The FReeper Foxhole Remembers The Battle of Antietam(Sharpsburg) (9/17/1862) - Sep. 17th, 2003

www.texasrifles.com ^ | July 30, 1995 | Peter Carlson

[snippy_about_it]

Msdrby loves geneaology. She'll get me on it, if nothing else.

Msdrby, get him on it! LOL.

Really, you should find out what you can before the history gets any older.

[Samwise]

The Gettysburg trip is really worth it.

I'll second that.

We took a family vacation to D.C. and Gettysburg the week before 9/11. If you ever get the chance, go. Buy one of the audio tapes for your car. Even Samwise Jr. was intrigued--although she was disappointed not to see a ghost. ;^)

I can understand why all the ghost stories abound. I don't believe in that stuff and consider myself pretty rational, but even I was "creeped" a little bit at times. I can't explain the feeling, but something just knaws at you from the battlefields.

[snippy_about_it]

I've only ever been to the Bull Run battle field and all the surrounding area that it encompassed.

There besides the sadness, I had the feeling of wonder seeing the terrain and putting up with 90 degree heat and humidity trying to imagine what it was like to wear the heavy clothes they did and battle on that terrain.

[colorado tanker]

I've not been to Antietam. I think I would feel similar to how I felt at Shiloh, just being overwhelmed by the numbers of men who died in such a small area.

There were no seasonal uniforms issued back then, were there? And no field showers, either. I guess it didn't bother people because they all smelled the same. :)

Ironic, isn't it, that Wesley Clark is announcing his candidacy on the anniversary of Antietam, where the federals were commanded by George McClellan who would run as a Democrat against Lincoln in 1864. May Clark enjoy similar success!

[snippy_about_it]

May Clark enjoy similar success!

LOL!!

[SAMWolf]

Some Photos of the tower demolition

To the joy of historical preservationists, a steel tower that stood over the location of the Civil War’s most famous battle was demolished today in an effort to restore the battlefield to its war-era appearance. The explosion lasted for only a split second.

The Gettysburg National Tower, which a private company opened in 1974 over the objections of park officials, fell on the 137th anniversary of Pickett’s Charge, the climactic standoff of the three-day Battle of Gettysburg. In that battle, Union forces turned back the charge of Confederate troops under the direct command of Gen. George Edward Pickett.

The bloody battle took place along Cemetery Ridge, a short distance from the tower site and many historians see it as the turning point of the Civil War. Although there were casualties of nearly 60 percent, Pickett’s rebel troops broke the line but were unable to hold their position.

Demolition of the tower was part of a National Park Service campaign to remove modern structures built on the battlefield. In June, a federal judge ruled in favor of the government in a lawsuit seeking permission for control of the site and took the tower away from its former owners, Overview Limited Partnership. According to Overview Limited Partnership, the tower measured 393 feet from its base to the tip of an antenna at its top.

Restoring Sacred Ground

Before the tower’s fall, National Park officials and preservationists called the demolition the first step towards restoring a sacred land in United States history .

“This is truly a great day for everyone who cares about our nation’s sacred ground,” said park superintendent John Latschar. Preservationists said the historical importance of Gettysburg required the correction of past “mistakes” by the government that allowed the modern intrusions.

“To a preservationist, demolition is almost always an ugly word,” said Richard Moe, the president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation. “But not today. Today, we’re doing something right.”

Controlled Demolition Inc., a family-run company, performed the demolition. The company offered to perform the demolition for free, prompting the park service to press for condemnation of the tower by the company’s July 3 deadline. The government set aside $3 million to compensate the former owners of the tower and the land it sits on, although the precise amount will be determined later by a judge.

The company said its demolition work for the project would normally cost about $75,000, although the park service claimed in a court filing that the work would save the government $1 million. Park officials said the higher cost referred to the cost of disassembling the tower piece by piece.

‘Criminal Vandalism’

Beyond demolishing the tower, the park plans to restore fences, orchards and lanes that were present in 1863 and remove modern buildings that sit on the battlefield.

Although welcomed by historic preservationists, the demolition is not without its critics, most notably the engineer who designed the structure.

Joel H. Rosenblatt told The Baltimore Sun that destroying the tower was “criminal vandalism.”

“This thing is more than just another tower,” he said. “It is unusual engineering design, and it’s worth saving. It deserves attention for itself.”

Rosenblatt said the tower was unusual enough that he took out patents on its shape and construction. The tower, which consisted of a four-level viewing area in the shape of an octagon, was supported by a latticework of battleship gray steel.

Civil War reenactors standby to fire a cannon to simulate the demolition of the National Tower on the Gettysburg Battlefield in Gettysburg, Pa. Monday, July 3, 2000. The 1970s steel observation tower that preservationists say desecrated the hallowed ground of Gettysburg was demolished Monday on the anniversary of the battle that saved the Union. The 393-foot tower was blown up with 10 pounds of explosives as part of a National Park Service campaign to remove modern structures and return the Gettysburg Battlefield to the way it looked in 1863 . The AP

[SAMWolf]

Rebels never had a better chance

TERRY HEADLEE

The Confederacy was on a roll during the summer of 1862. Just a year after the outbreak of the Civil War, rebel troops had managed to make a presence along a 1,000-mile front stretching from Sharpsburg, Md., to Newtonia, Mo.

For the moment, it appeared the Confederates were on the verge of accomplishing their goal of becoming a separate nation, said James M. McPherson, a Pulitzer Prize-winining Civil War author.

From June 26 until Sept. 17, rebel armies won numerous key battles, driving Union troops from the Peninsula in Virginia and taking a smashing victory at the Battle of Second Manassas in August.

"Lee already gave the Union a one-two punch. He invaded the North in early September hoping to make it 'three and out,'" McPherson siad.

Then came Antietam.

Historians would later peg Antietam, and not Gettysburg as is widely believed, as the turning point of the Civil War.

By the time the cannon smoke cleared after nearly 12 hours of hellacious fighting, Confederate forces led by Gen. Robert E. Lee were in full retreat from Sharpsburg.

The battle ended Lee's high hopes for a major victory in his first invasion of the North.

And in the next three weeks, the Confederacy would suffer a chain of losses and retreats.

"Antietam changed the momenum for the Confederacy from being on a roll, to being in retreat," McPherson said.

Suddenly, Lee had failed to win Maryland, a border state, and the Confederacy was no longer seen as invincible.

That gave a much-needed boost to the morale of the Union soldiers.

Even worse for the Confederacy, Lincoln seized the moment to issue the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, freeing all slaves in Confederate states as of Jan. 1, 1863.

That's significant because it elevated the war to a higher level by converting it from a struggle over states' rights to the higher moral cause of slavery.

That practically ended the Confederates' quest for diplomatic recognition from Britain and France.

The two countries weren't anxious to get involved in a moral war.

Recognition could have turned the Civil War into a world war if the Union attempted to stop the two world powers from shipping supplies to the South.

"It almost certainly would have ended the blockade of the South," McPherson said. "That's why what happened at Antietam had world importance."

"Antietam was a crucial turning point. It was important for Maryland, nationally and internationally," said McPherson, a Princeton University professor whose 1988 book, "Battle Cry of Freedom," won the Pulitzer Prize.

No other Civil War battle can make that claim, he said.

Not even Gettysbug.

Historians say Gettysburg is often mistakenly considered the turning point of the Civil War.

It was fought over three days with more total casualties, about 50,000.

It also marked the Confederate's highest penetration of the North.

The battle was a victory for the Union. Lee was forced to retreat to Virginia and never again undertook a major offensive.

McPherson said even if Lee had won at Gettysburg, the Confederacy lost a significant battle at Vicksburg, Miss., the next day.

