Posted on 10/15/2005 8:38:50 AM PDT by teldon30
Lee was also suffering from the loss of Stonewall Jackson. His order to take Cemetery Hill "if practicable" would have been interpreted a helluva lot differently by Jackson than it was by Dick Ewell.
I stand corrected. Draft did not start till 1863. Overall the Union leadership in the East was not stellar. It took 2 years to shake out ths system. The fighting from Gettysburg onward, many Union divisional, brigade, regimental commanders were promoted from the ranks up, veterans and proven men, versus the earlier selections tainted by politics or inherited deadwood. The South lost the war in the West and at sea. These battles helped the Union accomplish the Anaconda Strategy which ultimately cut up and strangled the South of resources and ability to replace material and manpower losses.
Our bankruptcy laws are modeled on the Biblical concept of slavery, which was a limited period of reduced responsibility, not to exceed seven years. (although the option was open for those who desired it to REQUEST a permanent condition of slavery.) The Africans who came to this country were already slaves who would otherwise have been killed, or castrated and sent off to the world of islam to guard and fill harems. (as they still are.) Slavery itself, per se, is not considered evil in the Bible. It is, however, a lower position in life, and the believer should use lawful available means to get out of it.
The first black "indentured servants" came to Virginia in 1619, served their terms, and began independent lives. The problem in the American south began when the Biblical pattern was broken, and the slaves were not capitalized and released after seven years.
The south lost because they did not have the industrial base to support the war effort. It is a simple fact. He who can make the most bullets wins!
Probably. Lee was a very hands off commander, preferring to make his desires known in broad terms and allowing the commander on the field to execute a plan to accomplish it. As you pointed out that was no problem for Jackson but it was for Ewell. But Lee should have known that.
And yet those English aristocrats refused to recognize confederate sovereignty. And before you make such blanket claims, one of William Gladstone's closest friends was Charles Sumner.
Like what?
This profited merchants and manufacturers in the north at the expense of largely poor farmers in the south (most of whom owned no slaves).
These poor southern farmers were big consumers of imports were they?
Overall, neither was the confederate leadership. Take away Jackson and the southern corps commanders in the Army of Northern Virginia were a mediocre lot. The south had, for all practical purposes, a single competent army commander. Division and brigade commanders were about even.
We recall Gladstone's famous comment that Jefferson Davis had made a nation. Whenever the British were on the point of recognizing the Confederacy, the Union would win a victory. Acton was perhaps more representative of English aristocracy. The middle-class liberals tended to be on the side of the Union.
I read that Lee waited for a while in Gettysburg in a defensive position, thinking Meade might come after him. Also, Pickett was devastated and never forgave Lee for what happened to his men. Longstreet also wanted to get away from Lee at that point.
"Overall Union leadership was not stellar." I meant in the East and the first 2.5 years of the war only. The best Union commanders were in the West while the best Confederate commanders were in the East at the beginning of the war. Unfortunately too many promising brigade commanders were killed at the beginning of the war, and who knows how well they would have been if they lived. Even if the Northern commanders were average, the sheer industrial might, efficient rail system and manpower of the North was crushing the South. The ACW was fought at the dawn of the industrial revolution and the people who ran the North were not stupid to take advantage of this economic advantage.
I used to think Lincoln was a great President ( I think he was a good man) until I started really getting into the War of Northern Aggression and found him to be like FDR.....wrong man at the right time. I put Lincoln up in the top ten of bad Presidents. Thanks for the heads-up on Lincoln and Marx......I had no idea.
Exactly trek. To call it a Civil War is to miss it's meaning altogether. If Virginia fought Virginia, etc., that would be a Civil War. A War of Northern Aggression is what I call it and always will. *~*
How sad was it that these West Point generals who were classmates and soldiers together ended up trying to defeat each other. It would be like Gen. Myers & Gen. Abizaid trying to kill each other.
Thanks Sassy.
State loyalties ran deep in those days.
Other way around. Lee began his return to Virginia the next day, with the first of his wagons beginning the journey south on the afternoon of July 4. You're correct in that Pickett never forgave Lee.
Point of trivia. Pickett received his appointment to West Point from an Illinois congressman. Pickett's uncle and this congressman were political enemies and the uncle enlisted the help of a third party to act as go between and assist in obtaining the appointment. That go-between was Abraham Lincoln. Nice story, even if it may not be entirely accurate.
Gladstone later denied that he meant that speech as recognition of the confederacy. Palmerston was not amused.
But it helped Lee, who knew most of his opponents very well. The one Union general he had little memory of was Grant, who turned out to be the only one Lee couldn't figure out.
..."The War of Southern Rebellion"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.