- This topic has 5 voices and 11 replies.
-
Posts
-
Many historians disagree on the pivotal battle of the civil war. Which do you think was the one? I was thinking of first Manasass (bull run) What do you think would have happened if the southern army had pursued the federals as they were fleeing in panic northward towards Washington, could they have ended the war right then and there?
I don't know enough about this to give a good answer, but why wouldn't you choose the Second Battle of Bull Run? In my understanding, the First Battle didn't turn into much, and Second Bull Run was much larger.
It's been said that if the cofederate army had prusued they very well could have taken washington. They wernt that far away and the federal army was in a paniced reatreat, and not very likely to reorginize any time soon. Some historians believe that the south probably had up to two weeks after the battle where they could have pressed and taken washington, the north was in such disarray.
I lived in Manassas and then in the D.C. area last year around this time. It's about a 40 minute drive along I-66 from Manassas to D.C. without traffic. I too had heard about that window of opportunity to press into Washington. I'm not sure how long that would have taken the Confederate Army to travel that distance…perhaps two or three days?
Maybe , but I dont think so. remember many drove out for the afternoon from washington with there ladies and picnic lunches to watch the battle. So it could not have been to difficult. It all depends on how fast a leader can get his army ready and on he move.
Though McDowell's army was disrupted and panic stricken there was a garrison in reserve in Washington they could have rallied behind. Furthermore, after Jackson turned the tide, his army and Beauregard's were exhausted from the fighting and were too green to fight an offensive on such a short notice. There was absolutely no chance for them to pursue. They did well enough to eek out the victory they did. You must remember that the first half of Bull Run they took a severe licking. Washington was never even in their sights I assure you.
Well the Royalists never recovered from Prince Rupert's defeat at Marsden Moor.Whoops! Oh Sorry-Wrong Civil War (LOL)? ?:-P 😛 😛 😛 😛
Though McDowell's army was disrupted and panic stricken there was a garrison in reserve in Washington they could have rallied behind.? Furthermore, after Jackson turned the tide, his army and Beauregard's were exhausted from the fighting and were too green to fight an offensive on such a short notice.? There was absolutely no chance for them to pursue.? They did well enough to eek out the victory they did.? You must remember that the first half of Bull Run they took a severe licking.? Washington was never even in their sights I assure you.
My post was more of a what if they could have pursued, could Bull run have been a turning point? And many believe that there was a window of oppurtunity for nearly two weeks after the battle while the federal army was reorginzing that the south could have went on the offinsive and possibly have been sucsessful.Johnston and Beauregards armies totaled about 30,000 men, of which 17,000 bore the brunt of the fight. Holmes ,Ewell and Early saw no action at all, while some, including Longstreet saw very little. So there were some reserves. But yes it was probably impractitical,what with the weather and all.It's something historians will be arguing about for generations as they already have.? But like I said it was a what if.The simple fact of the matter was, if the south could not win the war early on they wernt going to win it at all. Fewer resources and men. Grant used that to his advantage and the outcome was inevitable.
THE turning point in the Civil War was the Emancipation Proclamation. The South's best hope for victory was always the imposition of peace by the European powers, principally Britain (remember it was in the middle of the period known as Pax Brittania), but only if the war could be portrayed to the British public, and Parliament, as an economic struggle that was damaging, in many ways severely, their domestic economy because of the lack of cotton for their textile industry. The Proclamation ended that hope by converting the war publicly to one against slavery. There was no way that any British government could survivie if it was perceived as trying to save a slave economy. After all, Britain, like the rest of the “civilized” world had already abolished slavery. Even Russia had freed its serfs.
THE turning point in the Civil War was the Emancipation Proclamation.? The South's best hope for victory was always the imposition of peace by the European powers, principally Britain (remember it was in the middle of the period known as Pax Brittania), but only if the war could be portrayed to the British public, and Parliament, as an economic struggle that was damaging, in many ways severely, their domestic economy because of the lack of cotton for their textile industry.? The Proclamation ended that hope by converting the war publicly to one against slavery.? There was no way that any British government could survivie if it was perceived as trying to save a slave economy.? After all, Britain, like the rest of the "civilized" world had already abolished slavery.? Even Russia had freed its serfs.
That was Lincoln's goal with this, to create an internal revolution and cast the south in a bad light to the rest of the world.
His goal was to re-unite the country, that was his goal from the moment they seceded. Everything he did was for that, and only that, purpose. He offered the Confederate states a number of opportunities to rejoin the union that would have allowed them to retain slavery because he believed that slavery would eventually die a natural death. In fact, if the Confederate states not yet conquered, by far the vast majority of the southern states, had ceased fighting between the publishing of the preliminary Proclamation on Sept. 17th I believe and January 1st, they would have kept all their slaves. It was their stubborn, and ultimately stupid, refusal to make any sort of compromise that condemned them.
His goal was to re-unite the country, that was his goal from the moment they seceded.? Everything he did was for that, and only that, purpose.?
Yes his ultimate goal was for the reunification of the country, and he used the EP for that purpose, and the purpose was to undermine the southern confederacy anyway he could.
The goal in war is ALWAYS to undermine your opponent any way you can. That is why Bush I encouraged the Shiites to revolt against Saddam at the end of the Gulf War even though he had no intention of helping them and the result was thousands of dead civilians. At least Lincoln never encouraged a slave revolt which was the one overriding fear of the South and had been for virtually the entire existence of the country.