That Union victory gave federal troops vital control over the Mississippi River and doomed any hope for the Confederacy to win the war.

[SAMWolf]

I guess you'd get the same feeleing as when I got touring ome of the Battlefields in Belgium, I visitied some of the sites where the Battle of the Bulge took place, it's like the spirit of the events that took place there never leave.

[SAMWolf]

Ironic, isn't it, that Wesley Clark is announcing his candidacy on the anniversary of Antietam, where the federals were commanded by George McClellan who would run as a Democrat against Lincoln in 1864. May Clark enjoy similar success!Amen to that.

[colorado tanker]

McPherson, a Princeton University professor whose 1988 book, "Battle Cry of Freedom," won the Pulitzer Prize.

Outstanding book.

I agree with the comments as to Antietam's importance. I disagree with the downplaying of Gettysburg. Had Lee won and taken Philadelphia or isolated Washington under seige, even temporarily, northern morale would have plunged. The copperheads and peaceniks may well have won the election of 1864 as a result.

[colorado tanker]

Little Mack and Waco Wesley - what a pair!

[colorado tanker]

I haven't forgotten Clark's order to deploy combat helicopters into the Yugo mountains to hunt for tanks during the Kosovo war. They were to go in solo, with no ground support, which would make them sitting ducks for hand held AA missiles in that rugged and heavily wooded terrain. Thank goodness they never actually deployed, although the fallout from slow deployment is probably why we have the Stryker mess today. What a maroon.

[SAMWolf]

I agree. A Confederate victory at Gettysburg if followed up would have been a devastating blow to Lincoln's re-election chances. But with the war in the West going badly, I'm not sure if the military effects would have reversed the course of the war.

[SAMWolf]

Don't forget his orders to have the Brits sieze the airfield from the Russians. That could have got messy.

I've heard some say he's brilliant. IMHO he's over-rated.

[w_over_w]

"As he inspects the determined Gray line, Colonel Gordon notices a wounded father holding his lifeless son and also the many devoted Southern soldiers ensuring that the promise to General Lee will be kept."

I'd look at those faces and read the names of these kids 17, 18, 19 years old and I'd get tears in my eyes."

Yep . . . finished.

[colorado tanker]

But with the war in the West going badly, I'm not sure if the military effects would have reversed the course of the war.

The West was the key, wasn't it? Winfield Scott's original grand strategy - take the Mississippi Valley away and strangle the South. By the end of the War, Sherman's "western" army was in North Carolina.

If Lee had won at Gettysburg I doubt he could have taken Washington - didn't have the strength. Union reinforcements would have eventually driven him back to Virginia. To me the real danger from a loss at Gettysburg would be a McClellan victory in 1864 and that he would have sued for peace by recognizing some form of southern independence or reconstituting the Union with slavery.

[colorado tanker]

I think Clark is long on book smarts and short on common sense. I think history has taught that we don't need a policy wonk as President - you can hire wonks by the thousands. We need someone with good values and good instincts, someone to set the right course.

My own rule of thumb is I won't vote for a candidate who has not served in statewide office - Governor or Senator. I want to be sure of their political philosophy and see how they react in the hot seat. Think if that nutburger Perot had been elected. Ike was unique in that for four years he had functioned as a near equal to heads of state in very difficult circumstances and performed excellently. Clark has not done that and is no Ike. It would be a huge mistake to put someone untested in the White House.

[SAMWolf]

Brings a tear to your eye doesn't it?

[SAMWolf]

I think a negotiated peace may have been a possibility if McClellan were running things.

The West was the key, wasn't it?

Yep, it tends to be underated in most historys of the Civil War.

[SAMWolf]

I think Clark is long on book smarts and short on common sense.

Those were the words I was looking for when I answered before about Clark being considered brilliant by some.

My own rule of thumb is I won't vote for a candidate who has not served in statewide office - Governor or Senator.

Good rule.