i think the fed govt would have evacuated to Philly or NY and rolled on. Just like if Richmond was captured early on the Confederate govt would have moved to Atlanta or CharlestonTXAGBQ76 said:
What if the Confederate Army had not stopped the rout at the Battle of Bull Run, but instead continued on to DC?
This I agree with completely.LMCane said:
what if we could time travel back to First Bull Run with one M1A3 Abrams tank sporting an American flag?
while interesting- I don't think it really adds much knowledge to come up with meaningless hypotheticals.
what if Hitler died as a baby?!
well, he didn't.
All the what if's can go to the extreme in every case. How about instead of Hitler died as a baby, that his mom and dad did the deed an hour later. Given that the one sperm that conceives is 1 in 100 million in a typical male ejaculation, then the one that became Hitler would have likely not been the one to get to Miss egg and then an entirely different person would have been born.Jabin said:This I agree with completely.LMCane said:
what if we could time travel back to First Bull Run with one M1A3 Abrams tank sporting an American flag?
while interesting- I don't think it really adds much knowledge to come up with meaningless hypotheticals.
what if Hitler died as a baby?!
well, he didn't.
I've noticed, on this board at least, that most of the hypotheticals seem to favor the South one way or another.
The Confederate Army didn't win because of lack of food or armaments, it lost because the Federal Army could replace every soldier killed or wounded thrice over.. made Grant a very successful general.JTA1029 said:
What if the southern army was fed to content? Would it have made a difference and where and to what extent?
What if the south had been as well armed as the north? Where and to what extent would it have made a difference?
TXAGBQ76 said:
What if the Confederate Army had not stopped the rout at the Battle of Bull Run, but instead continued on to DC?
IF Grant had been in command of the Army of the Potomac during the 1862 Peninsula Campaign it would have been all over. He would have plowed straight through Magruder at Yorktown /Williamsburg without a blink of an eye. That would have put Johnston in a very bad situation.BQ78 said:
What if McClellan didn't love his army too much and was not a moral coward in the spring of 1862, it could have ended before Lee appeared on the scene and Lee would be most remembered for his Mexican War exploits and capturing John Brown.
Or maybe it was Lincoln's fault micromanaging McDowell's Corps on the Rappahannock and not giving McClellan control of that corps.
Noblemen06 said:
If Jackson isn't wounded at Chancellorsville and Lee gives him the same order he gave Ewell at the end of the first day at Gettysburg, does the CSA ultimately win the battle?
No Franklin.... However, It would have delayed the inevitable. Hood would have pulled a highly questionable move somewhere else.BQ78 said:
If Cheatam and Cleburne had followed Hood's orders and got their men across the Nashville Pike at Spring Hill on the afternoon of November 29, 1864.
"Take that hill, if practicable."Noblemen06 said:
If Jackson isn't wounded at Chancellorsville and Lee gives him the same order he gave Ewell at the end of the first day at Gettysburg, does the CSA ultimately win the battle?
What do you base that on? Franklin (which was questionable but no more than Lee at Malvern Hill or Gettysburg)? Where else was his decision making questionable? Maybe Ezra Church but other than those two days, I think he was a solid tactician and operational commander.Quote:
Hood would have pulled a highly questionable move somewhere else.
Then Meade would have withdrawn to Pipe creek (his first choice of the battle site) and Gettysburg would be a footnote in history.Rabid Cougar said:"Take that hill, if practicable."Noblemen06 said:
If Jackson isn't wounded at Chancellorsville and Lee gives him the same order he gave Ewell at the end of the first day at Gettysburg, does the CSA ultimately win the battle?
Lots of discretion in the last two words.
doubledog said:
What if the Confederacy had freed all of the slaves, immediately after secession?
The Union would no longer have the moral high ground which would allow Brittan and/or France to enter the war, without repercussions from their own populace, and force the Union to negotiate peace.
This is the only scenario that I see for a Confederate victory/peace.
BQ78 said:
How so? He held Thomas off all day with much fewer men until Bates' Division cracked. What should he have done differently at that point?
Thank you, that was my point...Sapper Redux said:doubledog said:
What if the Confederacy had freed all of the slaves, immediately after secession?
The Union would no longer have the moral high ground which would allow Brittan and/or France to enter the war, without repercussions from their own populace, and force the Union to negotiate peace.
This is the only scenario that I see for a Confederate victory/peace.
There wouldn't have been a Confederacy in the first place if they were interested in ending slavery.
I believe the Nashville campaign was a huge questionable affair. Achieved nothing but accomplish what Sherman wanted to do in the first place; get the Army of the Tessessee out of his way and destroy it.BQ78 said:What do you base that on? Franklin (which was questionable but no more than Lee at Malvern Hill or Gettysburg)? Where else was his decision making questionable? Maybe Ezra Church but other than those two days, I think he was a solid tactician and operational commander.Quote:
Hood would have pulled a highly questionable move somewhere else.
Hood gets a bad rap IMO, where he flagged was making sure his orders were followed by tired or weak subordinates (July 20, 22 and 29 November 1864).
Remember what Sherman said about Hood's army "If they go as far as the Ohio River, I will give them rations"Rabid Cougar said:I believe the Nashville campaign was a huge questionable affair. Achieved nothing but accomplish what Sherman wanted to do in the first place; get the Army of the Tessessee out of his way and destroy it.BQ78 said:What do you base that on? Franklin (which was questionable but no more than Lee at Malvern Hill or Gettysburg)? Where else was his decision making questionable? Maybe Ezra Church but other than those two days, I think he was a solid tactician and operational commander.Quote:
Hood would have pulled a highly questionable move somewhere else.
Hood gets a bad rap IMO, where he flagged was making sure his orders were followed by tired or weak subordinates (July 20, 22 and 29 November 1864).
You don't have to do a hypothetical where the North won.Jabin said:
I've noticed, on this board at least, that most of the hypotheticals seem to favor the South one way or another.
LMCane said:
as others have mentioned, most of these "what ifs" favor the South.
and what if Emory Upton had an entire brigade with him when he attacked at Spotsylvania and broke the Rebel lines near the Muleshoe?
what if the next day when the Union army broke through the rebel lines, the Confederates were not able to bring up a second line (thereby stopping a literal split in their army)
what if Benjamin Butler plowed through Petersburg defenses in June 1864 rather than waiting 24 hours until the rebels sent down reinforcements from Cold Harbor?
you can play this game all day long- and in reality the Union had many more close chances to end the war successfully than the Rebels did.
what if the colored troops instead of running INTO the Crater had run around the sides of it and broken the rebel lines in summer 1864?
CanyonAg77 said:You don't have to do a hypothetical where the North won.Jabin said:
I've noticed, on this board at least, that most of the hypotheticals seem to favor the South one way or another.
So most of the hypotheticals are wondering what it would take to change history. A change where the North won sooner or later than they did, doesn't move the needle.
