The Worst American Civil War Alternate History Cliche

[Fiver]

I'm not sure how much of a cliche it is in Civil War timelines, but certainly in many threads about the prospects of an independent CSA there are people claiming that the Union will never give up on trying to reconquer the CSA. I think its safe to say the Union will eventually give up on putting the cat back in the bag, refocus on influencing southern politics and economically dominating the south.

I consider it far more likely that the Confederacy would be revanchist. Based on the Confederacy's actions during the ACW, they appeared to believe all slaveholding states were rightfully theirs, plus a route to the Pacific. Unless they produce a general who makes Robert E Lee look like Leonidas Polk and can get along with Jefferson Davis, that isn't happening. The Confederacy would probably wouldn't even keep all of the 11 states that seceded; there's a good chance they'd lose West Virginia and part or all of Arkansas or Tennessee.

 

[Fred the duck]

8 times out of 10, Canada gets annexed to the Union.

War of 1812 reborn LONG LIVE CANADA

 

[Spelf]

I'm not sure how much of a cliche it is in Civil War timelines, but certainly in many threads about the prospects of an independent CSA there are people claiming that the Union will never give up on trying to reconquer the CSA. I think its safe to say the Union will eventually give up on putting the cat back in the bag, refocus on influencing southern politics and economically dominating the south.

Not sure about that being a cliche. In any "CSA wins" scenario, the territorial integrity of the country (a peace negotiation will inevitably cede large parts of Virginia, Tennessee, maybe even Louisiana to the Union) will be compromised so much to a point that it would be silly for the Union not to keep trying.

 

[StephenColbert27]

George Greene excelled when commanding at brigade and division level. It would have been interesting if he'd ever gotten Corps command; there were few generals who were both aggressive and strongly favored building field fortifications.

Well said. He did great at Antietam. His tiny 3000 man division ended up being the only ones to take and hold the Dunker Church and the nearby knoll for any length of time. If properly reinforced he could have won the whole thing. Very similar to George Meade at Fredericksburg. I am baffled by how he was sent back down to brigade command. Should have stayed at division for sure. Corps would have been interesting.

 

[Fiver]

True, but it's essentially the only thing we have to show his quality as a commander. He's a blank slate in terms of quality aside from that, so the author makes him brilliant.

If a timeline needs a brilliant commander, the guy who was killed before he had a chance to do anything is a more credible choice than having someone inexplicably start fighting above their weight class. Of course a more credible choice than the guy who died before he could do anything is someone who showed promise in minor roles, like Charles Ferguson Smith, Philip Kearney, or James McPherson.

 

[Fiver]

Something I've noticed in a few stories now is that if Grant takes command sooner/later than OTL he flawlessly organizes the army and conquers the south/Canada in a couple of months

I've never seen that one, but for the past 150 years a lot of people seem to believe AS Johnston would have done this if he hadn't been killed at Shiloh.