Help Me: Extend the CSA's trench fortifications around Richmond and Petersburg

I'm working on a CSA victory TL and I'd like some help. I want to improve the CSA's ability to defend and hold both Richmond and Petersburg so I'd like to hear how there trench fortifications and defenses can be improved and extended farther away from the respective cities. Does anyone think it would be to there benefit let alone possible to get them as far as the Pamunkey river? Thank you.
 
I'm working on a CSA victory TL and I'd like some help. I want to improve the CSA's ability to defend and hold both Richmond and Petersburg so I'd like to hear how there trench fortifications and defenses can be improved and extended farther away from the respective cities. Does anyone think it would be to there benefit let alone possible to get them as far as the Pamunkey river? Thank you.

And the troops to man these extended lines come from where? Not to mention that the more you extend them, the more points the Yankees have to attack and the more reserves you need to be able to repair any breakthrough, which means even more men will be needed?

More defense is not the answer. Trench warfare, barring any sudden breakthrough on either side, becomes a war of attrition, and the South with its manpower deficit cannot afford that. To win, they have to attack. They have to carry the war to the North. And they have to be extraordinarily fortunate in battle.

A Confederate victory, implying conquest of the North, is not really possible given the Confederates' limited means. Fortunately they don't need a victory; a draw will do just fine. But they cannot get that draw by standing on the defensive; that gives the initiative to the Yankees, who can then attack at times and places of their choosing. The South has to attack to keep the initiative. It's a risky strategy, but the Confederacy must take that risk if it wishes to survive.
 
And the troops to man these extended lines come from where? Not to mention that the more you extend them, the more points the Yankees have to attack and the more reserves you need to be able to repair any breakthrough, which means even more men will be needed?

More defense is not the answer. Trench warfare, barring any sudden breakthrough on either side, becomes a war of attrition, and the South with its manpower deficit cannot afford that. To win, they have to attack. They have to carry the war to the North. And they have to be extraordinarily fortunate in battle.

A Confederate victory, implying conquest of the North, is not really possible given the Confederates' limited means. Fortunately they don't need a victory; a draw will do just fine. But they cannot get that draw by standing on the defensive; that gives the initiative to the Yankees, who can then attack at times and places of their choosing. The South has to attack to keep the initiative. It's a risky strategy, but the Confederacy must take that risk if it wishes to survive.
I understand where your coming from but from what I've gathered after reading The Battle Cry of Freedom by James M. Mcpherson such Trench warfare was more beneficial to the south. Because of its limited resources it stood more to loose in large attacks which generals like Grant a Sherman knew they could win in the long run due to the north's reserves. So trenches where used to give the rebels protective cover and help them pick off exposed federals working around their defenses. And according to the casualty numbers given in the book it seems to have worked for a good run.

So if making the trench line larger won't help then how could it be reorganized from that of OTL to give the south the upper hand in defending Richmond and Petersburg?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
More trenches around Richmond and Petersburg would require additional troops to man them. IOTL, Lee was incredibly hard pressed to feed even the 60,000 or so men he had in the trenches during the Siege of Petersburg. He would not have been able to feed many additional troops.
 
More trenches around Richmond and Petersburg would require additional troops to man them. IOTL, Lee was incredibly hard pressed to feed even the 60,000 or so men he had in the trenches during the Siege of Petersburg. He would not have been able to feed many additional troops.

And even if he could feed them, they aren't there to feed.


The OTL defenses did what such things could do, more would only require more manpower.
 
And the troops to man these extended lines come from where? Not to mention that the more you extend them, the more points the Yankees have to attack and the more reserves you need to be able to repair any breakthrough, which means even more men will be needed?

More defense is not the answer. Trench warfare, barring any sudden breakthrough on either side, becomes a war of attrition, and the South with its manpower deficit cannot afford that. To win, they have to attack. They have to carry the war to the North. And they have to be extraordinarily fortunate in battle.

