what if Cold Harbor Brock the Union Forces

What if At Cold Harbor The Union Troops Refused to attack after the first 5 minutes of the Charge .

What If the Union troops had just gone to ground and started to dig in .
And when the order's came down to renew the Charge the Troops yelled “Hell no We won't Go .” This Was from the lowest Private to the Regimental Colonel's .

The Union forces in the East as of Cold Harbor Refuse to Attack .
How would this of Changed the War between the States .
 
OK, then lets pull out and head southeast again...

Refuses to attack is not the same thing as refuses to move. This was not the rebellion in the French Army in WWI. In the ACW a continuous front was not needed. Grant HIMSELF, essentially, felt that way. Throughout the '64 Virginia Campaign, Grant maintained a method of sheer determination and doggedness. "Move by the left flank, move by the left flank, move by the left flank" (Shelby Foote). It was the one strategy Lee feared most. It was the one Grant knew would work. No more fencing. Just a brutal club to smash Lee time and again until he could reach the James River. "We must destroy this army of Grant's BEFORE he gets to the James. If he gets there, it will become a siege. And then it will only be a question of time." (Robert E. Lee).

Except for the Second Battle of the Mule Shoe (Which completely wiped out the entire Stonewall Brigade), every tactical engagement up to Cold Harbor was a Southern victory. But every time afterwards, Grant ordered a march to the southeast! Each time, the Union soldiers were reminded a different man was commanding them now. But Cold Harbor was in a class by itself. The soldiers themselves knew what a disaster it was going to be. They never trusted Grant again with the enthusiasm they had following the Wilderness.

But if they refused to attack again, well, Grant was no Napoleon, much less Caesar. He'd been asked to rethink the circumstances, a revolt would do that for such a man. Not Jackson, not Sheridan, not Sherman, not even Lee. But Grant would reconsider. Especially since his ultimate goal wasn't through Cold Harbor anyway.
 
Last edited:
Ward

I have to give you marks for courage. Even just a discussion, rather than a story thread, can produce a cannonade of Neo-Confederate replies insisting that your idea means that the Union army melts away, Lee takes Washington, Philadelphia, New York, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Boston, Bangor, Des Moines, St. Paul, Los Angeles.... (WANK).:D OK, those were for jokes. Still, change one event, and those with an agenda will insist THAT WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING!

I liked the interview I saw once of Newt Gingrich saying that just because the South wins a battle they otherwise lost didn't mean that suddenly every battle they ever fought afterwards would be a Southern victory. He was talking about the nature of Alternate History and how writers sometimes got tunnel vision and couldn't see that a defeat for the North that should have been a victory would simply mean a greater war effort by the North. The South was fighting with pretty much all it had, while the North still had considerable reserves, a "fact that fiction/fantasy writers in this genre tend to overlook". (Newt Gingrich).
 

Typo

Banned
What if At Cold Harbor The Union Troops Refused to attack after the first 5 minutes of the Charge .

What If the Union troops had just gone to ground and started to dig in .
And when the order's came down to renew the Charge the Troops yelled “Hell no We won't Go .” This Was from the lowest Private to the Regimental Colonel's .

The Union forces in the East as of Cold Harbor Refuse to Attack .
How would this of Changed the War between the States .

The union army melts away, CSA wins '64, but a fanatic slave smuggles a gun which is used to assissinate Jeff Davis. The South then occupies much of the north and imposes a "reinsititution" of northern states. Lee gets elected in '67 and blitzs Mexico over Napoleon or something because I don't think we have a LeeWank of that scale yet.
 
?????????????????????????????

The union army melts away, CSA wins '64, but a fanatic slave smuggles a gun which is used to assissinate Jeff Davis. The South then occupies much of the north and imposes a "reinsititution" of northern states. Lee gets elected in '67 and blitzs Mexico over Napoleon or something because I don't think we have a LeeWank of that scale yet.
The Union Army melts away. Where? CSA wins '64. How? What happens to Sherman's Army in Georgia? What happens to Thomas' Army in Tennessee? To the garrisons on the Mississippi? What happens to the forces fighting in Mobile? Charleston? Eastern North Carolina? To the Red River Campaign? To the Army of the Shenandoah? To the militia reserves in Washington and Maryland? The US Navy? The US Marines? The Army in Bermuda Hundred? How does one army "breaking" in one sector cause a continent-wide war effort to simply collapse? One Confederate Army after another was destroyed in the West without the ANV going to pieces. Why should the Union war effort be any different?:confused:
 

