Could the South Have Won?

[Border Reiver]

I'm familiar with the USMA terrain walk there. I've been on site a few times. Walking the swale is something else. The scale of most of it was expected, but there was a reverse surprise at Chamberlain's position; I had expected it to cover more ground, but it felt very compressed.

I find it somewhat surprising just how small a lot of 19th Century and earlier battlefields are - especially when contrasted with WWI and WWII battlefields.

 

[Garrette]

I find it somewhat surprising just how small a lot of 19th Century and earlier battlefields are - especially when contrasted with WWI and WWII battlefields.

I've gone to both spectrums. When I took my wife on our first co-tour of a civil war battlefield she was struck with its size (Perryville, in Kentucky) saying that when I had said "battleFIELD" she expected a literal field.

On the other hand, when we went to Tippecanoe outside Lafayette in Indiana, we were both underwhelmed with what amounted to something less than half an American football field.

ETA: Then there are places like Shiloh and Gettysburg on the large end and Lexington and Concord on the small end. Cowpens from the American Revolution was a decent middle ground. In Europe, as you say, the battlefields are tremendous. Battle of the Bulge and Verdun come to mind; even Waterloo.

 

[Giz]

ETA: Then there are places like Shiloh and Gettysburg on the large end and Lexington and Concord on the small end. Cowpens from the American Revolution was a decent middle ground. In Europe, as you say, the battlefields are tremendous. Battle of the Bulge and Verdun come to mind; even Waterloo.

Hmmm, I always thought that Waterloo was quite compact for the forces involved (‘only’ a couple of miles across). Once you hit the World Wars, all scales are way off but prior to that, things were relatively compact (Towton, the bloodiest day in British history, may have only been a thousand yards or so across).

It's that growth in scale, without a corresponding increase in command and control, that helped turn WW1 battles into inconclusive affairs.

 

[Garrette]

Hmmm, I always thought that Waterloo was quite compact for the forces involved (‘only’ a couple of miles across). Once you hit the World Wars, all scales are way off but prior to that, things were relatively compact (Towton, the bloodiest day in British history, may have only been a thousand yards or so across).

It's that growth in scale, without a corresponding increase in command and control, that helped turn WW1 battles into inconclusive affairs.

Compared to the World Wars, yes, Waterloo is small, but it's more than a quick walk around it.

 

[Loss Leader]

Vietnam from the western powers side of the question was a lost cause before Americans started on-the-ground advisers post DBP and when we started the classified part of the war in Laos in '59.

Nor was any of it communicated to the American people. US moves in SE Asia were generally supported by the voters in the '50s and early '60s. By 1968, however, it should have been clear to even the most rabid anti-Communist that it was an impossible situation.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"Attention parents. History Class has been replaced by 'Alternative History' class. Upcoming topics include 'What if the South has won the Civil War?' followed by 'What if Germany had won World War II' and finally the controversial "What if the South had won World War II?'" - Welcome to Night Vale

 

[Border Reiver]

"Attention parents. History Class has been replaced by 'Alternative History' class. Upcoming topics include 'What if the South has won the Civil War?' followed by 'What if Germany had won World War II' and finally the controversial "What if the South had won World War II?'" - Welcome to Night Vale

There's a couple of decent alt-history Youtube channels. That being said, most people quite recognize that this is speculation on what might have been rather then an AAR looking to do it better next time.

 

[applecorped]

Of interest:

http://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/civil-war-sealion-the-capture-of-washington-d-c.68277/

That was enjoyable thank you

 

[Border Reiver]

That was enjoyable thank you

That was a very good write up

 

[pgwenthold]

I've gone to both spectrums. When I took my wife on our first co-tour of a civil war battlefield she was struck with its size (Perryville, in Kentucky) saying that when I had said "battleFIELD" she expected a literal field.

On the other hand, when we went to Tippecanoe outside Lafayette in Indiana, we were both underwhelmed with what amounted to something less than half an American football field.

1) Wouldn't it also be less than half the size of a European football field, then?
2) Given that it wasn't so much of a "battle" but "an an attack on the encampment", is it is surprising that it isn't that big? Basically, it was a camp for 700 soldiers. All the action happened on the perimeter and within.