DBWI: Sherman takes Atlanta no CSA after 1865

OOC: POD Hood doesn't backstab Johnston and attacks as ordered. Sherman is slowed down enough he isn't able to take Atlanta before the election and Little Mac is elected and screws up the war so badly the Union loses.

What if Sherman took Atlanta and a result Lincoln wins the election and the US wins the war? Would the South still be 50 or so years behind the times? Would the 60 year period of the CSA existance before the Great War broke out between Great Britian, France and Germany vs Russia, Austria-Hungry and the CSA weakened the CSA so much that the US was able to reconquer it be so impoverished for the Southern states? After all the CSA and its various state governments had virtually no money left after making debt payments and paying for the army. How much better off would the South have been if there was no slavery during that period?
 
Sherman would probably have destroyed everything between Atlanta and the coast and become the most hated man in Georgia. I'm not surprised if the people of Georgia would hate him to this day if that were the case.
 
Why do you think that? He was for "hard war" but he didn't destroy everything in his path before, why would he in this TL?

OOC: Sherman's destructiveness in GA is greatly exagerated in GA it was more stealing than arson or vadalism, SC on the other hand.....
 
Well, John, slavery and the CSA are completely linked. There is no seperating the two--and frankly, given how the civil war began simply because the Union elected a President Southern States didn't like, I'm resigned that there is no way that slavery wouldn't persist in the south until at least the 1920s.


It's because Dixielanders are pathetic sorts that would rather lord over blacks than address their collective poverty; that's why the United States simply took back states like Virginia (which was rather lukewarm on the Confederate Military Juntas that ran the country) and Texas (which had resources behind it) and left the middle to go broke on its own.


I mean, seriously, even before Hurricane Jillian wiped out New Orleans, the CSA was already an unstable powderkeg. I'd hate to imagine our precious and limited tax dollars going towards MISSISSIPPI of all places. Who cares if their economy is worse than Nigeria? Those inbred hicks thought they could run a state on racism and guns and all voted for it, so now they get what they want.


But I digress.


So, we want to explore a "Keep the losers from flushing themselves down the toilet, TL?" I think the PoD should be earlier; perhaps Eli Whitney doesn't invent the Cotton Gin and slavery remains unprofitable; perhaps the Southern States find an even dumber reason to secede than they did in OTL (Although that would take some doing, these are Dixielanders we are talking about here) and it's so really, REALLY stupid that they aren't all that committed to it.


But I'd have to think this would hold the Union back. Seperation was really for the best; now we can buy Confederate Oil at nearly cost and it doesn't matter how much oil washes up on the shores. Dixie is always going to be a hell hole no matter what happens, its far for the better that it slowly dies on its own instead of taking the rest of the US with it.


A reunited USA will simply find the South tries again. These are Dixielanders we're talking about--look at how stupidly they've run the CSA for the last 150 years--there should be no confidence that the Union will have to garrison these states for decades against the inevitable desire to go insane against their own blacks.


I'd want to ask; Why would the USA do better by reuniting with that whole racist, inbred, polluted pile of fail? We have far too many Southrons from all of the illegal immigration they keep trying to do; why would we want to have the likes of David Duke running a State in the US of A?
 
Well, John, slavery and the CSA are completely linked. There is no seperating the two--and frankly, given how the civil war began simply because the Union elected a President Southern States didn't like, I'm resigned that there is no way that slavery wouldn't persist in the south until at least the 1920s.


It's because Dixielanders are pathetic sorts that would rather lord over blacks than address their collective poverty; that's why the United States simply took back states like Virginia (which was rather lukewarm on the Confederate Military Juntas that ran the country) and Texas (which had resources behind it) and left the middle to go broke on its own.


I mean, seriously, even before Hurricane Jillian wiped out New Orleans, the CSA was already an unstable powderkeg. I'd hate to imagine our precious and limited tax dollars going towards MISSISSIPPI of all places. Who cares if their economy is worse than Nigeria? Those inbred hicks thought they could run a state on racism and guns and all voted for it, so now they get what they want.


But I digress.


So, we want to explore a "Keep the losers from flushing themselves down the toilet, TL?" I think the PoD should be earlier; perhaps Eli Whitney doesn't invent the Cotton Gin and slavery remains unprofitable; perhaps the Southern States find an even dumber reason to secede than they did in OTL (Although that would take some doing, these are Dixielanders we are talking about here) and it's so really, REALLY stupid that they aren't all that committed to it.


But I'd have to think this would hold the Union back. Seperation was really for the best; now we can buy Confederate Oil at nearly cost and it doesn't matter how much oil washes up on the shores. Dixie is always going to be a hell hole no matter what happens, its far for the better that it slowly dies on its own instead of taking the rest of the US with it.


A reunited USA will simply find the South tries again. These are Dixielanders we're talking about--look at how stupidly they've run the CSA for the last 150 years--there should be no confidence that the Union will have to garrison these states for decades against the inevitable desire to go insane against their own blacks.


I'd want to ask; Why would the USA do better by reuniting with that whole racist, inbred, polluted pile of fail? We have far too many Southrons from all of the illegal immigration they keep trying to do; why would we want to have the likes of David Duke running a State in the US of A?

