- 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: The South lost Stonewall Jackson on this day 163 years ago...
Posted on 5/11/26 at 4:05 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 5/11/26 at 4:05 pm to RollTide1987
Let us cross over the river and rest in the shade of the trees.
0
Posted on 5/11/26 at 4:05 pm to KiwiHead
Wrong quote
This post was edited on 5/11/26 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 5/11/26 at 6:50 pm to weagle1999
quote:
Oh kiss off.
Apparently you haven't read any of the articles of succession?
Posted on 5/11/26 at 7:00 pm to greenbean
Apparently you haven’t read any of Lincoln’s statements?
This post was edited on 5/11/26 at 8:51 pm
Posted on 5/11/26 at 7:44 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:I regret that I have but one downvote to give for my country!!!
Rest in piss, traitor
Posted on 5/12/26 at 9:19 am to StanSmith
I live in Harrisonburg. Don’t tell all those people back home in La how much of a low crime paradise it is. If you do, they will all be up here tomorrow
Posted on 5/12/26 at 12:24 pm to NorCali
I thought he got shot by pickets riding back to camp in the dark? Just a terrible accident.
Posted on 5/12/26 at 1:28 pm to Mung
quote:
I thought he got shot by pickets riding back to camp in the dark? Just a terrible accident
He and a few others went out to assess the situation to make plans for the next attack. Without realizing it they got outside the Confederate picket line. As they returned they were challenged by the pickets who opened fire thinking it was a Federal recon party probing the lines.
Posted on 5/12/26 at 7:09 pm to Obi Wan Ryobi
quote:
The South could have won. European markets at the time gave them a 44% chance and that’s probably about right.
Not hardly. The north did not put nearly the resources into it that the south did and still kicked that a___.
The CW was kind of like a 2010s football game between Vandy and Bama, Vandy may keep it close through the first half, but eventual the depth and talent of Bama shows up and turns it into a 55-10 blowout.
My family has been in MS since the early 1800s, so most of my ancestors fought for the south, but that doesn't mean they were right or even understood what they were fighting far. Although as deep southern roots as anyone on this board, I can still be objective and use common sense.
This post was edited on 5/12/26 at 10:25 pm
Posted on 5/13/26 at 11:35 pm to greenbean
quote:
Not hardly. The north did not put nearly the resources into it that the south did and still kicked that a___.
The CW was kind of like a 2010s football game between Vandy and Bama, Vandy may keep it close through the first half, but eventual the depth and talent of Bama shows up and turns it into a 55-10 blowout.
My family has been in MS since the early 1800s, so most of my ancestors fought for the south, but that doesn't mean they were right or even understood what they were fighting far. Although as deep southern roots as anyone on this board, I can still be objective and use common sense.
The Confederacy lost the Civil War the day Stonewall Jackson died. With Stonewall Jackson, Gettysburg could have easily been a very different battle. The Confederacy probably still loses the Civil War even with Stonewall Jackson, but I think the Civil War gets extended for several years just because of him if he lives.
The problem with the whole Civil War debate is everyone looks at it through a 21st century perspective. Everyone Monday morning quarterbacks. In 2026, most states have little to no unique culture. States are far more administrative zones than they are sovereign governments anymore.
Back in 1861, states truly were like countries. And I don't think most can truly comprehend it, especially younger Millennials and Gen Z, but back then loyalty was to your state, not to the U.S. Even in the Union Army, soldiers fought for their states more than the U.S. as a whole. On that note, most Confederate soldiers could have cared less about slavery. Many probably even personally disagreed with it. But they were fighting for their states and for their families more than anything else. Many Confederate soldiers weren't in much better shape than slaves. Yes they had freedom, and I don't discount that, but most were dirt poor just like slaves.
If you really think about, the U.S. actually was meant to be the first EU. States are truly countries, with a small federal government that really only worried about a combined national defense, a universal currency, easy interstate commerce between the states and certain nationwide laws. State governments have more power than the Federal government.
The Civil War was about state's rights. Now yes, the most important right for the southern states was slavery. No debate there. Slavery was the most important issue for the Confederacy. And the Confederacy was absolutely wrong on slavery. But it wasn't the only issue, and the slavery issue was part of the broader battle for states to have more rights than the federal government. I know it's hard for many to understand nowadays, but wars can be fought for multiple reasons.
Once the Confederacy lost the Civil War, in reality the entire U.S. lost long term. Yes slavery ended, and that is a wonderful thing. But besides that, states were largely stripped of true power and independence following the Civil War. Southern states first of course, as part of reconstruction, but long term all states. States losing their right to govern themselves has also caused most states to lose their distinct culture.
