150 years ago . Gettysburg

Posted by: MrB

150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 12:16 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gettysburg

The turning point of the Civil War.

Oh, the humanity

Dave
Posted by: DLC

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 05:30 AM

If Ewell had allowed Early to take Cemetery ridge pre Day 1 - it could have been a whole different story ! Course I'm not regretting that- though I'm a southerner (Texan) I'm glad the North won... the South was wrong, and I abhor bigotry , not to mention slavery.

Lee was overconfident he should have listened to Longstreet and pulled out, moved toward Washington and made the Union fight on the ground of HIS choosing. But - that's history.

I highly recommend the Book, The Killer Angels by Michael Shaara if anyone is interested in the battle and what went on behind the scenes. The movie Gettysburg follows the book pretty closely except Pickett's charge. IF they'd followed the book, it'd been another Normandy beach scene like from Private Ryan only worse ! eek
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 07:01 AM

When we were in Atlanta a couple of weeks ago, we went to the GA historical museum and spent almost all our time in the Civil War exhibit. I'd never before seen so clearly just how passive the South was in its conduct of the war. Almost all of the South's strategy was defensive. Of course I knew that the incursion into PA at Gettysburg was the only time that the South had come into northern territory, but I'd not really realized that for the most part the South defended rather than attacked. That's why it's "the war of northern aggression," I guess--although given the secession, I don't see the aggression so much as I do the desire to keep the Union whole. Anyway, I really enjoyed the visit to the museum--and was ashamed by some of the commentary written by northerners into the guest book. Some really deep a-holes in there.
Posted by: DLC

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 08:26 AM

Well Lee ventured 1 other time into the Union... at Antietam (1862). That also was a disaster and the Union got some lucky breaks .... like Burnside at the bridge ! But I'm glad it turned out the way it did.

NOT excusing some northern A-holes, but if the southern culture didn't keep this damm thing going for 150 years, maybe their attitudes would be different. It's the whole TP type intolerance and GW Bush arrogance - my way or the highway !! sick

BTW _ I don't think the South could have ever beaten the North... BUT had they won Gettysburg, England might have recognized them as a country and we still might be fighting today (or at least many years past 1865) ! So again - I'm glad Gettysburg turned out the way it did. Get it OVER ! .... and for some GET OVER IT !! laugh
Posted by: Celandine

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 10:50 AM

Originally Posted By: DLC

BTW _ I don't think the South could have ever beaten the North... BUT had they won Gettysburg, England might have recognized them as a country and we still might be fighting today (or at least many years past 1865) ! So again - I'm glad Gettysburg turned out the way it did. Get it OVER ! .... and for some GET OVER IT !! laugh


...or as my southern cousins would say
EVERY FREAKIN' YEAR as we were driving
off into the sunset (back Northward)...

"SAVE YOUR CONFEDERATE MONEY,
FOR THE SOUTH SHALL RISE AGAIN!"
cry cry cry cry

Yar! Roit! smirk
Posted by: MrB

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 11:26 AM

Was interesting to see you state that the South was mostly defensive moves. Has me thinking about that. I guess so. Interesting.


But then thought of the last major cavalry battle that happend to be in Kansas about fifty miles from where I sit now. It was the culmination of a march of Confederate General Sterling Price which went up through the middle of Missouri to St Louis then across west to above present day KC then down parallel to the Kansas border on the Kansas side to about Fort Scott . He was being followed by Union troops .

The Battle of Mine Creek.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mine_Creek


He was attempting to draw federa troops west away from the Eastern area to help Lee.

Didnt work
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 12:21 PM

Kinda late. If you look at the North's strategy, you'll see that from almost the start they deploy a multi-pronged attack. They bottle up the southern ports along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. They attack and hold coastal areas in Florida. They attack in Texas. They attack down through TN, and are constantly (more or less) besieging Richmond and south of Richmond. I really don't think that the South had enough manpower to do that.
Posted by: Papa

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 02:22 PM

Grant says in his memoirs that he believes the war would have ended sooner had he been allowed to more aggressively pursue the war in the west. the large amount of foraging he had to do to feed his troops was one of the reasons he thought Sherman could succeed in his march to the sea.
Posted by: Papa

Re: 150 years ago . Gettysburg - 07/02/13 02:34 PM

I don't think a win at Gettysburg would have made much difference as to England entering the war on the side of the south. The Emancipation Proclamation pretty much assured that England would not assist the south.

Lincoln had written the Proclamation but was waiting for a Union victory to issue it. Even tho Antietam was pretty much a draw it was close enough to a victory that he went ahead and issued it. McClellan had Lee's battle plan courtesy of a Union soldier who found some cigars wrapped in a copy of the plans and still came away without a complete victory.