- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Location
- Ohio
History debate
very trueIn the current time line it was the margin of victory. There was that untapped reserve, but also political minefield if tapped. I'd hate to have a big call up during the summer of '64 for example. There are likely other bad times politically too. The USCT solved a number of political problems.
In the current time line it was the margin of victory. There was that untapped reserve, but also political minefield if tapped. I'd hate to have a big call up during the summer of '64 for example. There are likely other bad times politically too. The USCT solved a number of political problems.
History debate
True....I haven't read a lot on the Colored Troops but I believe something like 200,000 served during the war. Out of that 10,000 died from combat and about 20,000 more from disease. I'm really surprised they weren't used more than they were. They definitely were motivated to fight.
What did you think of Trudeaus book, I've been debating on getting that one.. His other two on Gettysburg and Shermans march I thought were superb..I think they would've been used more in fighting if predjudices didn't die so hard. And from my reading of Noah Andre Trudeau's Like Men Of War, USCT training varied wildly from regiment to regiment. Some like the famous 54th Mass. were trained just as well if not better than most white units. Other USCT units barely knew the rudiments of marching, loading and firing their weapons before being thrown into battle and understandably performed poorly thus reinforcing the predjudice of the generals who committed them to battle. Which is the reason we see quotes praising their qualities as fighting men and others saying that they should never be used in combat but for merely "digging ditches".
More like...
Expired Image Removed
I'm not so sure of that, there was still a large reserve of the white population that could be tapped into for the Union, although it probaly would have led to more public unrest and a stricter draft if it occured.
True....I haven't read a lot on the Colored Troops but I believe something like 200,000 served during the war. Out of that 10,000 died from combat and about 20,000 more from disease. I'm really surprised they weren't used more than they were. They definitely were motivated to fight.
What did you think of Trudeaus book, I've been debating on getting that one.. His other two on Gettysburg and Shermans march I thought were superb..
ThanksI can't recommend that book enough. Very well written and researched. And he covers just about every combat action the USCT took part in. From the smallest skirmish to large battles.
Debate no longer and get it!
Probably because she's tired of hearing about how the South would've won but for the superior numbers and resources of the North. Well guess what, that's what usually happens when a smaller country starts a war with a country with more people, more industry, more resources and more money and the will to see the thing through to the end. The smaller country loses precisely because of those things. To whine about it, like some here do, seems to be sour grapes.
I'm not pretending to know Diana's mind, but that seems a pretty good guess.
D9, as I read your post, both S.D. Lee and W.T. Sherman agreed. So why all the histrionics?
True....I haven't read a lot on the Colored Troops but I believe something like 200,000 served during the war. Out of that 10,000 died from combat and about 20,000 more from disease. I'm really surprised they weren't used more than they were. They definitely were motivated to fight.
More like...
Expired Image Removed
Well I know that Sherman hated the colored troops and he said that fighting side-by-side with a black soldier only weakened the moral of his troops. He especially hated the recruiters DC tended to send to collect blacks to enlist in the army. He kept complaining that the recruiters ate too much food and took too much space on the trains or some lame excuse like that he used to send them away, hehe. That really crawled on the nerves of the politicians in DC.
At least this is what historian John F. Marzalek claims about Sherman...
He didn't "hate" the colored troops. They were untrained and it was this that he feared would affect the moral of his troops. He also didn't want slaves following him on his March to the Sea, not because he didn't like blacks but because he didn't want to deal with 10 to 20 thousand slaves on his March. When you consider having to feed that many people in addition to foraging and feeding 60,000 troops, you've got one heck of a logistical problem.
Sherman was a racist and he hated the blacks, that's a fact. He even said that when the war ends, he would buy some slaves for himself. Why else do you think he defended general Jeff C. Davis after he cut the bridge and left so many former slaves on the mercy of Wheeler's cavalry? Also, Sherman was constantly receiving numerous scoldings from DC to restrain from his racist remarks all the time.
Sherman was a racist and he hated the blacks, that's a fact. He even said that when the war ends, he would buy some slaves for himself. Why else do you think he defended general Jeff C. Davis after he cut the bridge and left so many former slaves on the mercy of Wheeler's cavalry? Also, Sherman was constantly receiving numerous scoldings from DC to restrain from his racist remarks all the time.