Ironically, the Confederacy fought to stop the same type of overbearing federal government we now have today. Ironically, if the South had won the Civil War, it would actually be better for states like California and New York now. States would still have genuine autonomy and states like California and New York could easily be seceding from Trump and the U.S. right now. So the joke has ended up on them in a way.
This post was edited on 5/13/26 at 11:41 pm
Posted on 5/14/26 at 7:44 pm to TheMagicMan
quote:
The Confederacy lost the Civil War the day Stonewall Jackson died. With Stonewall Jackson, Gettysburg could have easily been a very different battle. The Confederacy probably still loses the Civil War even with Stonewall Jackson, but I think the Civil War gets extended for several years just because of him if he lives.
The problem with the whole Civil War debate is everyone looks at it through a 21st century perspective. Everyone Monday morning quarterbacks. In 2026, most states have little to no unique culture. States are far more administrative zones than they are sovereign governments anymore.
Back in 1861, states truly were like countries. And I don't think most can truly comprehend it, especially younger Millennials and Gen Z, but back then loyalty was to your state, not to the U.S. Even in the Union Army, soldiers fought for their states more than the U.S. as a whole. On that note, most Confederate soldiers could have cared less about slavery. Many probably even personally disagreed with it. But they were fighting for their states and for their families more than anything else. Many Confederate soldiers weren't in much better shape than slaves. Yes they had freedom, and I don't discount that, but most were dirt poor just like slaves.
If you really think about, the U.S. actually was meant to be the first EU. States are truly countries, with a small federal government that really only worried about a combined national defense, a universal currency, easy interstate commerce between the states and certain nationwide laws. State governments have more power than the Federal government.
The Civil War was about state's rights. Now yes, the most important right for the southern states was slavery. No debate there. Slavery was the most important issue for the Confederacy. And the Confederacy was absolutely wrong on slavery. But it wasn't the only issue, and the slavery issue was part of the broader battle for states to have more rights than the federal government. I know it's hard for many to understand nowadays, but wars can be fought for multiple reasons.
Once the Confederacy lost the Civil War, in reality the entire U.S. lost long term. Yes slavery ended, and that is a wonderful thing. But besides that, states were largely stripped of true power and independence following the Civil War. Southern states first of course, as part of reconstruction, but long term all states. States losing their right to govern themselves has also caused most states to lose their distinct culture.
Ironically, the Confederacy fought to stop the same type of overbearing federal government we now have today. Ironically, if the South had won the Civil War, it would actually be better for states like California and New York now. States would still have genuine autonomy and states like California and New York could easily be seceding from Trump and the U.S. right now. So the joke has ended up on them in a way.
Thank you for the thoughtful and well reasoned response.
I think one thing some of those who believe the south had a chance don't realize is how little effort/resources the north put into the war (compared to the south). The north had of tons in reserve they could have brought into the war (if and when needed).
This post was edited on 5/14/26 at 7:46 pm
Posted on 5/16/26 at 8:06 am to NorCali
quote:
Yes, so brilliant he got shot by his on troops accidentally after a flanking maneuver. Isn’t something taught in general school 101 about don’t put yourself or your troops in direct line of fire from your own army?
Time to let this era RIP in peace!
Being stupid is bearable, being vocal and stupid is intolerable
By the way, you do know rip means rest in peace why the stuttering?
Posted on 5/16/26 at 8:12 am to PJinAtl
quote:
As they returned they were challenged by the pickets who opened fire thinking it was a Federal recon party probing the lines.
When I lived in Richmond 40 years ago they had a great Confederacy Museum, I think its been renamed to the enlightenment or some other nonsense.
They had a scout's pocket notebook with a musket hole in it, it was owned by one of the scouts doing reconnaissance with Stonewall that night.
Posted on 5/16/26 at 8:14 am to trinidadtiger
"General Lee Im sorry to inform you that General Jackson has lost his left arm."
.......General Lee " I feel I have lost my right".
.......General Lee " I feel I have lost my right".
Posted on 5/16/26 at 8:51 am to RollTide1987
At Gettysburg, General Lee very much needed a healthy Stonewall Jackson commanding a powerful 33,000 man force aggressively crashing down on the town from the North, and an alert, able and aggressive JEB Stuart-led force of Cavalry present to inform the commanders in a timely manner with regard to the exact locations of the Union troops and their open flanks.
Lee had neither, and, as such, was relatively hesitant and cautions at a time when the situation required a Decisive Victory on that battlefield.
Meade's "Fall Back Plan" was contained in the Pipe Creek Circular, and that Pipe Creek line would have been a good defense line.
