Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Opening Statement Con

The Confederacy had seceded from America. They were heavily out-numbered and out-manned. The Union had the technology, the economy, and the war-age population to command an organized war effort. But the Confederacy held on to the hope that they could beat the odds and at least preserve their new country, the Confederate States of America. While the southerners did lose the Civil War, they had the ability to win. If luck and decisiveness went the way of the South, American lives in the twenty-first century would be very different.

The North had control of several very important things that the South would have to deal with throughout the war. One of those was the economy. The Union had many times the quantity of weapons and ammunition being created each day by the Confederacy. They also had a much deeper pocket than the South. The Union had stable finances, and could pay for a war far longer than the Confederacy could. The Union used these advantages, and continuously fed their soldiers new weapons, ammunition, and other necessary supplies. Their extensive railroad system helped them supply their lines even better. The South relied on shrewdness, and were forced to only spend what was needed in a battle. Because of this, each soldier could not rely on a steady stock of ammunition.

Another important thing the Union had as an advantage was their large war-age population. They could easily pump out soldiers, and therefore took a direct seek and destroy tactic to win their battles. The south had far less troops, and so had to ensure that their men were not wasted. The far greater forces the Union had just lengthened the desparity between the North's military power and the South's military power. The navy of the Union also helped to ensure that the North maintained control in the struggle for power. Blockades were set in a position to hurt the Southern war effort.

Lastly, the North had technology which would place them in a better tactical position than the South in every battle. The Union could position vulnerable artillery further away from the Confederate lines and bombard them. Since the Southern cannons could not fire as far, they would not be able to reach the deep artillery the Union had place. They would have to rely on a traditional cavalry attack that would be transparent to the entire Union army. The Union also had slightly more accurate rifles, and as a direct result, more mortal blows were done than can be said for the Confederacy. The North broadened their technological gap even further by equiping their armies with the best medical equipment that could be offered in North America.

Still, the South had a chance. They had a few factors which gave them a glimmer of hope.

One was the military strength of the Confederate troops. Soldier for soldier, the South was stronger than the North. Their troops came from a very gun oriented background, and therefore, the Confederate's ability to reload quickly and their skill at marksmanship were a noticeable amount greater than the North's. They were better horse riders, and consequentially made better cavalry. The quantity of horses the South had made for flexible cavalry manuevers, and gave them that tactical advantage. The Southern Generals were also more experienced than the Union Generals. The South's great participation in the Mexican War strengthened the tactical intelligence that the North lacked.

Lastly, the Confederates had important knowledge that would help them from both a tactical and strategic viewpoint. The Confederacy knew the lay of the land. They could launch attacks knowing what obstacles were in their way. They could pick good defensive positions. The South could retreat more efficiently so as to cut their losses. These pieces of information lead to fewer casualties sustained and more casualties inflicted.

All things considered, the Confederacy had a small chance of winning the Civil War, and maybe controlling all of the Union. If the South had just commanded their armies in a better way, they would have been able to overcome the numbers and technology the North possesed. The economy of the Union would have had to be dealt with immediately, and the Confederacy should have targeted Northern factories with suprise artillery bombardments. Had a military genius and war hero emerged, like a non-European Napoleon, and commanded the South, they would have won. However, General Lee and his commanding officers could not prevail and lead their beloved South too victory. Had Lee shown more military intelligence, the South would have won. Had the South been endowed with the luck of some Union tragedy, like Abraham Lincoln dying early in the Civil War, they would have won.

All things considered, it cannot be proven beyond a resonable doubt that the Confederacy was doomed to a defeat against the Union army.

13 comments:

hsylaxer said...

After reading this information, I wonder why the confederacy even went to war. I know that they fought for what they believe in, but why when the odds where completely against them?

hsylaxer said...

by the way im Jordan Bowser

Mary said...

i agree. the confederacy totally could have won. they may not have had the most advantages, but they had the important advantages. it's like a sports team. you could have a lot of people, but none of them know what they're doing, so they lose. on the other hand, you have a team with only just enough people to play, but they're all pros. Which team will win...obviously the team of pros has a MUCH better chance at winning.

Anonymous said...

I think the Confederates did have a chance at winning the Civil War. They didn't have as many factories as the Union, or as many people to fight for them, but they did have some of the best soldiers and officers in the country. So even though they didn't have as many people, they could come up with the best strategies because of their highly ranked officers and soldiers. That is why I believe that they had a chance at winning the war.

Christian :) said...

I believe that although the Confederate States of America were drastically outmanned and undersupplied, they had a chance to win the American Civil War. These rebels had a reason to fight, as their homeland was in jeopardy of destruction. In addition, the Confederates were much more skilled in the act of warfare, as opposed to the inexperienced Yankees, and knew the land that they fought on. We can see that the South had a very great chance in winning the war, as they "whooped up on", for lack of a better term, the Union's attacking forces (often at a ratio of 1 Southern soldier to every 4 Northern soldier), before the debacles at Gettysburg and Vicksburg. In conclusion, the Confederate States of America were not doomed from the beginning of our Civil War, but demolished by their own bad luck and failure.

David B. said...

I sort of agree with you Mary that the confederacy could have won the war because they had the most important advanages of the war, but the confederacy was not ready and did not know how to work as a team and use their pros to win the war.

bird said...

although the south had the heart and desire to win the war, it wasnt possible. the
Unions economy and population would overpower that of the South. the Union had most of population of men fighting, and probably most of the slaves as well. The Confederacy did have some advantages, but their in experience caused them not to use these advantages for good. an example of this would be gettysburg. If the South was familiar with land in the south, why would they march into union territory. This march truly shows that the confederacy had no chance to win the war.

RHansen03 said...

i think that the confederacy could have won if they made good smart decision unlike the one picketts charge which turned out to be a drastic loss to the south but if they were to maintain a defensive war they could have won.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Like Ryan said, the confederates did make stupid and horrible decisions like the Pickett's Charge. But they also decided to play a defensive war, and that gave them one advantage: Knowing the land. But for the CSA, they needed to play an aggresive war, and go attack the Union. This is because they are fighting an army with twice the amount of people. When they played the defensive war, they ended up have twice the amount of people coming at them. If they fought an aggressive war, they could have suprise attacked the Union, and helped lower the Union troops, and not lower as many as they did of their own. But they didn't, so that is why the Union could have, and did win this war.

Brittany said...

I agree with this post. The North did have a huge advantage over the south with their population. Although, the North over powered the confederacy the south did have a few advantages such as, familiarity with the land and officers and soldiers.
~Brittany Terry

Anonymous said...

I agree that the confederate could have won. They had a chance and didn't take advantage of it. They had good officers and the soldiers knew the land. Those were two major abilities.

Mr. T said...

I like David B's comment that the Confederacy didn't play as a team to more effectively use their advantages. It is hard in a Confederacy to unify various States that each saw themselves as semi-independent from the CSA. That was the downfall of the United States under the Articles of Confederation, and it may have been the downfall of the Confederates during the Civil War.