Nikephoros

Banned
The Union Army melts away. Where? CSA wins '64. How? What happens to Sherman's Army in Georgia? What happens to Thomas' Army in Tennessee? To the garrisons on the Mississippi? What happens to the forces fighting in Mobile? Charleston? Eastern North Carolina? To the Red River Campaign? To the Army of the Shenandoah? To the militia reserves in Washington and Maryland? The US Navy? The US Marines? The Army in Bermuda Hundred? How does one army "breaking" in one sector cause a continent-wide war effort to simply collapse? One Confederate Army after another was destroyed in the West without the ANV going to pieces. Why should the Union war effort be any different?:confused:

He was being sarcastic, in response to this:

I have to give you marks for courage. Even just a discussion, rather than a story thread, can produce a cannonade of Neo-Confederate replies insisting that your idea means that the Union army melts away, Lee takes Washington, Philadelphia, New York, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Boston, Bangor, Des Moines, St. Paul, Los Angeles.... (WANK).:D OK, those were for jokes. Still, change one event, and those with an agenda will insist THAT WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING!
 
You may fire when ready Griddly...

The union army melts away, CSA wins '64, but a fanatic slave smuggles a gun which is used to assissinate Jeff Davis. The South then occupies much of the north and imposes a "reinsititution" of northern states. Lee gets elected in '67 and blitzs Mexico over Napoleon or something because I don't think we have a LeeWank of that scale yet.
*sigh* As I warned Ward.....:rolleyes:
 
Onward! Onward to Greenland!

He was being sarcastic, in response to this:
Thank you VERY much Nikephoros, and I mean that with the utmost sincerity. If some of my posts on this thread seem silly, it is just that I am a survivor of many a ConfedWank, including the Jake Vektor Experience.:eek: When someone posts an idea about something bad happening to a Union Army, I have been conditioned to expect a Neo-Confederate onslaught. That's why I brought up the story of the Newt Gingrich interview. He and I are political polar opposites, which is why I found the things he had to say so surprising and admitedly pleasing.:D

You might say I have a "hair-trigger response" for any whiff of Neo-Confederates hence what any logical person will see as sarcasm I will take literally!:eek::eek::eek: In my own defense, I'll just say check out the past ACW TLs. You will see repliers go so far as to suggest "Marches to Lake Erie" and "The Siege of New York".:rolleyes: So please, try to understand that I am not talking in a COMPLETE vacuum.:eek:
 

Nikephoros

Banned
I made a similar joke in a thread about the Trent War. I made ridiculous borders, and I think you were the one who ripped into me. I swear I did it for the lulz, and I was trying to mock Neo-Confeds.
 
Field Marshal Grant

I made a similar joke in a thread about the Trent War. I made ridiculous borders, and I think you were the one who ripped into me. I swear I did it for the lulz, and I was trying to mock Neo-Confeds.
I have only been at this for a couple of months. I have made an absolute FOOL of myself from time to time, ESPECIALLY in my earliest replies. I was so bad once I got torn a new one by the Admin himself, and deservedly so. Still, I'd like to make you a challenge Nikephoros. How's your writing skills? Personally I can't write my way out of a wet paper bag, but I have a pretty good base of knowledge for the ACW, mostly Grant's campaigns. Have you ever considered a GrantWank? I'd love to see your work.:cool:
 

Nikephoros

Banned
I have only been at this for a couple of months. I have made an absolute FOOL of myself from time to time, ESPECIALLY in my earliest replies. I was so bad once I got torn a new one by the Admin himself, and deservedly so. Still, I'd like to make you a challenge Nikephoros. How's your writing skills? Personally I can't write my way out of a wet paper bag, but I have a pretty good base of knowledge for the ACW, mostly Grant's campaigns. Have you ever considered a GrantWank? I'd love to see your work.:cool:

Never been good at the ACW, although Sherman's March to the sea gives me a warm and fuzzy. My writing isn't that good.
 
Hello, General Grant! My name is Jeannie!

I have only been at this for a couple of months. I have made an absolute FOOL of myself from time to time, ESPECIALLY in my earliest replies. I was so bad once I got torn a new one by the Admin himself, and deservedly so. Still, I'd like to make you a challenge Nikephoros. How's your writing skills? Personally I can't write my way out of a wet paper bag, but I have a pretty good base of knowledge for the ACW, mostly Grant's campaigns. Have you ever considered a GrantWank? I'd love to see your work.:cool:
How about you Ward? You up for a GrantWank? POD the Day he takes Belmont? ASB, of course. Just have him reach all his objectives in half the time!:D
 
Top