Also keep in mind that the fortress of Wash DC needed a large number of troops to garrison it, but most of those troops were pulled out of the area and sent to Meade's army. As such, Wash DC was vulnerable, provided Meade's army could be defeated decisively.
We will re-visit these ideas this coming July 1st, during our annual Battle of Gettysburg thread.
Lee had neither, and, as such, was relatively hesitant and cautions at a time when the situation required a Decisive Victory on that battlefield.
Meade's "Fall Back Plan" was contained in the Pipe Creek Circular, and that Pipe Creek line would have been a good defense line.
Also keep in mind that the fortress of Wash DC needed a large number of troops to garrison it, but most of those troops were pulled out of the area and sent to Meade's army. As such, Wash DC was vulnerable, provided Meade's army could be defeated decisively.
We will re-visit these ideas this coming July 1st, during our annual Battle of Gettysburg thread.
Posted on 5/16/26 at 11:43 am to Champagne
quote:
Lee had neither, and, as such, was relatively hesitant and cautions at a time when the situation required a Decisive Victory on that battlefield.
Lee's problem went far beyond untested corps commanders. During the Gettysburg campaign he constantly gave conflicting and ambiguous orders to his commanders whom couldn't make heads or tails of them. A perfect example are the orders he gave to Ewell on the evening of June 30, the day before the battle. These instructed Ewell to move toward Gettysburg OR Cashtown as circumstances dictated. This led Old Baldy to exclaim, "Why can't a commanding General have someone on his staff who can write an intelligible order?!"
The very next day, when Lee gave Ewell discretion to attack Cemetery Hill, this indefinite and conflicting phraseology bit Ewell in the arse again: "attack if practicable but avoid bringing on a general engagement." What does a corps commander do with those orders when the bulk of the Union army that they had just fought and defeated in a general engagement are currently parked on the objective, reforming and digging in?
Lee also did a piss poor job at communicating with his primary subordinates throughout the battle. He never had Longstreet, Hill, or Ewell in one room at the same time so they could all be on the same page. He would always speak to them separately and these conversations often produced decisions that weren't adequately passed on to the other two corps commanders.
At the end of the day, the main reason why Lee and the Confederacy lost the Battle of Gettysburg can be boiled down to poor communication.
Posted on 5/16/26 at 12:08 pm to RollTide1987
All is true in your post.
Coddington's book is excellent and covers this. If Lee had wanted a good attack on Cemetery Hill late on July 1st, he would have ordered Anderson's Division into the attack. Lee kept it sitting still at that point of the battle.
Taking Cemetery Hill on Day One would have required a coordinated and aggressive Confederate command system during the few days leading up to July 1st.
It would have required an army command team that could have looked at the map and identified the Gettysburg road hub as a point that would allow rapid concentration of the army's combat power to such an extent that the enemy commander's decision loop would be non-functional.
Once this condition was achieved, the shape of the battlefield would have rapidly developed into a situation in which Meade would have been compelled to command his army back to the Pipe Creek defense line on the evening of July 1st.
Coddington's main thesis is that none of the armies of the American Civil War had that kind of army command system back in 1863, and that would include even the Army of Northern Virginia. The kind of rapid and decisive military aggresion that the situation required was beyond the capability of the Army of Northern Virginia.
It's a common problem: military systems may not be up to the task at hand, and, this results in something less then Decisive Victory.
I'll be spending some time at the Gettysburg Battlefield later this year.
Coddington's book is excellent and covers this. If Lee had wanted a good attack on Cemetery Hill late on July 1st, he would have ordered Anderson's Division into the attack. Lee kept it sitting still at that point of the battle.
Taking Cemetery Hill on Day One would have required a coordinated and aggressive Confederate command system during the few days leading up to July 1st.
It would have required an army command team that could have looked at the map and identified the Gettysburg road hub as a point that would allow rapid concentration of the army's combat power to such an extent that the enemy commander's decision loop would be non-functional.
Once this condition was achieved, the shape of the battlefield would have rapidly developed into a situation in which Meade would have been compelled to command his army back to the Pipe Creek defense line on the evening of July 1st.
Coddington's main thesis is that none of the armies of the American Civil War had that kind of army command system back in 1863, and that would include even the Army of Northern Virginia. The kind of rapid and decisive military aggresion that the situation required was beyond the capability of the Army of Northern Virginia.
It's a common problem: military systems may not be up to the task at hand, and, this results in something less then Decisive Victory.
I'll be spending some time at the Gettysburg Battlefield later this year.
This post was edited on 5/16/26 at 12:13 pm
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News