20th Maine? Not a chance. Little Round Top was a side show compared to what was happening in the Wheatfield, Devil's Den, the Peach Orchard and Cemetery Ridge on the afternoon of July 2. Law's Alabamians and Robinson's Texans had no chance to follow up a potential capture of Little Round Top because there were no reserve units behind them to exploit such a breach. Meanwhile, there were 13,000 Federal troops in the immediate vicinity who could have launched a successful counterattack.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:52 pm to SaintlyTiger88
Casualties
360,222 Union deaths
258,000 Confederate deaths
The union forced immigrants to fight for them pretty much. Too much cannon fodder to overcome.
360,222 Union deaths
258,000 Confederate deaths
The union forced immigrants to fight for them pretty much. Too much cannon fodder to overcome.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:55 pm to LSUinMA
In a war of attrition, the North would win 10x out of 10.
The South being agricultural and much lower population density, had no chance against the industrial north.
The South being agricultural and much lower population density, had no chance against the industrial north.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 12:58 pm to TutHillTiger
quote:
, we were the vastly superior woodsman and fighters, h
This one always gets me. The Southern officer corps was better at the beginning of the war, but that advantage had evened out by the middle of the war through attrition and battlefield selection pressure.
But the individual Union soldiers were a lot more formidable and courageous than Southern sympathizers would have you believe - in that regard they were the equal of their Southern counterparts. How many times did backwoods and rural men from Michigan, Indiana Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Maine step up when it mattered?
There are towns in western Michigan that lost 50% of their male population in the war.
This post was edited on 7/18/22 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 7/18/22 at 1:17 pm to deeprig9
The North was taking immigrants straight off the boats, mainly Irish at the time and inducting them into the military. This helped them immensely when they were having a tough time recruiting Native American soldier’s and sailors.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 1:21 pm to Pauldingtiger
quote:
The North was taking immigrants straight off the boats, mainly Irish at the time and inducting them into the military. This helped them immensely when they were having a tough time recruiting Native American soldier’s and sailors.
I remember my history professor talking about this. He made the comment that these Irishmen left their British controlled homeland where they were paid next to nothing and not allowed to even look at a gun. They came over here and right off the boat they were offered a gun along with the best paycheck they'd have ever seen. lol
Posted on 7/18/22 at 1:26 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
But the individual Union soldiers were a lot more formidable and courageous than Southern sympathizers would have you believe - in that regard they were the equal of their Southern counterparts. How many times did backwoods and rural men from Michigan, Indiana Illinois, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Maine step up when it mattered?
Yep. In fact if you tour the Gettysburg Battlefield, they'll point out that maybe for the first time Southern troops faced a sizable number of Union soldiers who were themselves from very rural areas and had just as much experience with firearms, etc., as their Southern counterparts.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 3:02 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
So you're alleging that one regiment (the 15th Alabama) could have taken the entire Union army from the rear if they got around the 20th Maine
That's not what I'm alleging. Thanks.
How you proceed from taking LRT depends on if you're going artillery or infantry and if it is Lee or Longstreet giving orders.
If you eave it static and try to roll a few pieces of artillery up overnight and try to impact Cemetery Ridge on Day 3, that's probably inconsequential to the outcome as you suggest.
The other idea, pushing for a roll up behind Union lines is much more high risk given the Union numbers, but a rearguard action is so by definition also higher reward.
Such an action is admittedly hypothetical, but since we are talking about alternate events, it is all hypothetical.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 3:05 pm to SaintlyTiger88
The South lost because they fought a straight up and honorable war. If they use guerrilla tactics and use terrorist attacks on the northern population they eventually end the North and its populace’s desire for war and Congress is pressured to end it.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 3:27 pm to KiwiHead
You just described Prussia at the time.
And that Prussia kicked everyone's arse for those reasons. And Moltke knew how to use those resources.
And that Prussia kicked everyone's arse for those reasons. And Moltke knew how to use those resources.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 3:39 pm to LSUinMA
quote:
How you proceed from taking LRT depends on if you're going artillery or infantry and if it is Lee or Longstreet giving orders.
Command and control had already broken down on the right end of the Confederate assault. Hood was down, Law was in command, but never effectively took charge of the division since he was also trying to command his brigade in their assault on the Union left. So essentially there was no one in charge on that part of the battlefield who could have let Longstreet or Lee know that they had taken the hill. Even if there was, Little Round Top wasn't an objective in Lee's overall battle plan so he probably wouldn't have cared less if his men held the hill. He would have ordered them to continue moving forward because Cemetery Hill was the key to the battlefield - not Little Round Top.
You also have to factor into the equation that the only units assaulting Little Round Top were the 4th, 15th, 47th, and 48th Alabama as well as the 4th and 5th Texas. That's six Confederate regiments assaulting eight Union regiments once Weed's brigade arrives on the hill. It's not that big of a battle and there aren't enough Confederates to exploit any kind of breakthrough if they somehow manage to take the hill.
This post was edited on 7/18/22 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 7/18/22 at 3:43 pm to LSUinMA
quote:
How you proceed from taking LRT depends on if you're going artillery or infantry and if it is Lee or Longstreet giving orders.
If you eave it static and try to roll a few pieces of artillery up overnight and try to impact Cemetery Ridge on Day 3, that's probably inconsequential to the outcome as you suggest.
The other idea, pushing for a roll up behind Union lines is much more high risk given the Union numbers, but a rearguard action is so by definition also higher reward.
The Union Sixth Corps started arriving on the field at 3:00pm on July 2nd. That's 16K men that Longstreet would have run into.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 3:50 pm to RollTide1987
People forget that Lee had a significant force on the Union’s right flank at Chancellorsville with an even bigger opportunity to envelop the North and couldn’t pull it off.
There’s no way a regiment could do it even if Lee knew it was happening.
It was too hard for armies at that time to communicate, to see things in real time and then make things happen. They were severely limited.
There’s no way a regiment could do it even if Lee knew it was happening.
It was too hard for armies at that time to communicate, to see things in real time and then make things happen. They were severely limited.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 4:06 pm to doubleb
quote:
People forget that Lee had a significant force on the Union’s right flank at Chancellorsville with an even bigger opportunity to envelop the North and couldn’t pull it off.
It was even easier for him at Second Manassas. Longstreet's 28,000 men assaulted across wide open ground virtually unopposed and smashed the left flank of Pope's Army of Virginia. They still couldn't take Henry Hill and prevent the Union army from retreating. People talk about Chancellorsville all the time, but the Battle of Second Manassas could have been the American Civil War's version of Saratoga with an entire army taken off the field by Confederate forces.
Posted on 7/18/22 at 4:12 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
It was even easier for him at Second Manassas. Longstreet's 28,000 men assaulted across wide open ground virtually unopposed and smashed the left flank of Pope's Army of Virginia. They still couldn't take Henry Hill and prevent the Union army from retreating. People talk about Chancellorsville all the time, but the Battle of Second Manassas could have been the American Civil War's version of Saratoga with an entire army taken off the field by Confederate forces.
I will have to bone up on Second Bull Run.
I’ve read more on Chancellorsville, Antietam and Gettysburg.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News