Your Surviving the War was Better under Grant... then Lee

rittmeister said:

just being there would have done the job

Click to expand...

Kirk's Raider's said:

It's impossible to prove or disprove a hypothetical question. A conventional army doesn't win wars by standing around and giving menacing glances. A conventional army wins by seizing and holding enemy territory. The Confederate Army was rarely successful in seizing and holding enemy territory. Galveston and Brownsville Texas are two such successful Confederate examples but they were to minor to influence the course of the ACW.
Kirk's Raider's

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

simply march to washingtom and sound a rather thundering boo!

Click to expand...

Kirk's Raider's said:

I already explained such a Confederate Army simply didn't exist three weeks after Ft.Sumter. The Confederate Army three weeks after Ft.Sumter had plenty of West Point trained generals. If it was easy to seize Washington DC they would if done so.
Kirk's Raider's

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

simply march to washingtom and sound a rather thundering boo!

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

there'd be no fight - just get there

... those west point trained generals probably considered their army to be a mob and didn't want to be seen with it

Click to expand...

Kirk's Raider's said:

How can a 21st Century poster be more knowledgeable about the capabilities of the Confederate Army then it's contemporary commanders?
Kirk's Raider's

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

we do that all the time, right? that kinda is what this site is all about, right?

they probably were too professional (they weren't) - most of those west point trained generals had held what ranks six weeks earlier? they tried to do it by the book to do nothing wrong. and one doesn't take out that 'mob' on a campaign, right? they need to march properly - they need to fire proper volleys and that means training, right? and one of ours can whip twelve of theirs anyway, right?

on the other hand they just reduced ft sumter, morale was high. all they need to do is show up in washington and demand game over. but that's not by the book.

... there was nobody there to stop that not by the book 'mob' on it's march to washington if it was underway three days after ft sumter.

think for a second of erwin rommel in command of the confederate army - but, then, he was a professional.

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

we do that all the time, right? that kinda is what this site is all about, right?

they probably were too professional (they weren't) - most of those west point trained generals had held what ranks six weeks earlier? they tried to do it by the book to do nothing wrong. and one doesn't take out that 'mob' on a campaign, right? they need to march properly - they need to fire proper volleys and that means training, right? and one of ours can whip twelve of theirs anyway, right?

on the other hand they just reduced ft sumter, morale was high. all they need to do is show up in washington and demand game over. but that's not by the book.

... there was nobody there to stop that not by the book 'mob' on it's march to washington if it was underway three days after ft sumter.

think for a second of erwin rommel in command of the confederate army - but, then, he was a professional.

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

we do that all the time, right? that kinda is what this site is all about, right?

they probably were too professional (they weren't) - most of those west point trained generals had held what ranks six weeks earlier? they tried to do it by the book to do nothing wrong. and one doesn't take out that 'mob' on a campaign, right? they need to march properly - they need to fire proper volleys and that means training, right? and one of ours can whip twelve of theirs anyway, right?

on the other hand they just reduced ft sumter, morale was high. all they need to do is show up in washington and demand game over. but that's not by the book.

... there was nobody there to stop that not by the book 'mob' on it's march to washington if it was underway three days after ft sumter.

think for a second of erwin rommel in command of the confederate army - but, then, he was a professional.

Click to expand...

Kirk's Raider's said:

True we are all armchair generals and Monday morning quarterbacks. On the other hand the two early commanders of the AnV Generals Joseph Johnston and Pierre Beaugaurd were experienced army officers who had previous experience in the Mexican American War. They knew the capabilities of the early AnV and had excellent Intelligence on the AoP.
Kirk's Raider's

Click to expand...

Kirk's Raider's said:

Edwin Rommel was an excellent general but he had no magical powers. Ultimately the larger stronger opponent won.
Kirk's Raider's

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

doesn't matter. he took the initiative whenever he could (disobeying direct orders in the process). i'm also rather sure planting the stars and bars on the building site of the capitol would have done the job.

Click to expand...

Kirk's Raider's said:

That is assuming some one in the 21st Century knows more then the contemporary Confederate commander's.
Kirk's Raider's

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

a major and a colonel - that's regimental officers, right? exactly what you need for that kind of war. they were learning on the job.

the us army was spread all over the country. who on earth should have held the confederates off washington if they marched the next day?

Click to expand...

rittmeister said:

^not necessarily - but it would have been rather big bargaining chips, don't you think?

Click to expand...