RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ?

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 11:24:21 AM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

I disagree with your Premise. Jackson of course was a fine general but his was not the leading role for the Army. Lee lost a trusted and capable subordinate when Jackson was accidently killed by his own picket. But Lee made the decisions not Jackson. Lee ran the Army, not Jackson.

Lee didnt actually ( except the gettysburg disaster) start "losing" until mid 1864 and that was more a matter of the right General in command of the Northern Armies. Grant understood he had the larger, better equiped, better supplied and supported army. He could afford to lose a tactical battle as long as Strategicly he kept forcing Lee to engage him and kept moving towards his objective.

After that first lose with Grant in command when he didnt turn his army and march dejectedly into cantonment around Washington the troops were amazed and happy that Grant continued forward, continued to force Lee to fight.

(in reply to Texican)

Post #: 121

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 2:33:48 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

Texican has a bit of a point. In Jackson, Lee had a subordinate with initiative, decisiveness, and daring. One Lee could simply issue an order, "March to turn their left flank if practicable" and it would be done. After Jackson passed, Lee could no longer paint the broad strokes for his corps commanders (Longstreet the exception). He had to adopt a micro-management command style that did not match his temperament. It could be argued also though, the Union army's officer corps was learning to do its job better at this point. Lee continued to succeed, but lost a very potent offensive weapon in Jackson.

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 122

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 4:23:22 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

Jackson was VERY aggressive and bold, but he was best on his "home ground" in northern Virginia. The Penninsula Campaign was hardly a shining moment for "Old Jack". And he might not have been what Lee needed against Grant in 1864, given that the one time Lee led a totally defensive battle WITH Jackson (Fredricksburg) his "Right Arm" left a hole in his Right Flank that would have been BIG trouble had anyone been supporting Meade's attack.

Mostly what made Union Commanders fear Jackson was his ability to move decisively and attack boldly before they were ready (Some, like the Spaniards Jack Aubry relished taking on, were NEVER ready). They treated him like a "live grenade" that could go off anytime. and were often "half beaten" before the fight commenced. But he would probably have had a LOT of difficulty with a phlegmatic foe like Grant who couldn't be "buffaloed".

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)

Post #: 123

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 5:22:33 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Jackson was VERY aggressive and bold, but he was best on his "home ground" in northern Virginia. The Penninsula Campaign was hardly a shining moment for "Old Jack". And he might not have been what Lee needed against Grant in 1864, given that the one time Lee led a totally defensive battle WITH Jackson (Fredricksburg) his "Right Arm" left a hole in his Right Flank that would have been BIG trouble had anyone been supporting Meade's attack.

Mostly what made Union Commanders fear Jackson was his ability to move decisively and attack boldly before they were ready (Some, like the Spaniards Jack Aubry relished taking on, were NEVER ready). They treated him like a "live grenade" that could go off anytime. and were often "half beaten" before the fight commenced. But he would probably have had a LOT of difficulty with a phlegmatic foe like Grant who couldn't be "buffaloed".

Certainly Grant couldn't be "buffaloed", but his (Meade's) corps commanders still could. Jackson, I argue, would have given Grant fits, but in the end the result would have been the same.

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 124

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 5:49:03 PM

Texican

Posts: 248
Joined: 10/30/2006
Status: offline

Of course, I do acknowledge that Jackson never would have made it far into 1864 or 1865. It was probably a miracle he survived as long as he did. Generals who ride around on the front lines during the Civil War were wide open to get picked off eventually.

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 125

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 5:55:53 PM

chris0827

Posts: 441
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

Sheridan versus Jackson in the valley instead of Early would've been interesting.

(in reply to Texican)

Post #: 126

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 5:57:47 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Jackson was VERY aggressive and bold, but he was best on his "home ground" in northern Virginia. The Penninsula Campaign was hardly a shining moment for "Old Jack". And he might not have been what Lee needed against Grant in 1864, given that the one time Lee led a totally defensive battle WITH Jackson (Fredricksburg) his "Right Arm" left a hole in his Right Flank that would have been BIG trouble had anyone been supporting Meade's attack.

Mostly what made Union Commanders fear Jackson was his ability to move decisively and attack boldly before they were ready (Some, like the Spaniards Jack Aubry relished taking on, were NEVER ready). They treated him like a "live grenade" that could go off anytime. and were often "half beaten" before the fight commenced. But he would probably have had a LOT of difficulty with a phlegmatic foe like Grant who couldn't be "buffaloed".

