The Deah of Stonewall

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

The Deah of Stonewall

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 >> The Deah of Stonewall

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 5:57:00 AM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

a little bit off topic but i read somewhere in the forum that the war was completely lost in the west which to a degree it was but the death of stonewall jackson was what really ruined things for the rebels with stonewall still alive gettysburg would have turned into another fredicksburg it would have been slaughter it would have changed the whole complexion of the battle jackson was a genius and if you think he would have not takin the heights on the first day you have another thing coming

Post #: 1

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 6:16:04 AM

Queeg

Posts: 495
Joined: 6/23/2005
Status: offline

Jackson's death undoubtedly was a major turning point in the war. Probably the biggest single blow to the Confederacy.

(P.S. Welcome to the forum. Next time, it would help if you used a few periods to break up your posts. Some of us old guys have a hard time digging out the content without a rest break here and there.

)

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 2

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 7:56:02 AM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

thanks for the reply i will try to remember that it would have been a different war

(in reply to Queeg)

Post #: 3

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 7:57:03 AM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

he also could have been the leader they were looing for in the west as he could act as a independent commander as well

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 4

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 9:42:34 AM

christof139

Posts: 980
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline

Stonewall md mistakes too, jut as Lee did at Gettyburg. Even if Lee hadn't made mistakes at Gettyburg, the Union AotP had one Corps that had never been comitted to the battle, and the greater part of another Corps.

Stonewall would have made a difference, but the South still would have lost because they couldn't sustain the casualties and equipment loss as well as the North. if Stonewall was in the Wset, and let's say he pushed on into southern Ohio as did Morgan the Cavalry Raider, many, many thousands of Union Regular, State, and local militia would have rallied and formed to meet Stonewall. Stonewall would have been very greatly outnumbered. morgan was hounded (chased), outfought, and overwhelmed.

The Northern Infantry was every bit as good as the Southern Infantry, and in open field stand-up fighting perhaps a tad more well drilled and better. Many Northern regiments consistently beat nearly every Southern unit they faced, and if not, gave as good as they took. This applies to both sides, and even green units sometimes accomplished very remarkable results.

It is a misnomer that all Southerners were from a rural background and all Northerners were from an urban background. Northern units from upstate NY, the mountains of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont and even western Massachussetts, plus the units from Michigan, Indiana, PA, Illinois, and all the rest of the Northern States had a very high proportion of troops that were of a rural and even frontier background and had had experience with firearms before they went into the military. Units from michigan, Minnesotta, and Wisconsin had troops from areas that were still basically frontiers with Indians such as the Lakota (Sioux) in their backyards (close proximity). Plus, the north had many well established Militia units, and more than the South did since the North had a much larger populace. The South had land and a long coast, and just those 2 aspects and assets were enough to hinder anyone from defeating the South quickly.

Happy New Year!!! nice to meet you all, Chris

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 5

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 11:16:29 AM

Berkut

Posts: 757
Joined: 5/16/2002
Status: offline

Jackson is quite possibly the most over-rated general in American history.

Not that he wasn't good, because he was. But the myth about the man far exceeded his actual accomplishments, adn his death simply sealed an image of him that could not be assailed. He never had the opportunities to prove that he was human, just like every one else, by sending men off on some futile charge and getting them killed.

His record was impressive, but limited. And he had his share of gaffes and blunders as well.

You say he would have taken the heights on the first day? How do you know that? Was it only a lack of someone deciding to take them? Who would say that Jackson would be in Ewells place anyway? Maybe he would have been in charge of Longstreets Corps. Maybe he would have never even cared about getting shoes, and Gettysburg never would have happened.

