gary
Captain
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2005
Lincoln believed that with the newer breechloaders (that he thought would be in the hands of his troops) and repeaters and "machine guns" that the Confederacy wouldn't last that long. Ordnance Chief Ripley was a bulwark against firearms development and stalled as long as he could. Let's say Ripley got sacked much earlier. Would the newer guns have affected the war?
For instance, if Fremont had a few of those machine guns he wanted he may not have lost to Jackson in the Valley. If Jackson couldn't secure the valley, McClellan may have eventually surrounded Richmond and starved it into submission and the war may have been over sooner.
By the same token, Rosecrans wanted 5k Spencers but never got them. The order was delayed and when some where shipped, they got no closer than Nashville. If Ripley hadn't delayed, Rosecrans men would have had them for Chickamauga. Of course there's the counter that they would have exhausted their ammo like the 21st Ohio did and would have had to surrender.
Thoughts please.
For instance, if Fremont had a few of those machine guns he wanted he may not have lost to Jackson in the Valley. If Jackson couldn't secure the valley, McClellan may have eventually surrounded Richmond and starved it into submission and the war may have been over sooner.
By the same token, Rosecrans wanted 5k Spencers but never got them. The order was delayed and when some where shipped, they got no closer than Nashville. If Ripley hadn't delayed, Rosecrans men would have had them for Chickamauga. Of course there's the counter that they would have exhausted their ammo like the 21st Ohio did and would have had to surrender.
Thoughts please.