re: Was it possible for the South to win the Civil War?

True. You also wrote about The battle of the Wilderness. Lee had at least two chances to split the AoP in half but inept subordinate command failed to seize the opportunity.

Two of my GFs were in the siege of Vicksburg and were taken prisoner when Pemberton surrendered. They were paroled and sent back to Dalton, Ga. The 33rd Ga (Gilmer Tigers #2)was reorganized and fought at Chicamauga later.

South wins Gettysburg, South marches on DC, South wins war.

I have always laid the blame on Jeb Stuart for Gettysburg. The Cav is supposed be the eyes and ears for the General. Stuart was out conducting meaningless raids for his own glory, instead of scouting ahead and informing Lee that his army is marching into the largest battle of the war. Lee never gets the high ground because he is behind the Union to setup his forces.

The civil war was a great chess match. Had Lee not been so arrogant to think that HEwpuld prevail in an all out frontal assault , the North would have sued for peace. All he had to do was pivot around the Union Army at Gettysburg and position himself between it and WDC. At that point , the political pressure on Lincoln would have been unbearable. The losses in 1862 cost him a ton politically. If you read anything he wrote about the war between 1862-1863, you will get a real sense of the strain placed upon him. The politicians (and Lincolns) greatest fear was a Confederate attack on Washington. Lee knew this which is why he invaded the north in 62 and 63. His hubris got the better of him at Gettysburg and as a result fought from an inferior ground position. Travel to Fredricksbutg, chanchlorville, wilderness and Gettysburg. It's pretty obvious why the losing side lost the battle. Bad ground and poor positioning spelled doom.

No, their only hope was to make it so miserable for the North they just said screw it let em leave.

The North was more committed than the South anticipated.

If the North lost Gettysburg, then Lincoln would have lost what was left of his political capitol. His rivals would sue for peace. The North would have pussed out for all intensive purposes. Especially with the threat of the AoV being able to lay siege on the capitol.

quote:

---

This is valid, but success at Gettysburg would/should have led to marching on to DC

---

You need to define success, because Lee had stunning victories at Fredericksburg, and at Chancellorsville and was not able to turn these wins into an invasion of the North that would allow him to take DC.

Lee could have won Fredericksburg, but lost enough of his army to prevent another major battle that would surely follow.

Now if Lee was able to destroy the union army completely that's another thing, but that was extremely hard to do given the day's communications, etc. Armies weren't that mobile, commanders had trouble gathering intell, and it was hard to let those below you in command know what to do. The fog of war was a huge problem. Look at Chancellorsville for what I'm talking about. Jackson was killed by his own people trying to find the Yankee flank.

A few posters have already stated that the South's only best chance would have been to be aggressive when they had early success and advantage in the East. But the mindset at the beginning was that of defending the state's rights to govern themselves, so the South's political and military policy likely adopted a stance of defending the states from Federal authority and incursion until a political solution could result.

My maternal ggggrandfather was a confederate soldier in the First Louisiana, and my paternal ggggrandfather was in Company F (Woodville Rifles) of the First Texas - Hood's Texas Brigade of ANV. He was wounded in Miller's cornfield at Antietam, where their units involved suffered an 83% casualty rate, the highest of any unit in any American battle, as the cornfield changed hands a half dozen times. When union troops captured the First Texas' battle flag they reported that 13 confederates had died bearing it. My ancestor went on to fight and be wounded a second time at Gettysburg, and later his unit was sent to Lookout Mountain where he was captured and imprisoned for the remainder of the war. Someone said something about the terrain at Vicksburg - well, take a look at the Appalachian Mountains for terrain.

The most amazing thing to me is that battle after horrendous battle, these men continued to fight for years. By the end of the war the union had much better equipment and tremendous advantage in numbers. Of the 155 men who initially made up Company F, only 5 able-bodied soldiers remained at the surrender at Appamatox. Until just a few years ago there was still a Woodville Rifles Association.

Trivia: Do you know where the cannon that fired the first shot on Ft. Sumter to start the war is now located? On LSU's campus. A post-war gift from Gen. Sherman, who was the head of LSU prior to resigning to serve the Union.

quote:

---

Damn


Melt day: 55,342

---

But he's right. Lincoln was going to bring the South back into the Union no matter how many people had to die or even if it meant the South was reduced to a shattered wasteland of shell shocked cripples and starving widows and orphans. And thats basically what happened.

The level of death and devestation the Civil War brought to he South is similar to what Germany experienced in WWII.

Against the POTUS Lincoln, General Grant, his resources, his army, the support overseas, don't think so