Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
In the summer of 1863, Gen. Lee during the months of May and June had his last opportunity to save the confederate nation. It involved not an engagement with the union forces but a test of wills.
Gen. Lee had a strategic plan for the confederacy that differed from Pres. Davis strategic plan. As it is known Pres. Davis want to fight a defensive war and break the resolve of the north to fight a prolong war. He also believe in trying to maintain the confederate nation's territorial integrity which led to leaving various military units scattered through out the south and being ineffective. He had other failed ideas as well but these two effected Gen. Lee and the south's ability to fight and maintain an effective war effort.
Gen. Lee as it is known wanted to take the fight to union's backyard. His plan was more bold then marching the AoNV into PA. He wanted bring the scatter units and brigades in SC. and NC. to central VA. under the command of Gen. P.G.T. Beauregard and send them toward OH. He knew the north would constrict it forces in the south to meet two southern intrusion into the north giving a breather to the south of union forces. He also knew if he could or Gen. Beauregard could engage union forces in the union's own backyard and win then maybe a European nation would come to their aid.
Pres. Davis first approved his plan but never implemented it in full. He was unwilling to give up his plan of defensive war and his false belief he was a military genus. He even shorted Gen. Lee almost a division for his raid into the north. Pres. Davis started the war and his strategic plan was going to lose it.
Gen. Lee knew Pres. Davis's strategic plan was failing and it was going to lose the war. Here is the moment of truth in the summer of 1863, Gen Lee could have save the confederate nation from it present path and death. Once he saw Pres. Davis refuse to follow his strategic plan and he lost the test of wills. He should have led a COUP DE TAT. Yes, a coup!
Gen. Lee could have rid the south of a useless civilian government and ended Pres. Davis failed strategic plan. He would have had total control of all military resources and he would have used them more effectively then Pres. Davis. Just think, what Gen. Lee could have done and become if he would have been so bold.
Gen Lee would not have become the Cincinnatus or Washington of his dreams but he would have become the Caesar and Napoleon of the America's.
Yes, semi-democratic south government needed to go and yes, a military reign was needed to replace it or at least a puppet civilian government. Gen. Lee by ending democracy could have saved the confederate nation but he failed to be so BOLD!
I think Lee was one of the last generals in the Confederate army who would usurp his loyalties.
The Confederate States, as a whole, and originally thought of by its civilian leadership, was broken.
Many of the states were already lost by 1863. By then the Confederacy could not sustain a 13 or 14 state country.
Most generals would have written Vicksburg off eventually. The Union had the shorter supply line and the bigger army.
Lee did his best to get the Confederacy into a negotiation position. He had little prospects for victory.
By 1863, the Confederacy had even lost the western counties of Virginia.
At best, the Confederacy could hope for stalemate and a fewer number of its states as a separate nation.
I think a Beauregard offensive in the midwest (via Kentucky) would fizzle as did the '62 invasion. It's more than concentrating the troops. Food, ammunition had to be collected to support the drive. Once the objective or near objectives were known, the Union could concentrate greater forces to isolate or destroy Beauregard's drive. The only chance it would have would be the relief of Vicksburg. That could have resulted in Grant being sacked as another washed out major-general (ala McClellan, Hooker, Burnsides, etc.).
I think Lee was one of the last generals in the Confederate army who would usurp his loyalties.
The Confederate States, as a whole, and originally thought of by its civilian leadership, was broken.
Many of the states were already lost by 1863. By then the Confederacy could not sustain a 13 or 14 state country.
Most generals would have written Vicksburg off eventually. The Union had the shorter supply line and the bigger army.
Lee did his best to get the Confederacy into a negotiation position. He had little prospects for victory.
By 1863, the Confederacy had even lost the western counties of Virginia.
At best, the Confederacy could hope for stalemate and a fewer number of its states as a separate nation.
First, I agree Lee would be one of the last person's to led a military overthrow of the government.
Your post makes my point. Things were going badly for the south and it all falls back on Pres. Davis mismanagement of the war.
