What went wrong?

>>3084150
They assumed foreign powers would back their revolt, they didn't.

>>3084150
it was a bad idea from the start.

most of the member states were too selfish to agree on anything, being effectively run by an oligarchy of plantation-owners. Logistics was shit-tier,

also they were the ones who started the war, they took lincolns bait like a bunch of retards and get rekt for it.

Sherman did nothing wrong, the confederacy was stupid and incompetent when it came to the stuff that mattered (logistics and grand-strategy, they had some tactical successes sure, but got grinded down by strategic/logistical superiority from the north)

File: smugbrigade.jpg (62KB, 805x591px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 805x591px

>>3084163
>Sherman did nothing wrong

>>3084150
I know hindsight is 20/20 but it really seems like it was doomed from the start. They had fewer recourses, a smaller population, and couldn't compete economically. The logical thing to do in that situation is fight an atypical guerilla war, which the south could have definitely won. Imagine run and gun fighters hiding in Appalachia just causing hell for northern armies along with the constant death from southern diseases. Basically the south decided to fight a style of war they couldn't have possibly won

>>3084507
1861 was fundamentally an encouraging year for them, though.

First Bull Run, Ball's Bluff and Wilson's Creek were more than enough to make Southerners think those pale, gaunt mechanics from the North were no fighting men worth considering.

I mean, shit, they were right as well - McDowells army at First Bull Run was absolute crap.

It really was about slavery

>economy based on slave labor
>laws to maintain that economy
>advocacy for state rights to pass those laws to maintain the slave economy

If the confeds won America would be a bunch of warring Balkanized failed states waiting to be colonized by neighboring Euro powers instead of the most wealthiest country in the world like it did after the civil war.

>>3085219
I agree
What prevents the state that broke into the confederacy to break even more

>>3084507
>The logical thing to do in that situation is fight an atypical guerilla war

guerilla war after they lost the conventional war would have killed a shitload more yankees and kept the conflict going on for another 4-8yrs but for what purpose?

The Boers tried this against the brits but got dealt with when the brits just decided to burn everthing and starve them out, same shit would have happened with the CSA continuing the fight.

File: 1497217822960.jpg (75KB, 711x527px)

75KB, 711x527px

>>3084177
If you can't take the heat don't try to get out of the Union.

>>3084150
It should have been crushed in a few weeks but the union was uber incompetent

>>3084507
technically already happened in the Reconstruction era

>>3084150
Seceding from the US.

>>3084150
The CSA DID NOTHING WRONG

and this is coming from a british dixieboo

Abe was an old cunt who would have rather murdered millions of americans than see the union break up, the guy was a 1800's hitler

>>3084150
Saying it was going to fail from the start is just dumb, they had a good chance with their superior generals, they just lacked the industry and stability in the army, they certainly would have won if Britain supported them

>>3085273
>and this is coming from a british dixieboo
well of course the eternal anglo wants other countries divided and weak

>>3085251
True - also Lincoln calling up the militia was a horrible move that exacerbated the problem and lost him half the states that ended up in the CSA. He was goddamn lucky to hold on to Missouri and Kentucky.

I only recently realized the CSA had Washington within their reach - had they made that gamble in the early period of the war, things could have been a lot different.

>>3085275
Both sides had their share of retarded commanders - as is inevitable when command is granted to essentially celebrities and politicians, and then they count equal to Westpointers.

>>3085275
The brits were weird

they were semi-aiding the CSA then ended up having to pay the union millions in damages after the war for the ships they built the CSA that raided shipping.

if they went balls deep and aided the south they would probably have come out a lot better financially than tip toeing around and being fined for it.

I mean really they could have ended the union blockade in a matter of weeks and completely blockaded the north in return, the royal navy were nothing to fuck with at this period

>>3085310
They even had casus bellum with the Trent Affair - the populace was calling for blood, and the navy was readying - and then they instead backed down.

>>3085320
The whole supporting slave thing would be a huge prickly thing especially after the emancipation proclamation though

>>3085341
True - but they could have framed it as reaffirming naval dominance over uppity Yanks. Pay back the US for the Trent insult, only aid CSA indirectly.

>>3084507
>run and gun fighters hiding in Appalachia

That would accomplish nothing. The entire point of the war was preserving massive slave plantations, which were nowhere near Appalachia.

Union was descended from Puritans and Quakers, Confederacy descended from the Cavaliers. The war was a long time coming.

>>3084507
>The logical thing to do in that situation is fight an atypical guerilla war
They did do that, ever heard of Mosbys confederacy?