Certainly Grant couldn't be "buffaloed", but his (Meade's) corps commanders still could. Jackson, I argue, would have given Grant fits, but in the end the result would have been the same.

Sorry..., but I'm missing your reference to Meade in the above. I was refering to his Division's attack at Fredricksburg, which was all his "Wing Commander" thought necessary to do when ordered to "move against the heights". It was the ONE place on that day where a "full Corps or Wing assult" MIGHT have stood a chance of success, given Jackson's erroneous deployment.

Jackson would certainly have "livened things up" for Grant..., but Grant would probably have given Jackson fits as well with his refusal to panic and "run around like a wet hen" when Stonewall said "BOO!".

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)

Post #: 127

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 5:59:00 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

The Meade reference is that the AOP still belonged to him technically.

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 128

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:04:44 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

The Meade reference is that the AOP still belonged to him technically.

So you're referring to the 1864 Campaign, not Fredricksburg 1862? OK..., just wanted to be sure I wasn't missing something.

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)

Post #: 129

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:06:32 PM

andysomers

Posts: 157
Joined: 9/11/2006
Status: offline

Wow - I check back into this thread after an eternity and were into the "what-if" on Jackson! Cool stuff. My take is that the PA campaign would have gone much different. In the MD campaign, Lee's army was in such bad shape they couldn't do much. But he had something to work with in '63. I have no doubt that in Ewell's shoes (which he would have been) - he would have taken Harrisburg - ala Harper's Ferry in '62. I think that Lee would have kept the army in two corps - Longstreet as a strong base, and Jackson doing the daring out in front stuff. If the battle had gone over in the same location, I think Longstreet would have held the CS center, and Jackson would have tried to hit more on flanks/rear. I seriously doubt Pickett's Charge would have gone off (or needed to)...

A great series on this subject is the three-volume Gettysburg/Grant Comes East/Never Call Retreat set by none other than Newt Gingrich. Excellent excellent what-if reading. The other great fictional work waiting to be written is this same subject, but Jackson lives through Chancellorsville (or simply, he just doesn't catch pneumonia after being shot). I was actually in the porcess of developing an online forum game for this scenario a couple months ago.

AS

(in reply to chris0827)

Post #: 130

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:24:45 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

The Meade reference is that the AOP still belonged to him technically.

So you're referring to the 1864 Campaign, not Fredricksburg 1862? OK..., just wanted to be sure I wasn't missing something.

Yup, we were talking kumquats and kiwi fruit.

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 131

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:28:52 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: andysomers

Wow - I check back into this thread after an eternity and were into the "what-if" on Jackson! Cool stuff. My take is that the PA campaign would have gone much different. In the MD campaign, Lee's army was in such bad shape they couldn't do much. But he had something to work with in '63. I have no doubt that in Ewell's shoes (which he would have been) - he would have taken Harrisburg - ala Harper's Ferry in '62. I think that Lee would have kept the army in two corps - Longstreet as a strong base, and Jackson doing the daring out in front stuff. If the battle had gone over in the same location, I think Longstreet would have held the CS center, and Jackson would have tried to hit more on flanks/rear. I seriously doubt Pickett's Charge would have gone off (or needed to)...

A great series on this subject is the three-volume Gettysburg/Grant Comes East/Never Call Retreat set by none other than Newt Gingrich. Excellent excellent what-if reading. The other great fictional work waiting to be written is this same subject, but Jackson lives through Chancellorsville (or simply, he just doesn't catch pneumonia after being shot). I was actually in the porcess of developing an online forum game for this scenario a couple months ago.

AS

You beat me to the punch on the PA campaign.

Side note:
On the pneumonia, I read, about a year or so ago, an article from a modern physician who strongly suspects Jackson did not contract pneumonia, but instead threw a blood-clot from the amputation which lodged in the lungs. According to the Doc, the syptoms Jackson suffered more closely resembled this than pneumonia.

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to andysomers)

Post #: 132

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:38:03 PM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey
But getting regional superiority in the East would have required abandoning the West completely -- perhaps politically impossible as well as strategically alarming. And supporting so many troops in the East could have been a logistical nightmare for the South (the North was better equipped for that sort of thing).

Hindsight allows me to know they were going to lose much of the West anyhow, but they didn't know that. The political aspect makes a lot of sense. Someone more dynamic than Bragg might have been able to keep Rosecrans in check while some men were moved East. The logistics they would have had to figure out. Some sort of decisive move was required to make the North throw in the towel.