Well it WAS costly for the US a long time after the Great War when we reconquered the South so we might be better off financially . However, slavery may well have lasted until the present day instead of being ended when we took them over in 1925! :eek: Russia might still have a absolute monarch instead of a constitutional one after the Great War forced the tsar to start on the road to substantial reforms . OOC: The TL has the North retaking the South in 1925.
 
OOC: POD Hood doesn't backstab Johnston and attacks as ordered. Sherman is slowed down enough he isn't able to take Atlanta before the election and Little Mac is elected and screws up the war so badly the Union loses.

OOC: McClellan ran as a Copperhead (even though he wasn't one himself). If he had won, he'd probably abide by his electoral platform and try to start peace negotiations.

IC:

What if Sherman took Atlanta and a result Lincoln wins the election and the US wins the war? Would the South still be 50 or so years behind the times? Would the 60 year period of the CSA existance before the Great War broke out between Great Britian, France and Germany vs Russia, Austria-Hungry and the CSA weakened the CSA so much that the US was able to reconquer it be so impoverished for the Southern states? After all the CSA and its various state governments had virtually no money left after making debt payments and paying for the army. How much better off would the South have been if there was no slavery during that period?

Well, as Blue Max said, I can't see anyway the South would give up slavery without a good fight, especially when combined with the resentment toward the Union that dominated the CSA during the Davis and Lee years, and that wouldn't go away no matter what the cliché Union victory scenarios tell us. Especially the Deep South would have to be dragged kicking and screaming into abolition even with Union troops occupying them.

We'd probably see a weaker US as well, actually, since they'd have no hostile powers on their borders (except possibly Britain), and therefore would probably keep the Regular Army as a small border policing force. We might even see the President still being the highest military authority, something that would make McClellan turn in his grave.
 
OOC: McClellan ran as a Copperhead (even though he wasn't one himself). If he had won, he'd probably abide by his electoral platform and try to start peace negotiations.

IC:



Well, as Blue Max said, I can't see anyway the South would give up slavery without a good fight, especially when combined with the resentment toward the Union that dominated the CSA during the Davis and Lee years, and that wouldn't go away no matter what the cliché Union victory scenarios tell us. Especially the Deep South would have to be dragged kicking and screaming into abolition even with Union troops occupying them.

We'd probably see a weaker US as well, actually, since they'd have no hostile powers on their borders (except possibly Britain), and therefore would probably keep the Regular Army as a small border policing force. We might even see the President still being the highest military authority, something that would make McClellan turn in his grave.


OOC: Except his acceptance letter said he wouldn't. Whatever else he was Little Mac was a strong Unonist. If the Union won under him, the South would return at status quo ante bellum though.

IC: Of course it wouldn't give up slavery without a good fight. It didn't OTL why would it in this? It took about a decade to completely stamp it out as plantation owners tried to hide their slaves saying they were "farm workers" or ""personal servants" if anyone with a Northern accent asked.
 
Well it WAS costly for the US a long time after the Great War when we reconquered the South so we might be better off financially . However, slavery may well have lasted until the present day instead of being ended when we took them over in 1925! :eek: Russia might still have a absolute monarch instead of a constitutional one after the Great War forced the tsar to start on the road to substantial reforms . OOC: The TL has the North retaking the South in 1925.


OOC: Would the USA really want to inherit the problems of the CSA or just milk them for lewt instead? Now I'm going to struggle to shift my anti-CS views to get this to conform to the TL...



IC: I still think Worthington's Idea of "The Best of Both" was the right course of action. The Deep South is by far the poorest region in the United States, and I for one do not appreciate the Alabama Secession Crisis in the 1960s.


There are damn good reasons the South to this day has only 1/3rd of the congressional representation they otherwise would, to say nothing of Alabama's "Territorial Status" continuing to this day.


Frankly, I wish Iverson had gotten what he wanted and was able to take his entire state of fail and been allowed to shove it up his ass. We can listen to their complaints about 14th amendment sadness when they decide to give up on their farcical "Uncle Tom" laws.


So let's change the topic: Does anyone expect the Los Angeles White Sox to win the Series again, or will it be something like the Omaha Cowboys, the Vancouver Prospectors or even the Kansas City Royals?
 
OOC: Would the USA really want to inherit the problems of the CSA or just milk them for lewt instead? Now I'm going to struggle to shift my anti-CS views to get this to conform to the TL...



IC: I still think Worthington's Idea of "The Best of Both" was the right course of action. The Deep South is by far the poorest region in the United States, and I for one do not appreciate the Alabama Secession Crisis in the 1960s.


There are damn good reasons the South to this day has only 1/3rd of the congressional representation they otherwise would, to say nothing of Alabama's "Territorial Status" continuing to this day.


Frankly, I wish Iverson had gotten what he wanted and was able to take his entire state of fail and been allowed to shove it up his ass. We can listen to their complaints about 14th amendment sadness when they decide to give up on their farcical "Uncle Tom" laws.


So let's change the topic: Does anyone expect the Los Angeles White Sox to win the Series again, or will it be something like the Omaha Cowboys, the Vancouver Prospectors or even the Kansas City Royals?


OOC: I think so, a matter of national pride, which can't be underestimated, if nothing else.

IC: Well if Southerners got their acts together more of them would be states but they like causing trouble. I say keep them territories until they give up the "Uncle Tom" laws, start spending a decent amount of money educating their kids and in general enter the 21st century.

As far as baseball goes I think the White Sox have the best chance, they have the best pitchers in baseball.
 
Top