< Message edited by Berkut -- 1/1/2007 11:27:31 AM >

(in reply to christof139)

Post #: 6

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 11:18:03 AM

Feltan

Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline

Certainly Jackson was good, even great, but in death he became a legend. Would he have tipped the balance at Gettysburg? Probably not. By 1863 the South simply didn't have the manpower to overcome the Union. The Confederate troops at that battle were not mismanaged nor poorly lead. Jackson might have done marginaly better, but I don't think he would have taken Cemetary Ridge.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to christof139)

Post #: 7

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 12:45:01 PM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

if jackson was there it would not have got as far as cemetery ridge

(in reply to Feltan)

Post #: 8

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 12:55:37 PM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

as for being overrated that is your opinion and this is a forum but look at jacksons record look at the valley campaign 2nd bull run/manassas.

he just had that something different that inspired he was able to get that something more out of his men that is why if he didnt die before gettysburg the story could well be different it would have changed the dynamic of the way the war was

grant might have had to abandon the vicksburg campaign it could have changed the fortunes in the west afforded them breathing space

he was just that something different

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 9

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 1:02:38 PM

chris0827

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: hotdog433

as for being overrated that is your opinion and this is a forum but look at jacksons record look at the valley campaign 2nd bull run/manassas.

he just had that something different that inspired he was able to get that something more out of his men that is why if he didnt die before gettysburg the story could well be different it would have changed the dynamic of the way the war was

grant might have had to abandon the vicksburg campaign it could have changed the fortunes in the west afforded them breathing space

he was just that something different

Look at Jackson's record at the Seven Days battles and he didn't do well at the beginning of the Valley campaign either.

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 10

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 1:05:14 PM

chris0827

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Jackson is quite possibly the most over-rated general in American history.

Not that he wasn't good, because he was. But the myth about the man far exceeded his actual accomplishments, adn his death simply sealed an image of him that could not be assailed. He never had the opportunities to prove that he was human, just like every one else, by sending men off on some futile charge and getting them killed.

His record was impressive, but limited. And he had his share of gaffes and blunders as well.

You say he would have taken the heights on the first day? How do you know that? Was it only a lack of someone deciding to take them? Who would say that Jackson would be in Ewells place anyway? Maybe he would have been in charge of Longstreets Corps. Maybe he would have never even cared about getting shoes, and Gettysburg never would have happened.

Why would he be in command of Longstreet's corps? It was Heth, a division commander in AP Hill's corps who wanted shoes. Jackson wouldn't have made a difference there.

(in reply to Berkut)

Post #: 11

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 1:05:40 PM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

look at the results of the valley campaign as for seven days no it was not his finest hour but it was unorganised and just a shambles

(in reply to chris0827)

Post #: 12

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 1:07:55 PM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

there wouldnt have been a re orginization of the army of NV either as lee felt he had no one to replace jackson so he split it up into 3 corp

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 13

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 1:38:38 PM

christof139

Posts: 980
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline

Lee did mismanage his troops at Gettysburg, as did Ewell, and that is one reason the ANV lost at Gettysburg. IF Ewell had taken Cemetery and Culp's Hills on the 1st day, IF Lee had listened to Longstreet and attacked the Union's left flank, IF Lee did not waste all those troops in the Picket-Pettigrew Charge on the 3rd day, IF, IF, IF. The North IF'd itself to death also in many battles.

IF Jackson had ben at Gettysburg as the battle unfolded, we can only speculate what would have happened. Even if Cemetery and Culp's Hills were taken on the 1st day, the battle would still have gone on as ther was much defensible terrain in the area.

At the time of the battle, the AotP troops were the full equal of the ANV troops in every aspect. So, who knows what would have happened.

I feel that Lee may have listened to jackson more than Longstreet and ther may have been a flanking or other Jacksonian-Lee manuever made. Who knows??

The Shadow Knows!!! have to turn on the radio and catch some old airwaves to catch The Shadow.

Chris

(in reply to hotdog433)

Post #: 14

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 2:48:00 PM

Twinkle

Posts: 67
Joined: 12/16/2006
From: sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: christof139

Lee did mismanage his troops at Gettysburg, as did Ewell, and that is�one reason�the ANV lost at Gettysburg. IF Ewell had taken Cemetery and Culp's Hills on the 1st day, IF Lee had listened to Longstreet and attacked the Union's left flank, IF Lee did not waste all those troops in the Picket-Pettigrew Charge on the 3rd day, IF, IF, IF. The North IF'd itself to death also in many battles.

No doubt lots and lots of mistakes with terrible consequences happen time after time, as it goes in war..., but I do not think Ewell could have pull that of with men so tired that they could barely stand up?