(in reply to Jonathan Palfrey)

Post #: 133

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:43:21 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RERomine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey
But getting regional superiority in the East would have required abandoning the West completely -- perhaps politically impossible as well as strategically alarming. And supporting so many troops in the East could have been a logistical nightmare for the South (the North was better equipped for that sort of thing).

Hindsight allows me to know they were going to lose much of the West anyhow, but they didn't know that. The political aspect makes a lot of sense. Someone more dynamic than Bragg might have been able to keep Rosecrans in check while some men were moved East. The logistics they would have had to figure out. Some sort of decisive move was required to make the North throw in the towel.

We will all know for sure soon enough. Has anyone checked the new releases lately.....?

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 134

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:43:22 PM

AU Tiger_MatrixForum

Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RERomine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey
But getting regional superiority in the East would have required abandoning the West completely -- perhaps politically impossible as well as strategically alarming. And supporting so many troops in the East could have been a logistical nightmare for the South (the North was better equipped for that sort of thing).

Hindsight allows me to know they were going to lose much of the West anyhow, but they didn't know that. The political aspect makes a lot of sense. Someone more dynamic than Bragg might have been able to keep Rosecrans in check while some men were moved East. The logistics they would have had to figure out. Some sort of decisive move was required to make the North throw in the towel.

We will all know for sure soon enough. Has anyone checked the new releases lately.....?

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 135

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:45:27 PM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

The South had to act decisively in the 1st year , they had several opportunities they squandered then. The refusal to sell cotton was a death kneel. The failure to find an agrresive general early on ( understandable given no one had ever commanded that kind of force in America before) and move against a rattled poorly trained Union "army" in the east. BUT the biggest kicker was simply starting a shooting war when they did.

They failed these things all of these would have helped them again in 1864 when all they had to do was hold out long enough to let Mac win the Presidency.

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 136

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:48:36 PM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

WOW, there's an echo

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)

Post #: 137

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 6:52:03 PM

chris0827

Posts: 441
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline

Jefferson Davis and many southern generals didn't understand that the confederate's most valuable resource was their army. They lost far too many men trying to hold on to specific locations. Fort Donelson, Island #10, Vicksburg, and Port Hudson all saw the surrender of large numbers of confederate soldiers. When you're outnumbered more than two to one you can't afford to throw away men like that. No city in the confederacy was worth losing an army for.

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 138

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 7:23:25 PM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

They failed these things all of these would have helped them again in 1864 when all they had to do was hold out long enough to let Mac win� the Presidency.

I've read that McClellan wasn't going to be as kind as everyone expected if he got elected. The main reason was Lee was already bottled up and Sherman was marching through Georgia. I can dig up where I read that if you like.

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 139

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 7:25:23 PM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

Jefferson Davis and many southern generals didn't understand that the confederate's most valuable resource was their army. They lost far too many men trying to hold on to specific locations. Fort Donelson, Island #10, Vicksburg, and Port Hudson all saw the surrender of large numbers of confederate soldiers. When you're outnumbered more than two to one you can't afford to throw away men like that. No city in the confederacy was worth losing an army for.

I would say that is correct with the exception of Richmond. Lose Richmond and international credibility is lost.

(in reply to chris0827)

Post #: 140

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 10:45:21 PM

Jonathan Palfrey

Posts: 535
Joined: 4/10/2004
From: Sant Pere de Ribes, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827
Jefferson Davis and many southern generals didn't understand that the confederate's most valuable resource was their army. They lost far too many men trying to hold on to specific locations. Fort Donelson, Island #10, Vicksburg, and Port Hudson all saw the surrender of large numbers of confederate soldiers. When you're outnumbered more than two to one you can't afford to throw away men like that. No city in the confederacy was worth losing an army for.

Yes, that's one of the most striking things that we see so easily now and they didn't seem to see then. They were so outnumbered and yet they behaved as though it wasn't important.

(in reply to chris0827)

Post #: 141

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/29/2006 10:51:54 PM

Jonathan Palfrey

Posts: 535
Joined: 4/10/2004
From: Sant Pere de Ribes, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RERomine
Hindsight allows me to know they were going to lose much of the West anyhow, but they didn't know that.

I don't think the loss of the West was inevitable. With better play, perhaps...

Clearly, the fewer men they kept in the West, the faster they'd have lost it.

