Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Sherman Logan
Sure, the South might have won the battle, but the longer the war went on, the more the South was doomed. Even Shelby Foote recognized that. He stated that the North was basically fighting the war with one hand tied behind its back. The South could not win a long, drawn out war of attrition.

The much larger population and the fact that the North was much further ahead in manufacturing capabilities and materiel doomed the South. (Although the South never lost a battle for lack of ammunition.) In fact, from some sources I've read, if the North had used available repeating Henry rifles at the start of the war, it might have ended after a few battles. Lots of what ifs.

But basically the South's only chance was a kind of delaying action that might make the war weary Northern population give up. Lincoln was afraid of that with all the Copperheads twisting public opinion. But after Grant took Vicksburg and Sherman marched through the deep South, the game was mostly over. The South had great generals and great soldiers...just not enough of them.

147 posted on 01/11/2014 3:45:07 PM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]


To: driftless2

But basically the South’s only chance was a kind of delaying action that might make the war weary Northern population give up.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yes, I have wondered about that. What if the South had never used the traditional warfare practices of the day, but, had waged a low simmering guerrilla war instead. They might have won and those in the North grew weary,


159 posted on 01/11/2014 5:10:30 PM PST by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson