NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070608/ap_on_re_us/archives_lincoln

Apparently if the Union had snuffed out Confederate forced before they got back to Virginia, the South would have had to surrender a lot more quickly. Maybe it wouldn't have the same ramifications as if the South had won the Civil War and become an independent nation, but some things would have turned out differently. Imagine the Civil War being finished two years earlier and a lot of people who died in the war still being alive.

Well I still think they would be dead by now...

Imagine the Civil War being finished two years earlier and a lot of people who died in the war still being alive.

Still? After all this time? Was that "lost note" of Lincoln's instead a map to the Fountain of Youth, maybe? :eek:

Still? After all this time? Was that "lost note" of Lincoln's instead a map to the Fountain of Youth, maybe? :eek:

People, I've told you once, I'll tell twice: There is no such things as zombies or Jesus.

People, I've told you once, I'll tell twice: There is no such things as zombies or Jesus.

Or the Confederacy.

What about zombie jesus?

Arg...OK, so they wouldn't be alive except in Family Guy, but their descendants would be alive, and we might have had more of them.

And damnit, I had a beer last night with Zombie Jesus. Turns out he and Kwanzaa-Bot are really good friends.

...ain't we stinkers....

Still he made a good decision not to use nuclear weapons.

...ain't we stinkers....

Still he made a good decision not to use nuclear weapons.

Yes indeed on both counts.

Its kind of important, not the find of the century but quite interesting. The real reason Goerge G. Meade (that old ugly snapping turtle) didn't pursue and destroy Lee's confederates was he was still new to the command relativley speaking and he had lost 2 or 3 Corps commanders and several other major officers during the battle. He reorganized his forces and pursued but not quickly enough. He should have reorganized on the move... something Lee and Grant were both good at. If Meade had reorganized on the move histroy would be very different.

Yes indeed on both counts.

Its kind of important, not the find of the century but quite interesting. The real reason Goerge G. Meade (that old ugly snapping turtle) didn't pursue and destroy Lee's confederates was he was still new to the command relativley speaking and he had lost 2 or 3 Corps commanders and several other major officers during the battle. He reorganized his forces and pursued but not quickly enough. He should have reorganized on the move... something Lee and Grant were both good at. If Meade had reorganized on the move histroy would be very different.

For one thing, Lincoln would likely have been shot, or an attempt to shoot him would have taken place, in 1863, not 1865. We would have been looking at the short-lived tenure of President Hannibal Hamlin, the Republicans would have won the next election in a wash, probably with war hero Ulysses S. Grant being elected. Such a move would likely accelerate the civil rights movement for blacks, with much of it coming before the Second World War, but would still create a resentment from many Southern states, which would band together to attempt to block such rights from being enforced.

If there was anything like the Hayes-Tilden controversy, it would have happened in 1872 and probably would have gone differently. It's entirely possible that the Democrats would have won the battle, but since the GOP had to make numerous concessions in our timeline for that win, they might have lost the war. That could have led to a faster Civil Rights movement, or it could have led to a deepening division between the two sides, possibly culminating in a second Civil War.

People, I've told you once, I'll tell twice: There is no such things as zombies or Jesus.

There are zombies. I seen 'em. I SEEN 'EM!

Here I thought we were blaming the length of the war on McClellan

Here I thought we were blaming the length of the war on McClellan

As well you should; the man was an indecisive chickenshit. He constantly underestimated his own troop strength and vastly overestimated Confederate troop strength, and refused to bloody well commit to anything that might have resulted in a loss of face (or life) for him. I honestly don't know why Lincoln stuck with him for so long.

As well you should; the man was an indecisive chickenshit. He constantly underestimated his own troop strength and vastly overestimated Confederate troop strength, and refused to bloody well commit to anything that might have resulted in a loss of face (or life) for him. I honestly don't know why Lincoln stuck with him for so long.

I believe there was some kind of political reason to keep him in the top position. Finally his incompetence outweighed his usefullness in that way and he was dumped.

And damnit, I had a beer last night with Zombie Jesus. Turns out he and Kwanzaa-Bot are really good friends.

http://futurama.overt-ops.com/images/thumb/8/80/Kwanzaa-Bot.jpg/180px-Kwanzaa-Bot.jpg

"What the hell is Kwanzaa??!!"

"What the hell is Kwanzaa??!!"[/QUOTE]

A made up holiday

I believe there was some kind of political reason to keep him in the top position. Finally his incompetence outweighed his usefullness in that way and he was dumped.

I guess so. It's been awhile since my Civil War history class. I was just amazed by the sheer amount of his ineptitude, though. I would've dumped him long before Lincoln did.

What about zombie jesus?
my rendition: http://photos-851.ll.facebook.com/photos-ll-sf2p/v76/14/92/72602851/n72602851_32954542_6125.jpg

I guess so. It's been awhile since my Civil War history class. I was just amazed by the sheer amount of his ineptitude, though. I would've dumped him long before Lincoln did.

I think it also had to do with the fact that none of the younger corp of officers had as yet proven themselves any better. Devil you know and all that.

I think it also had to do with the fact that none of the younger corp of officers had as yet proven themselves any better. Devil you know and all that.

And don't forget that McClellan did an excellent job of training and preparing the Army of the Potomac. He created the weapon that Grant would wield decisively a few years later.

Getting back to the op: Meade was the opposite of McClellan, a fine field general, but not so good at the organizational side. I don't think he could have reorganized on the move, the way Grant or Lee or Sherman could have.

Or maybe he just had a bad day. Certainly Lee had a couple at Gettysburg.

And don't forget that McClellan did an excellent job of training and preparing the Army of the Potomac. He created the weapon that Grant would wield decisively a few years later.

Okay, granted. He was good at organizing, and i guess he was good at the whole theory of war thing, but he sucked green monkey balls at actually, you know, running a war.

Getting back to the op: Meade was the opposite of McClellan, a fine field general, but not so good at the organizational side. I don't think he could have reorganized on the move, the way Grant or Lee or Sherman could have.

Or maybe he just had a bad day. Certainly Lee had a couple at Gettysburg.

Again, granted, on all your points. I got real tired of having folks at my Southern college needle me about our cowardly general. "But who won the war?" didn't seem to have much effect.

...Civil war...

Great Depression...

MeClellan himself had a chance to end the war within a year if he hadn't have been so indecisive. After the route at Bull Run or Manassas Junction (Whichever you wish to call it personally I think the first should be Called Manasses Junction and the second one Bull Run) he did eventually lead a campaign that trapped a large portion of Lee's army that was under P.G.T. Beauregard between him and Lee during the Penninsula Campaign. Even though he was great at training and organizing like the most famous American General Washington, he could not accept the fact that he was not an immediate tactical thinker and tried to micromanage.

Anyway, he had Almost half of the Army of Northern Virginia poised for destruction with Lee in no position to support his entrapt troops. But.. as Lincoln said "I could give him a million soldiers and he would claim that Lee had 2 million and ask for more."
He entrenched himself, claimed he was outnumbered and asked for reinforcements. After nearly 2 months with nothing but small battles and short skirmishes he gave up and withdrew because he feared Lee assaulting him from behind, a possibility he wouldn't have had to concern himself with a month before. I would have sacked him right then but Lincoln did not because he feared loss of morale. Eventually he used that wisdom hes so famous for and "Promoted" him to a more useless position.

MeClellan himself had a chance to end the war within a year if he hadn't have been so indecisive. After the route at Bull Run or Manassas Junction (Whichever you wish to call it personally I think the first should be Called Manasses Junction and the second one Bull Run) he did eventually lead a campaign that trapped a large portion of Lee's army that was under P.G.T. Beauregard between him and Lee during the Penninsula Campaign. Even though he was great at training and organizing like the most famous American General Washington, he could not accept the fact that he was not an immediate tactical thinker and tried to micromanage.

Anyway, he had Almost half of the Army of Northern Virginia poised for destruction with Lee in no position to support his entrapt troops. But.. as Lincoln said "I could give him a million soldiers and he would claim that Lee had 2 million and ask for more."
He entrenched himself, claimed he was outnumbered and asked for reinforcements. After nearly 2 months with nothing but small battles and short skirmishes he gave up and withdrew because he feared Lee assaulting him from behind, a possibility he wouldn't have had to concern himself with a month before. I would have sacked him right then but Lincoln did not because he feared loss of morale. Eventually he used that wisdom hes so famous for and "Promoted" him to a more useless position.

I have to agree with this.