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 142

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 12:09:07 AM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey
I don't think the loss of the West was inevitable. With better play, perhaps...

Clearly, the fewer men they kept in the West, the faster they'd have lost it.

In the hypothetical realm where they do something different, no it wasn't. But the loss of the Mississippi didn't stop the war from going on almost two years more, so the Trans-Miss. area wasn't as critical as it was thought to be. I'm not suggesting a march to Atlanta go unopposed. More, I'm suggesting a quick shift of troops from the West to the East for a decisive strike against the Union army there. Lee was the most capable commander available. A quick strike that captures Washington and brings foreign recognition to the Confederacy could happen too quickly for the Union to capitalize on the situation in the West. Troops are then shifted back to the West to perform damage control if the war isn't ended. The question would be how quickly could the Confederacy transfer, lets say, 30,000 men from the West to the East? It would be a bold stroke that could end the war quickly, one way or another. The old adage is the best defense is a good offense.

(in reply to Jonathan Palfrey)

Post #: 143

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 12:23:11 AM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

Well, if you try it, it will have to be done in Mid-Summer to Early Fall when "living off the land" is most feasable, and you will have to keep moving, and even giving Lee another 30,000 men will only bring him up close to the average size of the Union Field Army in the East, minus all the Garrisons and support troops. It might be "the best chance", but it's not a forgone conclusion by any means.

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 144

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 12:32:55 AM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Well, if you try it, it will have to be done in Mid-Summer to Early Fall when "living off the land" is most feasable, and you will have to keep moving, and even giving Lee another 30,000 men will only bring him up close to the average size of the Union Field Army in the East, minus all the Garrisons and support troops. It might be "the best chance", but it's not a forgone conclusion by any means.

Figured it might be iffy. Kinda like betting the entire Confederacy on a pair of deuces.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 145

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 1:26:52 AM

Grifman

Posts: 156
Joined: 7/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Texican

Let me make one thing clear: Lee's victories correlate mostly with Stonewall Jackson's victories. Lee was largely victorious when he had Stonewall Jackson around. After ol' Stonewall passed on, Lee started losing.

I don't think the Wilderness, Spotsylvania, and Cold Harbor were considered CSA defeats by most historians. You must be living in an alternative universe.

(in reply to Texican)

Post #: 146

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 1:30:21 AM

Grifman

Posts: 156
Joined: 7/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RERomine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

They failed these things all of these would have helped them again in 1864 when all they had to do was hold out long enough to let Mac win the Presidency.

I've read that McClellan wasn't going to be as kind as everyone expected if he got elected. The main reason was Lee was already bottled up and Sherman was marching through Georgia. I can dig up where I read that if you like.

The point was though if this had NOT happened. If Johnston had kept Sherman out of Altanta.

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 147

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 1:41:49 AM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grifman
The point was though if this had NOT happened. If Johnston had kept Sherman out of Altanta.

He wasn't that effective at that. Johnston would generally get in Sherman's way and Sherman would just go around. And Johnston didn't seem to do much about preventing this from happening.

(in reply to Grifman)

Post #: 148

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 1:52:47 AM

RERomine

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grifman
I don't think the Wilderness, Spotsylvania, and Cold Harbor were considered CSA defeats by most historians. You must be living in an alternative universe.

Two are considered inconclusive and Cold Harbor a Confederate victory. Seems like Wilderness and Spotsylvania Court House were Confederate victories to me. Not sure how they are different from Cold Harbor. The Union got the daylights kicked out of them and Grant moved around.

(in reply to Grifman)

Post #: 149

RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ? - 11/30/2006 2:05:05 AM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RERomine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grifman
The point was though if this had NOT happened. If Johnston had kept Sherman out of Altanta.

He wasn't that effective at that. Johnston would generally get in Sherman's way and Sherman would just go around. And Johnston didn't seem to do much about preventing this from happening.

When the other side outnumbers you considerably, and you can only hold so much front before your line becomes so thin he can punch through it, you will eventually be outflanked. Joe Johnson kept his Army intact and in front of Sherman all Spring and Summer. Someone pointed out just a while ago that the South didn't seem to realize that it's Armies where it's most important asset..., yet here is a General who does and you are criticising him for it. J.E.Johnson may not have been R.E.Lee, but he gave Sherman a very tough campaign at minimal cost to Southern Manpower. "Cump" was more than happy to see Hood replace him.

(in reply to RERomine)

Post #: 150

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> RE: Did the South have any chance of victory ?