The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - March 18, 2010




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: historical: ACW eith Europe sniffing about.
paul1970    6/9/2005 12:11:59 PM
1861. Confederacy is born and Britain backs it up with more than just encouraging words.....

what happens.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3
Ehran    RE:Trent   6/10/2005 12:47:44 PM
cato i don't think that the crimea is any much further away from london than new york would be. also the crimea was a very limited campaign for the british and french. the idea was apparently to demonstrate to the russians that their butts could be much more severely kicked if they continued to aggravate london and paris over turkey.
 
Quote    Reply

Cato    RE:historical: Moral Angle   6/10/2005 1:22:20 PM
Ehran, yes the English Civil War was nasty. Civil wars sure wind up that way, and I guess there was a reason that "Cromwell" was a dirty word for a hundred years. The Crimean War was "limited" in the sense that it did not require a general mobilization, but it illustrated real deficencies in the British abilities to provide the "sinews of war", as well as their generalship. Would these issues have been resolved in time for a major continental campaign against an industrialized power? Perhaps. I have never despaired of the quality of the Indian fighting man, under British leadership, or other wise. I do believe that the support available from India would have been limited in the face of Russian "provocation" in Central Asia, perhaps stirring up trouble in Afghanistan. Nothing drove our British Cousins nuts like percieved Russian covetous glances at the Jewell of the Empire. As to the causus belli, that depended where you went and who you asked. At the time of the Trent Affair, yes, the war was for the preservation of the Union. However, in a time of true national peril, emancipation would have come much more quickly than Jan. 1863. I wonder what type of effect that would have had on a very much abolitionist British public? Monitor vs. Warrior...well, win or loose, I just want grandstand seats. Cato off to work
 
Quote    Reply

JIMF    RE:historical: Moral Angle   6/10/2005 3:37:42 PM
"its funny now the acw is thought to be about freeing the slaves when that was actually an afterthought really." Frankly that statement is idiotic. The clear underlying cause of the Civil War was slavery, otherwise why did the South secceed when Lincoln was elected. The abolitionist movement, the Dred Scott Decision, the publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin, John Brown's insurrection all dealt with the issue of slavery and exacerbated relations between the North and South to the breaking point. Lincoln's election was viewed in the South as the final straw. The emancipation proclamation in 1862 was taken as a war measure because Lincoln did want to permanently alienate the border states, but the ultimate intent to end slavery was well understood.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2010StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy