Just remind me..

[Alexander's Horse]

I'm with MtG here. And although I don't have any respect the Confederate generals' cause, they were quite adept on the battlefield.

Yes but here is something I have noticed worth thinking about - sure the confederate armies move about and win a lot of battles. They have better generals for sure. But dominant armies don't have to do that, which brings us back to the lesson of Sherman again. The dominant just bulldoze through.

Other examples would be the Soviet steamroller in WWII. Sure, blitzkrieg is elegant and wins Germany a lot of quick victories but it cannot in the end compensate for fundamental weaknesses in Germany's situation. The same applies to the Confederacy. Sherman understood that and he just went for the jugular. He inspired US generals like Eisenhower with his broad front strat in the west. With overwhelming superiority the western allies too didn't have to risk Montie's northern thrust or Churchill's mooted Balkan campaign.

My reading of military history is usually its the ultimate loser who has to get fancy.

[Dr Strangelove]

If the Confederacy had survived until WW1 there would never have been a WW2. The US could not have sent all their troops to France with the border to the South to defend. Germany would have worn down the French in WW1, pressing on to the Channel ports in '17 and '18 in a gruesome finish to the slaughter. The UK would have eventually had to deal. In the meantime the Germans would have been free to exploit the revolution in Russia, and help bring victory to the White Russians while they brought home the food and raw materials from the East since they were cut off by the UK blockade. No communist Russia, no 2nd World War, no Cold War. No Manhattan Project, no nukes... I doubt the US and UK would have ended up best buddies either. The US/Canada border would likely be a possible flashpoint, the UK allied with the Confederacy after they survived the Civil War and showed their mettle. Still, the slavery would have had to go for that to happen, and good riddance. Imperialist Germany would have had a White Russian puppet state into the bargain.

I'd have spent my time in the military defending Washington State, or in the Midwest somewhere looking through my binoculars at Sloww, MtG, damn Yankee that I am.

Edit: I moved to Oregon however, not a state at that time. I wonder who would have won the West?

The German Spring Offensive of 1918 was the last hurrah from the Kaiser's armies. When the allies stopped it they barely had more than 2 division's worth of American troops on the French front. Meanwhile the British and French had sent several divisions to the Balkans and Italy. American not being in WW1 might have meant a slower Allied counter-offensive in France, or a reduced effort in Italy and the Balkans, but nevertheless Germany and it's allies were at the end of their resources. Their peoples were starving, spontaneous revolts were occurring in Germany and the dual empire. Neither were able to continue onward much longer. One possible side effect of no American participation might have been that with their troops further from home, Germany and Austria might have fallen to the bolsheviks.

[Dinner]

Lee was very aware that the south was materially poorer than the north, that it had a much smaller population, only a tiny manufacturing base, and much worse infrastructure. I remember a quote from the Burns' documentary on the Civil War in which they quoted a soldier congratulating Lee on some recent victory in battle and Lee supposedly responded "If we have to many more victories like that one then we will lose the war". Lee knew that the whole time even if he was winning individual battles he was losing men he couldn't replace, using up material he couldn't replace, and that none of the battles he won were knock out blows so he could win a dozen but if he lost one or two badly enough then the war was over.

[Alexander's Horse]

Right, Lee woops the army of the Potomac over and over but they keep coming back for more and they only have to beat him once, which they do at Gettysburg, and he's done for.

[Hauldren Collider]

Lee from the outset was trying to force a political rather than military conclusion to the Civil War. The hope was that by nabbing Harrisburg they could spook the North into suing for peace. Had Lincoln lost the election it might have worked.

[Alexander's Horse]

exactly

[MichaeltheGreat]

Unfortunately (for the CSA), Lee was stuck with Davis and Stephens and the rest of the inept CSA cabinet. A political victory was impossible when your politicians are such buffoons.

[regexcellent]

Had Lincoln lost the election it would have worked, as his opponent was in favor of letting the South secede. If the South had put more men into groups like Mosby's Rangers, working behind enemy lines to pillaging the North in Pennsylvania and Ohio, then it may yet have succeeded in taking Lincoln down.

[Alexander's Horse]

one great blessing of the war was the way it ended, with the confederate armies allowed to disband and go home with honour, that was well-earned

[MichaeltheGreat]

Had Lincoln lost the election it would have worked, as his opponent was in favor of letting the South secede. If the South had put more men into groups like Mosby's Rangers, working behind enemy lines to pillaging the North in Pennsylvania and Ohio, then it may yet have succeeded in taking Lincoln down.

Davis screwed that pooch when he replaced Johnston with Hood.

[Dr Strangelove]

Had Lincoln lost the election it would have worked, as his opponent was in favor of letting the South secede. If the South had put more men into groups like Mosby's Rangers, working behind enemy lines to pillaging the North in Pennsylvania and Ohio, then it may yet have succeeded in taking Lincoln down.

Mosby's Rangers operated in their home territory of Northern Virginia, rarely crossing into bordering areas of Maryland. They relied upon being able to hide and resupply in friendly territory. I doubt they would have lasted so long if they had attempted deeper penetrations into enemy territory.

[Hauldren Collider]

one great blessing of the war was the way it ended, with the confederate armies allowed to disband and go home with honour, that was well-earned

Agreed. Lee surrending, and Grant allowing the troops to return home, were probably key in preventing the war from becoming an insurgency.

[Dr Strangelove]

But there was an insurgency, an insurgency which the United States wearied of fighting, so they retreated and allowed the reversal of one of the main victories of the war - the freeing of the slaves. So the North got a united nation back and the South got their slaves back.

Practically nobody lost out. It makes you wonder why they fought.

[regexcellent]

Mosby's Rangers operated in their home territory of Northern Virginia, rarely crossing into bordering areas of Maryland. They relied upon being able to hide and resupply in friendly territory. I doubt they would have lasted so long if they had attempted deeper penetrations into enemy territory.

They made regular raids into Maryland. With more organizational support from the Confederate army, mounted rangers would have been much more effective. As it is, Mosby was very adept at disrupting Union supply and communications.

[Dr Strangelove]

Yes, as I said they made rare forays into Maryland, but only the neighboring areas where they were close enough to Virginia that they could dart back under cover within a matter of hours. Cavalrymen tend to go through horses quickly. Raiding up into Pennsylvania or Ohio they would lose a significant fraction of their horses, which would mean either slowing down to match some of their men marching, slowing down because some of their horses are double-mounted, or abandoning men who've become unhorsed. Either way, the unit would quickly become depleted.