The war should have never lasted for more than a few months. A quick push to Richmond and the Confederacy would have collapsed. Since guerrilla war probably wouldn't have developed and the rest of the south not occupied, the end would have been a negotiation probably allowing the slave states to keep their slaves for a given time and new territories to be free.

There certainly wouldn't have been the bitterness that exists even today. The south still has an inferiority complex coming from the defeat. Even though the population of the south has boomed since air conditioning, the culture is still one of bitterness and "'they' are out to get us". It does give the south a unity that elects presidents. But is also an anchor for the development of the nation as a whole.

I knew there were several opportunities for Lee's army to be crushed, and a quicker end to the war. But the Union suffered a leadership deficit until the end. Lincoln was a brilliant president, don't get me wrong, but the military leaders of the time were sub-par.

I knew there were several opportunities for Lee's army to be crushed, and a quicker end to the war. But the Union suffered a leadership deficit until the end. Lincoln was a brilliant president, don't get me wrong, but the military leaders of the time were sub-par.

That's not true at all, the leadership was brilliant, unfortunatly they were all on the Southern side not the Northern side.

Lee: One of the 3 best generals of the 19th century (Napoleon and possibly Wellington maybe somebody else)

Jackson: Very good in his own right, tide of the war turned sharply after his death, heck with him not Ewell maybe the south gets Cemetary Hill and wins Gettysburg winning the war.

Longstreet: Not absolutely jaw dropping brilliant but very solid, probably would have led the Union army had he been born somewhere else.

And there were others.

That's not true at all, the leadership was brilliant, unfortunatly they were all on the Southern side not the Northern side.

Lee: One of the 3 best generals of the 19th century (Napoleon and possibly Wellington maybe somebody else)

Jackson: Very good in his own right, tide of the war turned sharply after his death, heck with him not Ewell maybe the south gets Cemetary Hill and wins Gettysburg winning the war.

Longstreet: Not absolutely jaw dropping brilliant but very solid, probably would have led the Union army had he been born somewhere else.

And there were others.

I think you're selling Ewell a bit short. It's true that he didn't have the stoic charisma of Stonewall, but he was very competent.

Unfortunately, leadership didn't really count for much in certain battles. Gettysburg was one; with Meade willing and able to engage, the pullback across the open area of the batlefield to the other ridge was the best decision.

The two key events of the battle were 1) the loss of contact with JEB Stuart's cavalry, leaving Lee deaf and blind as to what he was actually facing, and 2) the solid defense of Little Round Top by the Union on the second day against a stronng Confederate push. Once that failed, Lee had only two, unpalatable options: An all out attack, or withdrawal. History shows he chose the former, and made one of his few mistakes with Pickett's Charge.

Incidentally, I entirely agree that the South had all the best generals at the start of the war (especially Lee, probably the best general of his generation, period). The Union had to make generals capable of standing against their southern counterparts. At that, neither Grant nor Sherman had anything like Lee's dash and flair; they simply had more forces, better equipped forces, and the determination to use them.

Yeah, I thought this was common knowledge that had Lee been captured in Pennsylvannia, the CSA would have been done for. Hell, Lee knew he was in extreme trouble after his entire center was shattered when Pickett failed to take Cemetery Ridge. It's only because of Meade's overly cautious attitude that the Federal infantry didn't pursue.

I think you're selling Ewell a bit short. It's true that he didn't have the stoic charisma of Stonewall, but he was very competent.

The two key events of the battle were 1) the loss of contact with JEB Stuart's cavalry, leaving Lee deaf and blind as to what he was actually facing, and 2) the solid defense of Little Round Top by the Union on the second day against a stronng Confederate push. Once that failed, Lee had only two, unpalatable options: An all out attack, or withdrawal. History shows he chose the former, and made one of his few mistakes with Pickett's Charge.

I would have said Ewells decision to not take Cemetery Hill was the most important single aspect of the battle, but those two are right up there.

Then again, I say Lee should have taken Longstreets advice and disengaged, either after the first day or the second. Lee was certainly among the best of his time, perhaps ever, but I have to wonder just what the fuck he was thinking on July 3rd.

Of course, Gettysburg really was the high tide of the Confederacy...but it didn't help that Vicksburg fell on the 4th either. :p

People, I've told you once, I'll tell twice: There is no such things as zombies.
Oh no?
Then what word would you use to describe NS users then?

