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


Gettysburg overrated? - Battle of Gettysburg - Civil War Talk - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Mon Jul 9th, 2012 10:34 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
21st Post
Gettysburger
Member
 

Joined: Thu Jan 19th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I don't think knowing the history and how events played out would leave anyone thinking the ANV or another CSA army
would or could occupy or even invade the north again after July '63.

Isn't it apparent that both 'invasions of the north', that resulted in the battles of antietam and gettysburg that the ANV suffered catastrophic losses in blood and treasure?

Both invasions were audacious but both invasions were tactical and strategic disasters for the ANV and southern
moral.

dr. t



 Posted: Tue Jul 10th, 2012 06:37 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
22nd Post
Hellcat
Root Beer Lover


Joined: Tue Nov 15th, 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 901
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I wish that were true, Gettysburger. But this hasn't been the first time I've seen mention someone has mentioned the idea of the South occupying northern territory. I look over ebg's post and there's nothing about the South occupying northern territory, so I don't get how it is gotten from what he said that that was an intention of the South. I know Lee had various reasons for his invasions, but not once have I read anyone saying he intended to occupy Northern soil. And about the only recource I've seen any historian say Lee was interested in in the north was food for his army, which is understandable.

I don't get where this idea of the South wanting to occupy northern territoy is suddenly coming from. As I said, if that were an intention then wouldn't there have been more major invasions of the North?



 Posted: Tue Jul 10th, 2012 11:19 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
23rd Post
Gettysburger
Member
 

Joined: Thu Jan 19th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Hellcat,,I don't know where the idea of northern occupation came from either?

To comment on what you said, what army beside the ANV  had the resources to go on the offensive anytime after 1862?

Agreeing with you, the ANV's 'invasion' of Pennsylvania was to bring a bit of the war to the north, forage, grab some free blacks and possibly threaten Baltimore and DC for a short time.

We will never know for certain but looking how the 'invasion' played out, my thought is Lee probably wished he had stayed in Virginia.

dr. t



 Posted: Thu Jul 12th, 2012 02:47 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
24th Post
HankC
Member


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

  back to top

even captured resouces would be carried south in wagons and on their own backs.

there was no way to send significant amounts of supplies south.

as far as 'occupying' northern territory, the CSA had enough trouble occupying their *own* country much less northern territory.

northerners were not about to flee/move/refugee to rebel-occupied areas...



 Posted: Wed Jul 18th, 2012 09:46 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
25th Post
louren143
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jul 18th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 4
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

May have to study up on these guys a little more at Gettysburg. So it seems the guy actually did have the right information. On most of the books I have read on Gettysburg it just has not come up in that material.

(Edited by Admin to remove commercial, non-Civil war Link)



 Current time is 09:36 amPage:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.3119 seconds (11% database + 89% PHP). 25 queries executed.