A Confederate victory, implying conquest of the North, is not really possible given the Confederates' limited means. Fortunately they don't need a victory; a draw will do just fine. But they cannot get that draw by standing on the defensive; that gives the initiative to the Yankees, who can then attack at times and places of their choosing. The South has to attack to keep the initiative. It's a risky strategy, but the Confederacy must take that risk if it wishes to survive.

As you said trenches are not going to win the war for the CSA only delay the defeat.
The trenches only tied down the army when they has a better chance in a more mobile war.
The big problem the CSA had was the union blockade and the lost of control of the Mississippi river.
If you can stop the union blockade and export cotton and import weapon and goods needed for the war and the economy the CSA might stand a chance.
Germany in WWI had the same problem blockaded by sea for importing food and other vital materials. The trenches they had were much better than any thing CSA could build and they still lost because of the blockade.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
So if making the trench line larger won't help then how could it be reorganized from that of OTL to give the south the upper hand in defending Richmond and Petersburg?

In my opinion, what Lee achieved around Richmond-Petersburg from June 1864 to April 1865 was pretty much the best case scenario for the CSA. He was quite correct when he told Jubal Early (IIRC) that if Grant got to the James River, the battle would become a siege and then it would be a mere question of time.

If you want to save Richmond, you have to keep the Army of the Potomac away from Richmond-Petersburg.
 
What you want is more trenches in DEPTH not length. Give them fall back positions on their lines of retreat. The South can not attack the North except in the local sense. Every time the South tried to take the war North disaster struck. The only way the South can win is to wear out the North. Going north just makes them lose faster. Antietam, Gettysburg and the New Mexico Campaign shows that. Even Perryville wound up in a retreat.
 
And all this is predicated on Grant being stopped long enough for a victory at the polls for the Democrats in 1864?

Problem 1:
Sherman has still taken Atlanta, and is Marching Through Georgia. At best for the Confederacy, a nastier campaign in front of Petersburg will only lessen Lincoln's OTL landslide. Neither Hood nor Johnston would have been able to stop Sherman. The only difference being that with Johnston in charge Sherman's advance would have been slower. But Johnston staying in command would have required Jefferson Davis to not be the man he was.

Problem 2:
Assuming George B. McClellan wins, he still has 119 days until he is sworn in as Commander-In-Chief. By Inauguration Day March 4th 1865, Georgia has fallen, South Carolina has fallen, and North Carolina is about to be invaded. Mobile has been secured, Arkansas has fallen, Tennessee has been secured, and the Union is preparing to march across the rest of Mississippi and to invade the interior of Alabama. Only Texas, most of the Indian Territory, and the hinterlands of Florida, southwest Georgia, and (pro-Union!) Appalachian parts of North Carolina and a rump of Virginia are left.

Now, you are President George B. McClellan. The grounds are drying, and the new campaign season in Virginia is about to begin. Maybe the Democrats have control of the US House of Representatives, maybe not. But they certainly won't have the Senate. So, what do you do? Your Copperhead Democrats are demanding PEACE NOW. But you are a War Democrat, as are any number of your supporters. And whatever the power Copperheads had within the Democratic Party following a victorious 1864 election, what would they have left in a USA that had the CSA not just by the throat but prostrate and helpless?

Do you as President McClellan suddenly run off and sign a peace treaty with the CSA, recognizing their Independence, and thereby signing away potentially a massive portion of your own power as POTUS over ALL of the United States, including the about to be defeated Southerners (Democratic voters all)? Especially considering that the chances of a US Senate (still dominated by Republicans) giving a 2/3rds approval of such a peace treaty are just about nil?

No.

He'll happily shred (or let the courts shred) the Emancipation Declaration, and let the 13th Amendment die (while letting the 14th and 15th stay stillborn). But only as a condition for the South's surrender. Even then, probably an "unofficial condition", since he'll like getting that Unconditional Surrender for himself, just to spite Lincoln. Though no doubt with his opinions about Blacks being no secret, the Southrons will certainly believe his reassurances.
 
Top