US Civil War

No.

No. Same with Germany and Japan.

>>33881891
Why?

>>33881978
There's an incredible difference between WWII and the US civil war.

File: flame it.jpg (111KB, 1022x589px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1022x589px

>>33882007
>WWII and the US civil war
like fucking shooting from mouscets and stuff , WWII can call artilerry and its all over before it would even start
oh and teh
>FLAMEN WURFERS

"Win" the war? No.

But you see, that was never the Confederacy's goal in the War of Northern Agression. The aim was to make a continued war untennable with the yankee population and to negotiate a peace.

So back to your initial statement, they wouldn't have won the war, but the Union would have definitely come to the bargaining table.

File: 375px-1st_Minnesota_at_Gettysburg.jpg (44KB, 375x269px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 375x269px

>>33881874
>not mentioning the 1st Minnesota Volunteers
>suffered 82% losses to buy the union more time at Gettysburg

For shame.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Minnesota_Volunteer_Infantry

>>33881874
Doubtful.

The whole idea of Lee's plan here was to win a battle against the Union army in Pennsylvania, force them to retreat back to Washinton, and then sack Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and possibly Baltimore, the idea that such a thing would cause Congress to force Lincoln to the end the war and negotiate.

Bold plan, and if the 20th Maine had held out, Lee definitely would have his field victory that he needed for the rest of his plan.

Problem is, the rest of his plan probably wouldn't have actually been practical afterwards. The Confederate supply situation was a goddamn mess, and even if they had managed to win at Gettysburg, they would have been pretty much entirely out of ammunition and food, so that whole sacking northern cities thing wouldn't have been possible anyway. The victorious Confederates would have had to go back to Virginia anyway to resupply.

The adage of "amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics" proven yet again.

There's the narrow possibility that simply defeating the Union army yet again, but this time on their home turf, might have still had the desired result of creating enough political pressure to force Lincoln to the bargaining table. But that's about all there is, that narrow chance.

>>33882148
This.

Abraham Lincoln would NEVER give up on restoring the Union. So Abraham Lincoln would have to have lost to McClellan.

History would have had a strange way of working out, but had they swept the hilltops, the Union generals may have expended a ton of effort to retake it. If they played their hand perfectly the rest of 63 and 64 they might have been able to force Lincoln out. This would have helped immensely in that. Also Lee wouldn't have blundered the following day.

>>33882250
"Saviors of the Union."
-Calvin Coolidge.

Anyone else know stories in US military history of a unit getting mauled and it help save the day? Torpedo Squadron 8 at Midway comes to mind but that's it.

File: 1726-3.jpg (23KB, 400x250px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 400x250px

>>33882250
Bufford's delaying effort was also absolutely critical to winning Gettysburg, without him deciding to stall the confederates instead of fucking off it's very unlikely the union would have won without the high ground.

Lee lost Gettysburg when he decided to fight an enemy dug in on high ground. Instead of continuing with his original plan.

The South wouldn't have won unless they went through massive economic reform. which would have rendered slavery moot anyways.

>>33882556
Just in the Civil War, dozens of examples. The tough blue bastards that held the Hornet's Nest at Pittsburgh Landing is the most notable example that comes to my mind. The rest of the federal troops in their section had been routed and were cowering under the river's cut bank. Had the Trans-Mississippi not been stalled for hours by those guys, it would have been a turkey shoot. If they siezed the river landing, the remaining feds couldn't have been reinforced or even evacuated.

>>33882556

Shit the 1st were badass in more than just Gettysburg. They were one of the last off the field at First Bull Run and raped face at Antietam as well.

God I love my state

>>33881874
The problem is that if the 20th folded and Round Top was lost it wouldn't of changed the overall outcome of the war. Lets say the Army of Northern Virginia won Gettysburg and routed the Army of the Potomac all the way back to Washington. Lets say through sheer luck, ignorance, destruction/capture of routing men, etc that Army of Northern Virginia is in well enough position to assault and capture Washington and in turn Old Abe.

They then raid Union supplies and attempt to dig in and hold Washington with their massively depleted manpower after such an exhaustive campaign. Then the Grant Wagon comes back with the Army of Tennessee and encircles and destroys the depleted Army of Northern Virginia if they choose to try and hold Washington, or they are forced to cede the city and retreat back to Southern Lands and the Confederacy still falls.

>>33882556
Makes me really proud to be Minnesotan

>>33882745
>God I love my state
Fuck yeah. I also imagine a bunch of those guys being fairly recent Norwegian/Swedish immigrants, which makes their fighting like absolute madmen even more impressive.

I'm jealous that Wisconsin had the legit Norwegian volunteer unit though, those guys kicked serious ass as well.

>>33882935
Except that wasn't the goal of the Lee's Penna invasion at all. The point was to plant thousands of screaming Dixie boys into the Union heartland to eviscerate oublic support for the war. Sacking Philadelphia or Baltimore were on the table, but Washingto was fortified. Jubal Early ran into this problem during the last Valley campaign.

>>33883091
>but Washingto was fortified
Are you sure that was never a goal?

>>33883091
I know it wasn't, simply stating that even if a miracle occurred and stone wall Jackson returned from the grave leading the riders of Rohan and they somehow had the opportunity and capability to take Washington; that they had zero chance to hold it let alone truly fortify it with the Army of the Tennessee returning.

>>33882250
Not mention Col. Hiram Berdans in comand of two co. of Vermont sharp shooters. And the rest of the Vters in Gettysburg.

>>33882556
The lost battalion in WW1.

>>33883776
Taking Washington? Probably not.

But threaten Washington? Just by being in Pennsylvania Lee was a threat to Washington. Weather he attacked it or not.

>>33882007
Only in technology. The basic "underdeveloped country picks a fight they have no chance of winning and gets ground under inexorably by the sheer weight of industry and population" plot is the same.

>>33881874
If it hadn't been for that Traitor Lee, we would have won.

>>33885428
Germany could have won if it didn't declare war on the US and eliminated the UK before taking on the USSR.

>>33882007
>Why?
Because despite the activity along the Mason Dixon, The war in the west was going pretty poorly for the Confederates. Sherman was going to be able to cut their legs off. Effectively encircling the AoNOVA

>>33882007
>There's an incredible difference between WWII and the US civil war.
A smaller nation picks a fight with a larger, more technologically advanced, more industrious nation,

>>33885711
The US was not more technologically advanced, and Germany didn't exactly pick a fight with the US.

The US was sending vast amounts of support to the UK because the president was sprouting MUH DEMOCRAZY

>>33885727
>sinking US ships
>Telling the Mexicans that they'd support a war with us
>not picking a fight

>>33885968
You're thinking about world war one

Fuck the union, I wish they all fucking died.

>>33881874

Probably not, there were many issues piling up for the Confederacy at that time.

If you want what would have resulted in a Confederate victory had it gone differently, look to the Trent Affair.

File: 51QX-kHImpL._AC_UL320_SR194,320_.jpg (29KB, 194x320px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 194x320px

>>33881874
That's essentially the plot of pic related. The South doesn't outright win the war, but a victory at Gettysburg results in the CSA being recognized by the UK and France and makes the war untenable for the Union. This forces the North into Germany's sphere of influence and later alliance, creating an American front during WWI.

>>33882250

Every Minnesotan needs to make the trip to Gettysburg and see the memorial. It would certainly make this state less fucking cucked.

>>33884595
everyone forgets that the 20th Maine wasn't the end of the line. two companies of men armed with Sharps rifles on your left flank isn't exactly chopped liver.

>>33884317
>>33883776
A victory at Gettysburg would have been a political victory. Just like Manassas, you send the federal army scurrying back to Washington. Then you start tearing up the Union heartland and get the nearby cities frothing with fear. Either it galvanizes the opposition, or it's Lincoln's final blunder and McClelan is elected and comes to the peace table. Entrapping the Army of the Potomac inside of the Washington fortifications would have been really stupid, for the reason you said, the Army of the Cumberland would just come and crush the Army of Northern Va. Lee knew this, he was trying to force a political end to the war, total victory was never really an option, unfortunately for the Southern cause, the Union found their balls eventually. One more catastrophic blunder at Gettysburg may have taken them away, but who is to say.

>>33884595
I liked reading about muh ancestors slitting a couple sentries' throats, stealing into an encampment, and sending a couple hundred Vermonters on a prison train down to Dixie. Partisan Rangers were so cool.

>>33886583
The War in the West was lost at the Battle of Dover very early on, the South lost control of the rivers, and that was it, Sherman's backdoor was all set up.

File: IMG_1376.png (290KB, 618x347px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 618x347px

>>33887010
I don't understand what happened to Minnesotans. A bunch of Marxist sympathizing lefties inhabit that state now. University of Minnesota is second only to Berkeley in leftist loony-ism

>>33887821
It's gotta be something in Swedish blood, I swear.

t. Swedish/Norwegian living in the north metro area

>>33888141
That is it in a roundabout way. The constant importation of Swedish immigrants and now Somali-Swedish immigrants means Minnesota has taken a hard shift left in recent decades.

>>33882674
>Lee lost Gettysburg when he decided to fight an enemy dug in on high ground
"It's over, Gen. Lee! I have the high ground!"

>Confederates win Gettysburg
>Push through and try to lay siege to DC
>Demand Lincoln stop the war and let the South go its own way
>Word gets out the capital is being surrounded
>Grant, Sherman, and others show up from West and encircle Lee
>Lee forced to either flee, or stay and fight in a battle where he is pressed between a rock and a hard place
>South still loses

>>33888920
>Lay Seige to the Siegers
Only problem I see with this is communication into and out of the city of Washington will be next to non existent
Unless they used Carrier pidgeons or something, otherwise there would be no way a runner or telegraph or anything could get into the city that help was on the way. I think Lincoln might be forced to cave.
Or he'd pull a War of 1812 and evacuate and let another invader get BTFO by a freak hurricane after burning the city to the ground

>South voluntarily joins the union
>Then they decide to leave when its taken over by whackos who want to ruin them

>WOW THESE FUCKING REBELS

>>33889007
Word could probably get out before Lee even sees DC. Once a Union loss at Gettysburg is reported, it wouldn't be too hard to figure out what's coming next and start preparing for it. Getting defenses ready, evacuating down through Potomac if needed, and recalling forces to come to DC's aid.

