By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
Edit Thread
akuma587 said:
Kasz216 said:

Also... i'll say it again. There is no way the South could of won the civil war.

There were numerious issues where the North would ALWAYS come out winning in the end, just about no matter who was in charge.

The South had way too many disadvantages.

Had they got in another James Buchanon... sure they would of given up.

But put MOST presidents in Lincolns place. I say most presidents would of pulled it out.

Including even George W Bush.

Which is what i find funny.  Replace Lincoln with George W Bush....

and George W Bush is suddenly America's greatest president because he was at the right place at the right time.  Same stupid decision making skills... but they would of paid off.

Are you kidding me?  The South simply had to not lose.  The North had to win.

The South had the advantage that they weren't trying to advance on the North per se.  The North had to retake the entirety of the South to actually have won the war.

It was like the British fighting the American colonies.  We didn't win because we legitimately "won", we won because it became far too burdensome for the British to wage a war on us while they had so much to worry about at home while fighting with France.  We just happened to get lucky.

While the South did have some disadvantages in terms of their supplies and industry, you aren't painting an accurate picture of what was at stake and how much the North had to accomplish to defeat the South.

The North had to win.  The South simply had to not lose.

 

I know it seems that way... but it's not true.

Look at the Civil War.  Look at the big battles of the Civil War and where they were fought.

You'll note the vast majority of the early ones are in the North.

The reason being is the south had to keep attacking the North.

Why? because of the Norths advantages.

This wasn't like American revolution... why?  Location.  The UK was all the way across the globe.... the US was right there.

The orignal plan was to just build and train a strong competant army that could overwhelem the South and steamroll them.

The North had that army... and that's basically the plan they kept with, but since the South kept attacking them they had to go with a "Deploy as they are recruited" rather then a "Mass and charge" style.

The south had way more disadvantages then simply those stated as well... for example there command structure was crazy despite having good generals because of the states each wanting to protect it's own rights and it's self.

When ever battles went poorly states would pull back there militias and look out for number 1 rather then help each other.

To have won the war the south would have to keep attacking in the north, keep the north on the defensive and not lose any major battles.

The minute the south lost even one state it was over.