(in reply to christof139)

Post #: 15

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 4:00:09 PM

christof139

Posts: 980
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline

If Jackson had been there, perhaps Ewell may have had fresher troops or Ewell may have even been not present or most probably just in command of his old division, and even as it actually was, as portrayed in the Gettysburg movie, that one CSA Brigadier (forget his name offhand) was ready to go as were his troops. Ewell just had a moment of indecision due to being off in Space somewhwere for some reason or other. never happens to me of course.

More IFs to play with. What if Stuart had been around on the 1st day??

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!! Know what I mean?? Yes, you do.

What if you and I were there?? I would be in a cellar behind a sack of grain or potatoes, maybe

'ing away peacefully. It was a hot day and cellars are cool anyway.

I don't know. (One of my favorite and most accurate derivations.)

Thanx for the info. on Phister and I posted a brief list of manuals on the other thread for you where we were talking about it. You might have some of these. I wish I could remember the author and name of the Confed. Manual(s). They show up on Ebay every now and then.

Chris

(in reply to Twinkle)

Post #: 16

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 6:15:19 PM

General Quarters

Posts: 1059
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline

I am not persuaded by those who argue, here and in other contexts, that the North was the inevitable winner. If Washington had lost at Yorktown and the American Revolution failed, they would have said that was inevitable. History always looks inevitable after the fact, never while it is happening.

One of the most important variables in war is will to fight. If the South lost, it lost everything. It did not surrender until it was whittled down to the western portion of North Carolina. In contrast, the North could simply have walked away, and the other major party advocated that. Does anyone think the re-election of Lincoln was inevitable? Or inevitable that he was assassinated in 1865 instead of 1864? Or that it was Jackson, not Grant, who got shot by his own men? Or ... well, you can fill out the list yourself.

(in reply to christof139)

Post #: 17

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 7:27:08 PM

Berkut

Posts: 757
Joined: 5/16/2002
Status: offline

I agree with GQ - the South could ahve "won" the war, if you define winning as a negotiated peace leaving the South autonomous in some part.

It wasn't likely, but it was possible.

(in reply to General Quarters)

Post #: 18

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/1/2007 9:02:36 PM

christof139

Posts: 980
Joined: 12/7/2006
Status: offline

Yeah, it could have happened IF this and that, but chances were that the north would prevail over time as the South was just as war weary and even more so as the North. The south's economy was in dire starits and the North's was expanding. Desertions rates were amazingly high in Southern units as the war wore on, and even the famed Stonewall brigade had a large desertion rate. I was amazed when I read this in I believe it was Livermore, can't be sure though off the top of my head. The only hope the South had was to prolong the war and hope fro European recogniton and intervention.

Have you explored the unrest and antiwar sentiment in the South, and the desire of many to end the war and even that many were beginning to side with the Union in the late stages of the war?? They were very tired and worn out and their economy was in a shambles, and the blockade was gaining in effectiveness to a degree that hurt. Once the heartland of the South, Tennessee, northern Alabama and Georgia, and the Shenendoah began to be ravaged, and the Miss. River was closed in '62 to '63, the South's only hope was for prolonging the war as long as possible in hopes of European intervention and recognition, a slim possibility at best.

If Lincoln had lost the 1864 election, then it may very well have been a peaceful setlement to the war and perhaps even a reunion then or down the road, but slavery would hopefully have been gone in several years one way or the other, if not, then there may not have been chances of a peaceful solution. I don't know if McClellan had been elected if he would have made peace, nor even anyone else.

Who knows?? But in raelity I think it was about 90-99% inevitable that the North would win, and many Southern leaders realized this quickly I do believe, hence Lee's invasions to win a victory on Northern soil, which did not occur.

Chris

(in reply to Berkut)

Post #: 19

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/2/2007 1:34:09 AM

General Lee

Posts: 29
Joined: 10/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

I agree with GQ - the South could ahve "won" the war, if you define winning as a negotiated peace leaving the South autonomous in some part.

It wasn't likely, but it was possible.

what else did the south want? to control the north?

(in reply to Berkut)

Post #: 20

RE: The Deah of Stonewall - 1/2/2007 3:21:30 AM

hotdog433

Posts: 36
Joined: 1/1/2007
Status: offline

of course everything i have said is all just an opinion of what might have happened if he lived but he didnt so it is all speculation but you look at his career and personality it was all seemingly possible

(in reply to General Lee)

Post #: 21