>>33888183
Well, Swedes during the 19th and early 20th century weren't exactly liberal by any means: Sweden was still a backwards country in relation to much of the rest of Europe until it became a welfare state in the 30s to 40s, then especially started being cucked in the 60s.

I just find it odd that MN and Sweden have both degenerated in similar ways, during a similar time frame while being totally separate entities with the only commonality being a lot of Swedes.

I don't blame Somalians for much, because they're just a symptom of an illness, not the cause. Lutheranism is pretty fucking weak, and that probably has something to do with the overly permissive mindset with our culture in MN.

>>33889020
>Mfw you realize the southerners were the real Americans, and the union were akin to the British we fought just 80 years earlier for similar reasons
>mfw the southerners were the good guys

>>33889020
It was more complex than that. The Founding Fathers always had plans, including Jefferson, to phase out slavery and they were cognizant of the fact this would "destroy" the South. They also knew the Southern way of living was never going to survive into the future, it was hopelessly unsustainable. They also knew the Southern senators would never agree to any sort of plan to transition the South to a different economy because of their pride. They basically had no choice but to pass the buck onto succeeding generations and hope a plan could be formed. It wasn't and eventually it all came tumbling down a century later. What should have happened from day 1 was a cooperative plan to steadily herd immigrants to the South to fill up fieldhand positions and simultaneously begin freeing percentages of the slave population so the South could continue as an agrarian society and not barrel towards destruction so they could eventually become an industrial society peacefully.

>>33889114
Sure, but Swedes never stopped immigrating. Swedes have been constantly trickling in from the beginning into the present and likely future. That means the state inevitably would turn left when Sweden became a welfare state.

>>33885665
>eliminated the UK
and how are they going to do that?

>>33889020
>>33889141
The South screwed themselves by throwing a tantrum at Lincoln's election ("NOT MY PRESIDENT") because they thought he was an abolitionist.
They managed to start to break away from the US and then then threw it all away by attacking Fort Sumter.

>>33889372
They did throw a tantrum, but politically speaking, I think they were still the most ideologically right. They had a no party system, which I wish we had today.

>>33889208
>Swedes never stopped immigrating.
I've lived in Minnesota/Minneapolis for 26 years and have never once met a Swedish immigrant. And I'm not a social shut-in.

>>33889412
They also had a complete fuckup of a government that could barely bring itself to function despite being in the middle of a war for it's survival. On paper they had a no party system, in reality they functionally had 13 groups with competing interests.

>>33889481
13 groups is better than what is effectively 2. Either way, being born right before or during a war is gonna guarantee a massive mess: look at the US after the revolution, we were a huge mess in spite of winning, and on the verge of financial ruin. The southern government wasn't like that because it was especially bad, but was simply a new and wartime government at the same time.

>>33889502
Except unlike the USA the CSA inherited a developed civil service and most of its government figures had prior experience in a national government. Thirteen different groups meant that the Confederate Congress was a dysfunctional mess, and just because they didn't have any political parties in the four years of their existence doesn't mean parties wouldn't have developed; the first US political parties didn't come about until 1796.

>>33889044
Which is why they were not going to go to DC, they were going to York, maybe Baltimore, Philadelphia, the undefended Union heartland and industrial centers.

>>33889141
But that's wrong you retard.

>>33882556
Washington's Immortals is a good book on the American Revolution, Maryland volunteers bought time for Washington to retreat and save the continental army during the battle of Manhattan

"My god! What brave men I lose this day!"

>>33891344
Except that even a complete rout of the Union forces would leave them low on supplies and lacking enough reserves to properly exploit the victory, as happened many times during the war. With the Union's superior transportation and communication ability the Union army could more easily regroup and reinforce itself.

Plus Lee winning at Gettysburg doesn't stop Vicksburg from falling a day later.

>>33888920
I need to read Grant Comes West some day.

>>33889372
>>33889412
They also somehow failed to recognize that Lincoln couldn't end slavery without an Amendment, and they had enough states to block one with many votes to spare.

On the other hand, a lot of the wealthy planters wanted to sell out their states by planting crops like cotton that ruined the land with no rotation, then move to a new state with new land... and the one thing that Lincoln and Congress COULD do was prevent new states from being admitted with slavery.

There is at least a little merit to the idea that the planters lied their fellow Southerners into secession.

>>33881874
Semi-related question, /k/.

What are the best Civil War battlefields and museums to see? I'm planning a road trip that passes through Vicksburg on the way to Gettysburg.

I've already come across a few things like the Civil War Naval Museum (conveniently next to Benning's National Infantry Museum) that I had never heard of. What else should I be sure to hit along the way?