Oppinion of the CSA on West Virginia

"Treacherous land" inhabited by damyankees or "stolen part of the homeland" (sorta American Alsace-Lorraine)?
 

Philip

Donor
I think the correct answer is 'both'. From the CSA point of view, the land was integral to Virginia, but the people (or at least most of them) in it were Yankee sympathizers.
 

Xen

Banned
I think the correct answer is 'both'. From the CSA point of view, the land was integral to Virginia, but the people (or at least most of them) in it were Yankee sympathizers.

Most of the "Yankee" sympathizers were located around the Ohio River, the interior of the state were "real" Virginians. It could very well be an Alsace-Lorraine kind of deal.
 
It was something they couldn't do anything about, though. With the locals pro-union and the fact it would restart the Civil War if the USA survived it and West Virginia remaining a state assumes that I don't think the CSA would do a damn thing about it.
 
Most likely regarded as a welcome loss. The state seceded form Virginia and the South. They disliked them as much as the Union.
 

Xen

Banned
It was something they couldn't do anything about, though. With the locals pro-union and the fact it would restart the Civil War if the USA survived it and West Virginia remaining a state assumes that I don't think the CSA would do a damn thing about it.

You could argue it could undermine the south's argument of pro-secession.
 
Top