and yet they're the ones who kept murdering civilian noncombatantsThis is not going to happen, the South saw themselves as gentlemen, they wanted to be seen as fighting like gentlemen.
and yet they're the ones who kept murdering civilian noncombatantsThis is not going to happen, the South saw themselves as gentlemen, they wanted to be seen as fighting like gentlemen.
and yet they're the ones who kept murdering civilian noncombatants![]()
And they weren't reticent when it came to murdering POWs, and enslaving civilians...
Best,
Any victory through guerrilla warfare will need outside help, and which European power wants to help the South, hmm?
yup. if that's what it means to be a Southern gentlemen then i'll be a damyankee brute any day of the week.
yup. if that's what it means to be a Southern gentlemen then i'll be a damyankee brute any day of the week.
Lee &co. were imbeciles who hated the very idea of irregular units.
For those who try to say that Confederate irregular operations were a failure I have three words: John Singleton Mosby.
It is my opinion that, especially along the Mississippi, if the confederacy had gone systematically "grey ghost" it would have been a incalculable drain of unionist resources.
This is not going to happen, the South saw themselves as gentlemen, they wanted to be seen as fighting like gentlemen. I'm pretty sure there's two or three threads already discussing how the South would not use guerrilla tactics.
And the Union's resources far outweigh the Confederates, guerrilla or not the outcome will ultimately be the same. Any victory through guerrilla warfare will need outside help, and which European power wants to help the South, hmm?
But slavery would have ended fairly quickly afterwards when industrialization came along, as crop machines were far more efficient than slaves.
The first commercially viable cotton picking machines came out in the 1950s.
and who do you think is going to operate those machines?![]()