Franco British Russian intervention in the ACW

Sigma7, historically the CSA came close to winning by virtue of Northern weariness in 1864.

Now turn the Union blockade into a CSA-Allied blockade of the Union, replace CSA shortages with USA shortages and add to the CSA reinforcements equal to Lee's entire army and just how is Lincoln supposed to win?
 

67th Tigers

Banned
Sigma7, historically the CSA came close to winning by virtue of Northern weariness in 1864.

Now turn the Union blockade into a CSA-Allied blockade of the Union, replace CSA shortages with USA shortages and add to the CSA reinforcements equal to Lee's entire army and just how is Lincoln supposed to win?

I wonder what will happen when the US Army comes up against a force that can shoot straight. Remember the shock Cleburne's Division inflicted at Liberty Gap when their infantry started delivering effective fire at over 800m?
 

67th Tigers

Banned
67th Tigers, all too well.

However, after the second volley literally cut me in half I don't remember too much...:D

It's actually quite an interesting tale. Cleburne was a former British soldier who was familiar with the cadre system the British adopted in 1853 for musketry training. The proper use of a rifle requires a whole new skillset over and above that of a musket and the British were the only army in Europe to universally train all their infantry as "riflemen"*. Other issued the rifle, but not the training, as indeed happened in the US.

In early 1863 Cleburne acquired a copy of the course of musketry and used the cadre system to completely retrain his division as "riflemen" rather than musketeers. Their first combat showing after this was at Liberty Gap, where the Union troops were quite shocked to find men dropping at 800m, a range normally considered safe.

I'm quite interested in the musketry of this period. Sherman's troops in 1864-5 did quite a lot of long range shooting, but their hit rates were worse than 1 hit per 1,000 rounds expended, whilst I've yet to find hit rates for the British in the rifle-musket period worse than about 1 in 20 (FWIW, typical hit rates in the fights between the AoP and ANV were around 1 in 150 to 200).



* Some simply didn't, in Austria, Prussia, Russia and France rifle training was usually restricted to light infantry, jaegars, chasseurs and the like. Prussian infantry with their M1841 needle rifles were forbidden from aiming.
 
Sigma7, historically the CSA came close to winning by virtue of Northern weariness in 1864.

Now turn the Union blockade into a CSA-Allied blockade of the Union, replace CSA shortages with USA shortages and add to the CSA reinforcements equal to Lee's entire army and just how is Lincoln supposed to win?

Well, I tend to think it would drive support up, it's not just a fight with fellow Americans. It becomes a foreign invasion in many people's eyes.
 
Well, I tend to think it would drive support up, it's not just a fight with fellow Americans. It becomes a foreign invasion in many people's eyes.

...But there's only so much increased support can do when the enemy is beating you like a drum. (See: Germany, 1945)
 
Equuleus, if the US can't force the CSA to surrender then the US loses.

With the economic disaster and shortage of military equipment caused by a blockade, with the CSA fully equipped, and without any numerical advantage for the Army of the Potomac vis a vis the Army of Northern Virginia Lincoln accomplishes nothing and loses in 1864. At the latest.
 

Dure

Banned
There has to be a way the Union can win a Trent War but I am damned if I can see how.
 
A mysterious stranger approaches Lincoln and offers to provide the Union with new wonder weapons to turn the tide. His first offering: 100,000 AK-47s.:D
 

Dure

Banned
The thing is only ASBs would work. Every time a thread like this comes up American patriots come up with the same old ideas that have been shot down time and again and they just don't hold water. There has to be a (non-Guns of the South) way of defeating the British. I just can't see it. I find it very frustrating.
 

Dure

Banned
Mean while down in the White house cellar Zombie Lincoln plots the British downfall in 2010.
 
What commerce raiders? The Union navy is hopelessly outnumbered and out classed.

