Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


What ifs of the Civil War - General Civil War Talk - Civil War Talk - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1 Page:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Thu Feb 11th, 2010 01:32 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
1st Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I stand to believe that if Stonewall Jackson had survived Chancellorsville then the south would have most definetly won Gettysburg. I know ill get alot of angry messages for saying this but in my opinion T.J Jackson was a more competent general then Robert E lee. His tactics in the Shanadoah valley campaign was flawless. But anyway back to the original subject; if jackson was alive and present at gettysburg there would have been a much better chance for victory on the first day. While Gen. Ewell declined to take culp's hill Jackson would have jumped at the chance to defeat the federals during their most vunerable moment.  also instead of longstreet taking all day to move his troops into position on the second day jackson would have pushed his men to get there quickly giving his forces more time to take advantage of any sucesses. But anyway i would love to hear what you have to say about this or any other what ifs about the war.



 Posted: Thu Feb 11th, 2010 09:02 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
2nd Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

What if Fleming had been born 100 years earlier and discovered penicillin in the 1820s rathet than the 1920s?

Then AP Hill may have been on his game at Gettysburg…


HankC



 Posted: Thu Feb 11th, 2010 10:12 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
3rd Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Messages? We don' got messages. We don' need no stinkin' messages!

No angry messages, csamillerp. Disagreements, yes. But no angry messages.

Stonewall would have slaughtered his corps assaulting the heights. Ewell was a bit more cautious. And here I'll note that Jackson's performance in the valley was mystical, but it got cancelled out with his performance in the Penninsula Campaign. And, I'll add that Jackson would have been a nobody without Lee making the decisions.

Oh! Welcome to the board.

Ole



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 12:03 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
4th Post
Doc C
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 1st, 2006
Location:  Eastern Shore, Maryland USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

S. J. didn't do that great at Cedar Mountain either.

Doc C



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 12:04 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
5th Post
pamc153PA
Member
 

Joined: Sat Jun 14th, 2008
Location: Boyertown, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 407
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Okay, what if Lee had decided NOT to resign from the Federal Army, and had in fact taken the lead post when it was offered him? How might that have changed the course of the war? You may say Lee's allegiance was to Virginia, but. . .what if it wasn't?

Pam



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 12:07 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
6th Post
Doc C
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 1st, 2006
Location:  Eastern Shore, Maryland USA
Posts: 822
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Pam

Maybe thousands of lives would have been saved. Also, if McClellen had really defeated Lee at Antietam how many lives would have also been saved???? What ifs, what ifs.

Doc C



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 12:32 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
7th Post
susansweet3
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 11th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 312
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

What if 's what if's everything else has to stay the same and they wouldn't if one thing changed others would have too so you can never predict what would have happened as it didn't happen. 

 

I agree Stonewall was good in the Valley but not so good on the Penninsula 
 He was good in the Valley for one thing because he knew the territory.  He didn't know Gettysburg any better than he knew the Penninsula . So who know what he would have done. 

I like the Fleming living earlier so lives could have been saved. 

Susan



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 12:40 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
8th Post
pamc153PA
Member
 

Joined: Sat Jun 14th, 2008
Location: Boyertown, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 407
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

And if there would've been penicillin for A.P. Hill, there would have been some for Stonewall, too, which means he wouldn't have died (most likely) from pneumonia, not even if they still would have done that medieval medicine called cupping on him. And then we're back to Gettysburg.

Pam



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 04:08 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
9th Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Ewell's men could hear the Federals digging in on culp's hill on july 1st. If he would have attacked he may have taken the hill. Instead he suffered crippling casualties on july 2nd and 3rd. culps hill was a vital position for the federals if it was taken the entire federal line would have been unobtainable. Jackson had the flair and the aggressive mind to take that hill. and yes lee was a mastermind, but would he have achieved the fame he had without his "foot calvary"? who else could have held a position like he did during 2nd Manassas? Lee did not achieve as much after jackson's death then he did before, but Lee was the only one that could have held the army of northern virginia together during the last year of the war.

Anyway i appreciate the reply, it is so hard to find someone to talk civil war with me, much thanks.



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 04:19 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
10th Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Jackson may not have done his best during the pennsula campaign but look at what he had done the week prior to that, look at the distance he had traveled. Lee had a tendency to assault positions that he should have known was near impossible to take, Malvern hill, Pickett's charge. Jackson may have been alittle too aggressive but so was Lee. Being a commander of an army you must know when to be aggressive and when to be cautious. McClellan was too cautious at Sharpsburg, well really in every battle he faught, but it took Lee Pickett's charge for Lee to realize that being aggressive wasn't always the best idea when you fight for a country that cant replenshed his ranks. Lee was a great General but so was Jackson, and neither would have been as great without the other.



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 06:09 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
11th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Anyway i appreciate the reply, it is so hard to find someone to talk civil war with me, much thanks.

Is why we're all here, csa: to talk Civil War with someone who'll listen and talk back.

Ole



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 07:50 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
12th Post
fedreb
Member


Joined: Tue Jan 16th, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 239
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

csamillerp
So what if Jackson had been at Gettysburg and what if he had attacked Culps Hill and been badly mauled by "what if"
Federals? How high would his star rise then? What if questions always assume that Jackson would take Culps Hill but what if he failed?



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 04:21 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
13th Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

He may have failed, but at least he would have tried. I think everyone would agree that Culps hill was at its weakest point on the first day. And i really believe that if Ewell would have attacked with a suffiecent force they would have tooken the hill. the confederates were tired and hard faught but so was the federals, the federals even more so. they were probably in a state of panick having been pushed back like they were. In all respect Lee should have never committed at gettysburg until he could reconnect with stuart but he did.



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 06:10 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
14th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

There was a relatively fresh division of XI Corps up there, plus a few batteries.

Sounds like we have Jackson Fan to torment.
)__

Ole



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 07:45 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
15th Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

well there was a fresh DIVISION but ewell had a corp. Jackson had a way of pushing his troops in a way that probably no other general could do. his troops marched 54 miles in 18 hours to reach 2nd manassas, who else could have done that? Jackson was the Hancock of the army of northern Virginia. i am a fan of jackson but also to all the soldiers that fought in the civil war, they showed courage that only a few have shown in history.



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 08:07 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
16th Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Nothing Jackson could do to change the terrain, which was the main reason for the Confederate defeat at Culp's Hill IMO.



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 08:13 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
17th Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

well in my opinion if picketts troops could march 7/8 of a mile across open terrain and momentarily break the union lines then ewell jackson or anyother commander could have taken culp's hill on the first day.



 Posted: Fri Feb 12th, 2010 11:34 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
18th Post
pamc153PA
Member
 

Joined: Sat Jun 14th, 2008
Location: Boyertown, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 407
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I agree with Joe--it was more terrain than the loss of Jackson as far as Culp's Hill was concerned. Have you walked Culp's Hill, in summer, csa? Granted, I have done it not under fire, without carrying a pack, rifle, etc., but it's not any easy trek even without those. I don't think the Longstreet-Pickett-Pettigrew fields can be equally compared to Culp's Hill, IMO. And remember, the Confederates who broke through at the Angle lost the position almost immediately--and so their gain was what?

Pam



 Posted: Sat Feb 13th, 2010 12:17 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
19th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I find it hard to blame Ewell for not taking "that hill." It was getting dark; he could hear the digging; there was no way to know what was up there.

As Pam mentioned, the slope was considerably greater than the west side of Cemetery Ridge. Uphill, against who knows what, without much chance of securing the position before full dark.

I'll agree that Jackson would have tried it, but taking it was a big if with great cost.

Just a thought.

Ole



 Posted: Sat Feb 13th, 2010 12:41 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
20th Post
csamillerp
Member


Joined: Wed Feb 10th, 2010
Location: South Carolina USA
Posts: 212
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

that is why you have skirmishers ahead of your main line, if they get chewed up then you make the decision whether to attack or not. But i agree with you there would have been heavy causalties but it wouldn't have been no more then what he suffered on day 2 or three.



 Current time is 01:50 pmPage:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.2110 seconds (11% database + 89% PHP). 24 queries executed.