I personally would like to see what's going on in the Eastern theater. See what Lee and McClellan are up to and what they're planning. Maybe also get a look at the respective presidents and how they're feeling about the course of the war. Thanks!
Coastal waters.
I personally would like to see what's going on in the Eastern theater. See what Lee and McClellan are up to and what they're planning. Maybe also get a look at the respective presidents and how they're feeling about the course of the war. Thanks!
I’d like to see more of the following:
1: Grant
2: French and German opinion and interaction
I'm wondering How John Reynolds is doing at this point and I'd also like either more of grant or the situation in Maine
Lee and McClellan are largely in winter quarters, but in a chapter coming up Lee makes a personal appearance while discussing an important matter with Davis. I did have it in mind that I could do a "state of the armies" post before getting into the meat of the campaigns of 1863 in the East if you were so inclined?
HURRAY!!! This is my favorite active TL so I'm very happy to see it continuedIn some good news, Chapter 44 will be up tomorrow.
HURRAY!!! This is my favorite active TL so I'm very happy to see it continued
HURRAY!!! This is my favorite active TL so I'm very happy to see it continued
Echoing this
Huzzah! Now I need to get my own finger out and finish mine!
Between the rebels and the recruits it's probably a wash as to how much the Union actually gains from the occupation. I think there would be a lot of guys ripping up RR track frequently too.
I love that Wolseley is such a gloryhound, you nailed him.
Tearing up chunks of RR and sniping is going to be a popular pass time for Orangemen in the winter of 1862-63...
So, I'm clueless when it comes to how the military worked in this era. But I read a TL by Saproneth which has a Trent War break out. In his TL the British blockade of the US coast does such a number on them so that the war ends in June of '62 I believe. The biggest reason for this was the destruction of the Union navy and the serious lack of small arms for the Union army. So, am I missing something or was Saproneth wrong about the impact of the blockade? You're TL has the Union doing much better than Saproneth's. Sorry for my ignorance, thanks.
Understood. Thank you. Do you happen to know what the other TL was that you mentioned? I wouldn't mind reading it.There's been a lot of debate about how much economic damage the blockade would cause the Union. Since it never happened we'll never know, but Saphroneth took the view that it would have irreparably damaged the Union's ability to prosecute the war. This TL takes a somewhat less dim view than that. Another TL by another banned member takes an even different view.
All in all it's a very contentious debate.
So, I'm clueless when it comes to how the military worked in this era. But I read a TL by Saproneth which has a Trent War break out. In his TL the British blockade of the US coast does such a number on them so that the war ends in June of '62 I believe. The biggest reason for this was the destruction of the Union navy and the serious lack of small arms for the Union army. So, am I missing something or was Saproneth wrong about the impact of the blockade? You're TL has the Union doing much better than Saproneth's. Sorry for my ignorance, thanks.
Understood. Thank you. Do you happen to know what the other TL was that you mentioned? I wouldn't mind reading it.
Just a quick question. If the British blockade is hurting the Union in terms of arms and powder, how the OTL CSA cope with these problems with the Federal blockade?As @The Gunslinger said, its an issue of debate. Precisely how hard the British blockade would effect Northern industry is unknowable, and some good arguments have been made that the blockade would cause irreparable short term damage to the Union war effort. This post by user robcraufurd is pretty insightful, alongside his reading of Executive Document 99 is pretty insightful. That being said, my own TL diverges from some of the underlying assumptions laid out in those essays. The largest is that while Britain ceases selling arms to the Union in December 1861, other foreign powers (France, Austria, Belgium, ect) are all shipping weapons to the Union up to the declaration of war TTL in February 1862, and the British blockade throughout March and April is far leakier than they would like to admit, with on average only 1 in 6 runners being captured in this period, meaning a substantial number of weapons are still getting through.
Coupled with small supplies of weapons being captured by Union raiders and in victories against the rebels (capturing Memphis would be a huge windfall) the Union is still managing to put the historic 250,000+ volunteers who showed up later in 1862 into the field, even if many of them are being armed with substandard equipment. For instance, most of the troops guarding the cities on the coasts have muskets vs rifled muskets, while the 12,000 men in New York comprising XV Corps, are armed with rifled muskets passed on from the Army of the Potomac. However, as I've alluded to, the Union army simply can't carry out the energetic campaigns it did in OTL's 1862, Arkansas is basically a stalemate since Curtis can't advance due to a lack of supplies, the Army of the Potomac is stalled in the field due to want of supplies, and they are gambling on one big offensive in the West while moving supplies forward for a spring campaign against Montreal.
The biggest loss is in powder, the existing supplies were just enough to carry out this years campaigns, with a bit of windfall from blockade runners, and now they have to hope that by February/March, the nitre beds established the year before will be churning out enough powder to keep the armies in the field.
All in all, it isn't a terribly rosy picture leading into 1863, but it isn't hopeless either.
It was being continued over on Civil War Talk, but it hasn't updated in quite some time to my knowledge.