As for no Jesus - not so! He's a Puerto Rican picking oranges in California for peanuts a day.

Then again, I say Lee should have taken Longstreets advice and disengaged, either after the first day or the second. Lee was certainly among the best of his time, perhaps ever, but I have to wonder just what the fuck he was thinking on July 3rd.



I think...he was thinking this was his last chance. Vicksburg was clearly doomed, and with it any real hope of Confederate control of the central west; the far west was (as it was in the entire war) a stalemated sideshow; the Missisippi theatre was failing or had failed, depending on how you rate it. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia was the last Confederate force of any strength still mobile and not trapped in a defensive tangle. And Robert E. Lee was enough of a Grand Strategist to know that defence would not win this war, he had to bring the war to the Union and beat them with it in order to win.

If he withdrew, he would probably not be able to entirely break contact until he was over the river and back in Virginia. Any attempt to circumvent Meade would result in the total destruction of his supply chain. And with the Confederate economy collapsing, the chances of his being able to mount another offensive had to be slim.

Lee was brilliant, but he was also human. He HAD to try to break Meade's line; even with almost no chance of success, it was the only real hope he had.

Its actually my opinion that regardless of how great the Armies of the Confederacy, particularly the Army of Northern Virginia, were. All the Union States had to do was keep the war going to win. The Confederacy was like amny confederacy's and loosely organized. The only things they had in common were hatred of the Union oppression and succession. They also had an economy based off of cotton and tobacco, two products that are easy to get elsewhere as Europe proved. In the British Empire particularly the Northern States were eventually favored because they convinced them that wool was hardier, cheaper, and better than cotton; also as long as the Confederacy continued to support the institution of slavery Great Britian was not going to throw in the promised support.
The Confederacy doomed itself the moment it fired on Fort Sumter. They entered a war against a larger more economically powerful rival with the ability to get its hands on far more advanced weaponry such as repeating rifles and gatling guns (granted they didn't come into play until the last months of the war). Even had the Confederates won a decisive victory political infighting might have insued causing them to collapse and economic disaster was imminent by 1863. The Confederacy was a doomed cause, some may argue it was a noble cause, but it was doomed from the beggining none the less.

People, I've told you once, I'll tell twice: There is no such things as zombies or Jesus.

YYou'd be wrong twice: I'm a zombie! I'm a zombie! BRAAAAINS!

Its actually my opinion that regardless of how great the Armies of the Confederacy, particularly the Army of Northern Virginia, were. All the Union States had to do was keep the war going to win. The Confederacy was like amny confederacy's and loosely organized. The only things they had in common were hatred of the Union oppression and succession. They also had an economy based off of cotton and tobacco, two products that are easy to get elsewhere as Europe proved. In the British Empire particularly the Northern States were eventually favored because they convinced them that wool was hardier, cheaper, and better than cotton; also as long as the Confederacy continued to support the institution of slavery Great Britian was not going to throw in the promised support.
The Confederacy doomed itself the moment it fired on Fort Sumter. They entered a war against a larger more economically powerful rival with the ability to get its hands on far more advanced weaponry such as repeating rifles and gatling guns (granted they didn't come into play until the last months of the war). Even had the Confederates won a decisive victory political infighting might have insued causing them to collapse and economic disaster was imminent by 1863. The Confederacy was a doomed cause, some may argue it was a noble cause, but it was doomed from the beggining none the less.

The North would have won if it kept at it no matter how badly things went in the beginning. The South's only chance was if the war lasted for a short time, as many had predicted in April of 1861. For that matter, I had heard that the conflict would be over in a matter of months, if not weeks, according to most projections. This was the South's best chance. That or to wear down the Union to the point where keeping the war going was no longer politically feasible and enough people would rather let the South go than keep fighting. Considering who was in charge, either that meant that this situation was very unlikely of that, in the case that it could be done, Lincoln's head would have been served on a platter politically.

If the South had triumphed at Gettysburg, it's entirely possible that this scenario would have played out and that the South would have achieved independence. However, that obviously didn't happen, and the Confederacy today is nothing more than a failed rebellion. Had it succeeded, it likely would have been one of history's biggest upsets, perhaps even greater than the American Revolution.