Civil War History - "What if..." DiscussionsWhat if they had attacked instead of digging in...? What if he was in charge of the army instead...? Did you ever have a "What if..." question, and you weren't sure where to post it? Here's the place to ask these speculative questions!
Whatever, the sentiments of the armed forces, such a war would necessarily have to be a quick one, before those at home had time think about where Britain's true interests lay.
That's an excellent observation that I will refer to our English cousins. Was Parliament capable of pulling a quick one on the constituency?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
The queens husband was decidedly anti-war and the Queen less than enthusiastic. The PM and his Foreign Minister, were both elderly men, who had neither the inclination nor enegy to even attempt to pull a fast one on the voting public. The south was lucky to get recognition as a belligerent.
If a local war thousands of miles away, became a world war, in which slavery and the rights of men became rallying points, it might become a war that England might not like or even win. such a war began just over four score and ten years before and the european world had been turned upside down.
The defence of Canada was a prime concern. In fact THE prime concern. There was a feeling the US was going north after the war no matter what, hence the constant consideration of war with the Union.
The problem with the Great Lakes as far as the US is concerned is that the links to the US river system are too small for any kind of warship, let alone something large like a Monitor. Although US shipbuilding capacity on the Lakes is larger.
Both sides need to improvise fleets on the Great Lakes (assuming the Brits don't succeed in keeping the Beauharnois Canal open, in which case dozens of RN warcraft are going to be on the Lakes).
Hitting Montreal would be interesting. It's defended by more men than are defending Washington with stronger works. It's the main staging area for the incoming regulars for example...
"It's the main staging area for the incoming regulars for example..."
Don't leave off in midsentence, 67th, I want to know more!
It's where Williams had his HQ, and half the regulars he had (inc the Guards Brigade). The only bridge over the St Lawrence not slated for demolition for example was near Montreal.
But surely, the fear of those british troops coming south from Montreal would be enough to paralyze thousands of union troops, perhaps enough to allow for a different decision in the militarily decisive Western theatre. Even if those british regiments did nothing but sit there, the effect might well be decisive.
Respectfully,
Matt
__________________ Great-Great Grand Nephew of George H. Pfau, 4th NJ Vol Infantry
Any thing, of course, is possible in "What If" questions, but Lincoln was a hard man to convince, when it came to giving up the cause of the Union.
The prospect of a two front war against the primier sea power of the age, would give any astute political leader pause. But, once such an occurrence became a reality, the British would have to do more than organize, transport and supply a large Army in Canada.
Lincolns actions and public opinion is problematic (it did not happen, so facts are missing) but I am sure that it may have only delayed the South's ultimate defeat, if, as is likely, Britain saw her interests in Canada as more important than those of the Confederate States of America, below the Mason Dixon Line.
Sam: I wouldn't say "did not dare." Maybe "thought better of" or "didn't choose to." You must have a really good reason to wade into that guy on the next bar stool. You might win, but you aren't going to come out of it without some injury. So. Is the injury worth it? Probably not. Save the fights for something important.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln