Confederate or Federal?

Discussion in 'Military History and Militaria' started by angular, Dec 16, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. A good mate just sent me the film 'Gettysburg' for my further education (thanks Pat!). It got me thinking, which side would I have been on.

    The slavery issue tends to trump all the others, but as a free-born Englishman I could never understand why the Southern states should not be able to just up and leave the Union.

    On balance, I think I would have been a Confederate. How about you?
     
  2. Union they won! :p
     
  3. In the Second American War Of Independance I would have most definately supported the South. More style, better Generals, infinately better cavalry and a truely defiant spirit. The only reason they lost is that it turned into a war of attrition which the South lacking the logistic backup the North had, could not hope to win.
     
  4. squeekingsapper

    squeekingsapper LE Reviewer

    Slavery was not actually anything to do with the war between the states starting, as the Union still had slavery after the war, and the famous emancipation proclamation only freed slaves in states in rebellion against the Union, of which technically there were none.

    Early in the war, the north blockaded the ports of the southern states, which would have made the Confederacy a beligerent nation and many say that the proclamation was only made to stop Britain and France, openly sending troops to assist the ailing Confederacy. Great Britain sent thousands of Enfield rifles over for the South and was very proactive in the blockade running, not to mention giving ships with volunteer crews to the cause. The most famous of these was the CSS Alabama (formerly the Enrica) which was manned almost completely with Brits and was sunk just off the coast of France within sight of Britain, after a very successful raiding campaign.

    As has been mentioned, the South had the better everything, other than manpower and money, and would have won had it not been ground down by the likes of Grant and Sherman fighting a war of attrition
     
  5. Gotta stay with my family. Confederate. We were fighting for states rights and to combat the invasion of our land by the North.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  6. rebel_with_a_cause - "The only reason they lost is that it turned into a war of attrition which the South lacking the logistic backup the North had, could not hope to win."

    Without doubt logistics, finance, resources and supply cost the South dearly, but so did their meanderings and, alledgely, putting romance ahead of realism. Gettysburg, the accidental battle that sealed the war, was totally thrown away by Lee. However appealing, couldn't soldier for a side like that.

    No.9
     
  7. North, without a doubt, slavery was an issue for many and I would rather be on the side that at least pretended to do something about it than the side that openly supported it.

    That being said wolud rather have been with the West African Squadron REALLY doing something about it. I suspect it would have given me the right hump and being an ardent Imperialist I would have wanted to put a stop to it an a highly kinetic way probably involving gunboats, Royal Marines and HE.

    "Her Majesty has made it her business"

    Trotsky
     
  8. The Confederate states were populated by some of the most intellectually squalid people ever to disgrace western civilisation. After the war ended the slave drivers took over the Republican party. It's been helping evil bastards to get elected ever since.

    It takes a special kind of rancid chutzpah to boo your opponent's name in a concession speech when the whole world is listening. The Republicans did it for John McCain with all the style of farm hogs fornicating in a mud pool. They're the true offspring of their red neck origins.

    And my advice would be not to fight for any slave economy unless you're quite sure there's no chance at all you'll end up in chains yourself with your arse whipped into ribbons of raw meat for daring to argue with the boss.
     
  9. The Union. I don't like splitters.
     
  10. Got to disagree, how do you explain the concept of the Southern Democrat, many of whom supported Jim Crow laws long after the republicans had ceased to>

    Trotsky
     
  11. Always remember from Alister Cooke's TV series on America.
    That Robert E. Lee was first offered Command of the Union Forces and that after he refused, despite the fact that he was against Slavery, he became Commander of the Southern troops.
    Lee's old House and grounds in Washington are now the Arlington National Cemetery.
    john
     
  12. Britain in the American Civil War
     
  13. The Rebs had better generals??? Okay, they had Lee, and they had Jackson. AP Hill was okay. But Bragg??? Kirby Smith? Stuart had fine aggression and not a whit of judgement.

    A.S. Johnston was touted as such a "great" general. Check his disposition of forces for Shiloh. Ludicrous. It was probably fortunate for the South that he got popped in action.

    By contrast, the Union had Grant, Meade, Sherman, Sheridan. Plenty of competent if not genious commanders. And while Lee, Jackson and Stuart have far more of the flamboyant romantic about them, the Union commanders by the end of the war were competent utilitarians who knew how to go about prosecuting a total war.
     
  14. Which side were the frogs on? :)
     
  15. Nominally the Confederate side...they took a "wait and see" approach, wanting to see if Britain would formally recognize the South.

    France had recently begun her adventure in Mexico with Maximilian, and it was in their interest to see a divided US, incapable of enforcing the Monroe Doctrine.