The CSA navy was hopelessly outnumbered and outclassed in OTL, but it didn't do badly at commerce raiding. CSS Alabama took 65 prizes. CSS Tallahassee/Olustee took 39. CSS Shenandoah took 38. CSS Florida took 37. Two of the Florida's prizes, the CSS Tacony and CSS Clarence took 23 more between them. CSS Sumter took 18 prizes. CSS Georgia took 9.

Most of the good ships in the USA are already in the USN having been purchased by the Govt. All that are left are wooden sailing ships.

During the Great War, the SMS Seeadler was a sailing ship and took 16 steam powered prizes.

There are no cannon left to arm them.

Considering the number of ships the USN built and armed during the ACW, this seems unlikely. It's not like you need the best and latest cannons to overwhelm unarmed merchant ships.

If they fight as privateers they will be treated as pirates by the Paris Declaration nations (which includes Russia - problem there). They are also easy for British and French gunvessels to hunt down. No master or seaman in his right mind is going to sign on in that situation.

The CSA commerce raiders took all of those risks in OTL. None were hung and they had no problem getting crews.

Commerce raiders are actually fairly hard to hunt down before radar, radio, and airplanes as the CSA clearly showed in OTL. Even after the advent of radio and airplanes, the SMS Seeadler evaded the British and US navies for 225 days before they wrecked on a reef.
 

67th Tigers

Banned
The CSA navy was hopelessly outnumbered and outclassed in OTL, but it didn't do badly at commerce raiding. CSS Alabama took 65 prizes. CSS Tallahassee/Olustee took 39. CSS Shenandoah took 38. CSS Florida took 37. Two of the Florida's prizes, the CSS Tacony and CSS Clarence took 23 more between them. CSS Sumter took 18 prizes. CSS Georgia took 9.

With access to the global market to draw supplies from.

Considering the number of ships the USN built and armed during the ACW, this seems unlikely. It's not like you need the best and latest cannons to overwhelm unarmed merchant ships.

They were really struggling for naval guns and other heavy ordnance.

The US built very few ships 1861-5, comparitively. I would recommend reading http://digital.library.cornell.edu/...t0003-6;view=image;seq=0687;node=cont0003-6:4

The CSA commerce raiders took all of those risks in OTL. None were hung and they had no problem getting crews.

None were pirates, they were the crews of Commissioned warships of a belligerent nation.
 
I'm pretty sure the Russians unequivocally stated they would back the Union against foreign intervention....

Why would they? It seems more likely to me they'd back the CSA, since the CSA's plantation elites have pretensions of being like European gentry. Or are you thinking they'd oppose any move the British and French make?
 

67th Tigers

Banned
The US built very few ships 1861-5, comparitively. I would recommend reading http://digital.library.cornell.edu/...t0003-6;view=image;seq=0687;node=cont0003-6:4

While on the subject, I found the number of vessels at that time committed to the blockade:

NABS of 1 Ironclad (Galena) and 33 Gunboats
SABS of 4 Steamers, 4 Sail and 36 Gunboats
EGBS of 5 Sail, 1 Steamer and 8 Gunboats
WGBS of 5 Sail, 7 Steamers and 22 Gunboats

= 13 Steamers (Sloops etc.), 14 Sail and 99 Gunboats of various descriptions
 
The thing is only ASBs would work. Every time a thread like this comes up American patriots come up with the same old ideas that have been shot down time and again and they just don't hold water. There has to be a (non-Guns of the South) way of defeating the British. I just can't see it. I find it very frustrating.

Of course, people with strange ideological axes to grind obsess in fantastic detail over how America can be destroyed by making Lincoln go crazy, so here we are.

Mind, you could make Lincoln go crazy in office; the early death of Mary might do it. But that's another story.
 
How eager are Britain, France, and even Russia, to fight another war? France had her Mexican adventure, but eventually gave up on that.

Regarding Russian support for the USA, perhaps Russia saw the USA as a counterweight to Britain and France? Or, having a weaker USA could mean a stronger France and Britain? Were there times where the USA was considered to have an effect on the European balance of power?
 
Top