Proposed Invasion of Charleston harbor by the North

Several other examples have been used by BH#2, so I figured I'd use an example of blatant land grabbing and threats of war followed by launching war.
 
OOPS again, hit the wrong button: From the exchange of ltrs between Beauregard with various SC and csa funtionaries, it seems obvious, he was planning to attack as soon he could gather, train and equip enough troops to be sure of taking Ft. Sumter. If this true than the timing of the attack was dependent upon when Beauregard was confident of success and only, incidentally, to Union actions.
Even if there had been no resupply effort, it would seem Beauregard's attack would not have been delayed much longer than it was in reality.
 
Well, the feeling was to take the fort before Lincoln was inaugurated. Kinda missed that deadline.
 
Pure and simple davis needed a war to bring in the other slave states. He wasn't interested in peaceful seperation which is clear to any who see the repeated provocative attacks on the US flag. There was no intention for peace, The call by Davis for 100,000 troops to "defend" the CS is ample evidence of such.

Davis had been the Sect of War and was well aware of the capabilities, deployment and strength of the US military. He used that knowledge to good effect to emasculate better than 1/3 of the US military. He also counted on a more professional military being created out of whole cloth than what he ended up w/. His miscalculation cost the CS the war and gave us the four bloodiest years of US history.

If it is somehow true that Davis was tricked by Lincoln... one has to believe Davis was an incompetent politician and leader. He wasn't. Davis was in a deadly game of chicken w/ Lincoln and Davis was the one who blinked.
 
Robert Toombs, Secretary of State,CSA warned Davis of the consequences of attacking Fort Sumter and Davis chose to disregard Toombs' prophetic warning, that the attack "will lose us every friend at the North. You will only strike a hornet's nest. ... Legions now quiet will swarm out and sting us to death. It is unnecessary. It puts us in the wrong. It is fatal."
However, Davis felt he knew better. And we all know how that turned out.
 
In ref. to the starting of the war, Toombs acknowleges there was no war at the time, and that firing on Ft. Sumter would start a war.
 
There was no war yet when he did that. And there wouldn't have been a war if he would have kept his men and war wagons home.
 
Well, yes, if Maria Theresa had surrendered Silesia to Frederick, he wouldn't have taken it by force.

That's the kind of way there would be no war here.
 
Lincoln new that war was coming too, when he sent that reinforcement and war ships South.


Hmmmm well what gave him the clue? The seizing of federal installations and capture of troops? The firing on ships that flew the US flag? The call for thousands of troops? Or the surrounding of a federal fort and demanding its surrander?
 
There was no war yet when he did that. And there wouldn't have been a war if he would have kept his men and war wagons home.

And I'm told there wouldn't have been a 9/11 if the U.S. had just withdrawn all her troops from the Middle East.
 
Plus, Beauregard had not taken Sumter yet, only because he did not have enough men or enough guns properly site or enough powder and shot for his artillery. If he had had enough of all of that sooner, he would have made the final demand for surrender, sooner. preferably even before Lincoln had assumed office.
 
I think so. Beauregard's taking Ft. Sumter was not dependent on what Lincoln did , but on the dsa preparedness for war. Beauregard and the gov'ts of SC and the CSA were bound and determined to take Ft. Sumter as soon as possible, no matter what the President did or did not do, short of abject surrender and neither Beauregard nor the csa gov't expected that.
 
Davis had been the Sect of War and was well aware of the capabilities, deployment and strength of the US military. He used that knowledge to good effect to emasculate better than 1/3 of the US military.

Not bad history, not history at all.

Left that post ( Sec of war ) in 1857, at that period of time he was speaking against secesion, and when appointed in 53 found the USA Army had 10000 present for duty out of its authotsied 14,000, when he left it had 15000, of its authorised 16,000. So he knew secesion was comming, but was speaking against it and increasing the national army size by 50%.http://search.mywebsearch.com/myweb...3gRPSlsZTOrA0P0el5L251mp1ga2wOHwqn1hg==&ct=AR




He also counted on a more professional military being created out of whole cloth than what he ended up w/. His miscalculation cost the CS the war and gave us the four bloodiest years of US history.

No, being outnumbered in every measurable resourc except courage, and being invaded, caused the four bloodiest years of US history.

If it is somehow true that Davis was tricked by Lincoln... one has to believe Davis was an incompetent politician and leader. He wasn't. Davis was in a deadly game of chicken w/ Lincoln and Davis was the one who blinked.

Davis knew Lincoln was prepared to wage war, agianst what Loincoln explained wasa few 000 fireater, and the whole thing would be over before Congress was seated, Davis knew the temprement of the South better than Lincoln, and both got what they wnated from sumpter, Davis got the upper south to secede, Lincoln got to start the war by appearing to be attacked.

Both got more than they expected as it bturned out as war has ist own agenda once commenced with.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top