That doesn't really contradict what I said, that third or so of the Confederate army from slaveowning households were probably the third that didn't desert. When I was pointing out the insane desertion rates I wasn't trying to imply that literally everyone was deserting.
If The Confederate Armies Dissolve Into Guerrilla Bands, Could the Union Have Still Won?
- Thread starter frustrated progressive
- Start date
I guess the OP implies that they fight simply until the North allows slaves again. This rebellion should take little more than 9 months to finish, 3 months if they take my prescription.
The only slaves the North is going to allow are these guerillas being sold after they're caught
Are you nuts? The North isn't going to enslave whites. It's a pardon or the hangmen for these guys
Abhakhazia
Banned
The problem with guerilla warfare in for the Confederacy is that the kind of places where one could actually wage an effective guerilla warfare, such as the Georgia Pine Barrens and the Appalachians were already engaged in guerilla warfare...against the Confederacy. The Confederacy was the tool of the planter aristocracy, and the kind of petit blancs who lived in the rough regions of the South were not fond of being drafted and overtaxed by their wealthier lowland neighbors simply for their wealthy lowland neighbors to remain wealthy while they saw no benefit other than being on the receiving a Union bayonet.
There are a few examples of die hards retreating deep in to the woods after Reconstruction, but a lot of them were handled with local feuds with local unionists, and what you would likely see is something similar to that. The Confederate troops, likely with morale shot anyways, are going to be forced to fight for places to hide with pro-Unionist militias.
The only difference I can really see is a longer occupation of the South, which does mean a lot for Reconstruction as it will be harder to cast aside.
There are a few examples of die hards retreating deep in to the woods after Reconstruction, but a lot of them were handled with local feuds with local unionists, and what you would likely see is something similar to that. The Confederate troops, likely with morale shot anyways, are going to be forced to fight for places to hide with pro-Unionist militias.
The only difference I can really see is a longer occupation of the South, which does mean a lot for Reconstruction as it will be harder to cast aside.
I think he both read you wrong and was being sarcastic. IIRC you said the guerillas would lose.
I DID say the guerillas would lose, but when someone asked what the goal was (at least until they give up and turn into bandits) was that/
He was quoting Aphrodite and I was explaining what I think happened.
I have to agree. Any significant guerilla activity would mean harsher conditions for Confederate civilians, long-term garrisoning of Southern cities, etc. Eventually, the guerrillas would lose support of the populace when they see what they're losing and that the guerrillas are fighting for a lost cause. Things will also be harsher for the families of the Confederate leaders who don't formally surrender. I could see the families of some Guerrilla generals forcibly moved to (gentile) custody in the North on grounds of aiding (or suspicion of aiding) the guerilla forces.
The North might also use 'scorched earth' tactics in some areas that aid the guerillas.
Eventually, many of the guerillas will give up until the remainder are essentially just criminals claiming they're soldiers (which is how they'd be classified). They'd receive no mercy if captured.