What ifs...

[30th_il]

For the most part I don't enjoy "what ifs" discussion(s). I much more enjoy the "why didn'ts". But....I'd like to add a "what if". Heck, what if there was no civil war. What would society be like now. never mind the, what if general so and so did or did not do such and such. Let's take the ball to the court and say the civil war never happened. One such thing that would be....is no use for this forum...no Ken Burns documentary and all things alike.. If the civil war was not....what would be your interest?

[samgrant]

You did it! The Ultimate Civil War 'What If'

[matthew mckeon]

I don't like much of alternative history or "what ifs" in many cases for a couple of reasons.

It often seems like wishful thinking, instead of actual thinking. It often revolves around, "if only" this happens, then the rest of the story would be different. If only Stonewall had lived, if only Johnston had lived, if only Ewell had attacked here, if only Lee hadn't attacked there.

[nbforrest]

I certainly like "what ifs" but I do sort of prefer a more fact based discussion of tactics and generals. An analysis, I mean. Although of course, that is speculative too. Something I've noticed though as I ponder various "what ifs"...I pretty much always come to the conclusion that any what if still ends with a Southern defeat. From all the what ifs I've dicussed, I doubt that very many at all could have helped the South in the long run.

Respectfully

[milhistbuff1]

NB, With all due respect, the south did not need an absolute military victory to win. Forcing the North's body count high enough would have been enough assuming Davis gained the time to emancipate the slaves. Say Davis's 6 yr term ran out, someone more competent could have reversed the situation, or turned it to a political advantage, sought other allies.

As for Matthew McKeon's comments, I believe the What If questions are useful, only by exploring contingencies can we be prepared to meet them. History has also repeated itself tactically, In WWI, a young German officer read a book called Two Years in the Saddle written by none other then, Heros Von Borcke, a German observer describing his experiences and the tactics of on James Ewell Brown Stuart. That officers name, a Schwabian Erwin Rommel. The knowldege gained from that book determined his use of Artillery for the rest of his life, dictating tactical and stategic use of 77mm and in WWII 88mm guns as not just arty, but tank killers as well.

Immediately after the war the US sent a digest of our experiences in the Civil War to every military academy in europe, to describe the attitude of all but one of the countries Field Von Moltke will suffice. " one armed mob chasing another, there is nothing to be learned from this." The exception was in the descendents of those once oppressed by the Golden Horde, The Russian Cossacks. Once adapted to modern weaponry, that digest was the spine of the tactics that destroyed many a Panzer on the Russian Front.


Source "The Iron Cavalry" by Ralph Zumbro. I highly recomend it.
Respectfully,
Matt

[nbforrest]

Do you really think that the South could have held on for two more years, changed presidents, and then reversed the course of the war? I speculate of course, but I doubt it.

Now, I'm not a big Stuart fan, so I query, what on Earth good could Rommel have found in reading about Stuart's tactics, especially through the pen of von Borcke?

Also, I wonder if Rommel's reading a book like that (I'm assuming he did) was the start of the apparantly false stories of Rommel touring Jackson's battlefields, studying them, etc.

Respectfully

[milhistbuff1]

it was the use of Arty that drew Rommel's attention, he consistently surprised the british with fast offensives, although resisted were successfull due to the success in outflanking the Brits and trapping them in "boxes" such as El Adem and others. Rommel used horsed scouts as well, not just the panzers. By using the 88's essentially like power versions of HA he was able to break up attacks and enemy defenses. His weakness was logistics, same as many commanders throughout history.
Respectfully
Matt

[nbforrest]

Interesting. Regarding HA, I think Pelham steals the limelight from some equally talented officers like Chew.

Am I right that the Rommel in America stories are false? From what I've read, there's no basis to them.

Respectfully

[milhistbuff1]

This is the first i've heard of Rommel being in the USA. dont know, ewc might though.

[nbforrest]

Supposedly Rommel visited Civil War battlefields in VA and studied Jackson's tactics. Apparantly it is false as I read that Rommel's widow stated that he had never even visited the U.S.

Respectfully