I have been reading about the prelude before the battle at Gettysburg. It is clear the summer of 1863 was the last opportunity for Gen. Lee to change the course the confederacy was on. He knew the policies of Pres. Davis were leading the confederacy to its doom.
The question becomes, how could Gen. Lee change the course the confederacy was on? He tried to change the direction by offering other options but Pres. Davis ignored them.
Where does this leave Gen. Lee? We know he does tried to implement his plan under Pres. Davis's half hearted support and it failed. I see Gen. Lee's only option he had was to overthrow the confederate government and kick Pres. Davis to the curb.
Just Think, what Gen. Lee could of done if he had total control of the south's military resources.
What other option does Lee have in the summer of 1863 to change the course of the war and stalemate is better then total defeat.
I think a Beauregard offensive in the midwest (via Kentucky) would fizzle as did the '62 invasion. It's more than concentrating the troops. Food, ammunition had to be collected to support the drive. Once the objective or near objectives were known, the Union could concentrate greater forces to isolate or destroy Beauregard's drive. The only chance it would have would be the relief of Vicksburg. That could have resulted in Grant being sacked as another washed out major-general (ala McClellan, Hooker, Burnsides, etc.).
I believe Lee wanted Beauregard to cut throw WV. and into Ohio but the outcome would have most likely been the same. I am not a big Beauregard fame.
It may not have helped Vicksburg but it may have pulled the Union out of TN.
How would you(cash) have solved Lee's dilemma? Now think, Lee's army is becoming ramshackle and is slowly losing it viability as a fighting force and the prospects of winning the war are fading too all under Pres. Davis's war policies.
Now think, a new course needs to be followed and you offer one and it is ignore for the old failed ways.
My solution may go against our Democratic up bringing but as I see it Gen. Lee should have overthrown the civilian government of Pres. Davis. I believe this would have had a lot of beneficial effects throughout the southern states and the war effort.
How would you(cash) have solved Lee's dilemma? Just surrender! or followed the old failed path cut by Pres Davis's policies and see the death of a nation.
I think one of the major problems is both the student and historians have historically overstated what the Confederates did well, and not where the Confederacy dreadfully fell, very short.
One johnny reb was not going to defeat seven yankees. One johnny reb wasn't ultimately going to defeat even two well armed and supplied yankees.
We all have read of the Merrimac(Virginia) and the Monitor. But no historian seem to pause and ask what happened with no other Virginia to replace it, or pause to see the end of Norfolk as a Confederate possession.
Logistically, who notes that the iron sheathing used on the Virginia to make it an ironclad, was obtained from the rails of the B&O Railroad, hauled back to Richmond, by Stonewall Jackson's army. From the start the Confederacy was in a serious logistical situation. It had its slaves; it lacked foundries, rolling mills, factories and a good intergrated railroad system. It never would have an ample or necessary supply of the latter.
The only plan, within the means and capabilities of the csa in 1863, was Longstreet's.
Move Longstreet and his Corps by rapid rail movent to Johnston and, in retrospect, pick up reinforcements from Bragg on his way to Ms. Relieving Vicksburg (we now know that Roscrans was determined not to attack Bragg until After Vicksburg had been taken.)
IMO, even if successful I do not believe it would have held off the southern defeat much longer that it actually did.
[quote=OpnDownfall]The only plan, within the means and capabilities of the csa in 1863, was Longstreet's.
Move Longstreet and his Corps by rapid rail movent to Johnston and, in retrospect, pick up reinforcements from Bragg on his way to Ms. Relieving Vicksburg (we now know that Roscrans was determined not to attack Bragg until After Vicksburg had been taken.)
IMO, even if successful I do not believe it would have held off the southern defeat much longer that it actually did.[/quote.
This plan would be only allowing Longstreet to get his butt kicked by his buddy U.S. Grant.
Saving Vicksburg would not have given new life or viability to the southern cause. Only, a radical change in the policies of Pres. Davis could have given the southern cause a chance at viability.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
LEE'S - Last Chance to Save a Nation. 
Linear Mode
