WI: Robert E. Lee Destroys the Army of the Potomac in June 1863

I meant in the Eastern Theater the Confederate Forces in the Western Theater were pretty weak considering their defeat at Shiloh a year earlier.

What does that matter? The West effects the East and it wasn't short after Chattanooga that Grant attacked Lee. Nor did Meade just sit there. There was the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristoe_Campaign and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mine_Run after which Meade went into winter quarters which is common in war.
 

jahenders

Banned
He had just come off an uninterrupted victory streak against no less than three Union generals. He'd routed the Union army at Second Bull Run, stymied them at Fredericksburg, and completely stopped and turned an offensive at Chancellorsville.

To say he was probably riding an arrogant/overconfident streak would be an understatement.

We're in violent agreement. If the Union dug in somewhere other than Gettysburg, Lee WOULD attack.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
We're in violent agreement. If the Union dug in somewhere other than Gettysburg, Lee WOULD attack.

We're all apparently forgetting that Lincoln was bombarding the Army of the Potomac with messages calling upon THEM to attack LEE. So the apparent acceptance without due consideration of another defensive battle by the AotP south of Gettysburg in the event of a Southern victory there is not really warranted.
 
We're all apparently forgetting that Lincoln was bombarding the Army of the Potomac with messages calling upon THEM to attack LEE. So the apparent acceptance without due consideration of another defensive battle by the AotP south of Gettysburg in the event of a Southern victory there is not really warranted.

If Meade loses he is going to retreat and regroup because that is what armies do and he wasn't preparing the Pipe Creek line for the sake of his health. Lee would follow as his legendary arrogance at that point would make him think he is one victory away from destroying the enemy as he was obsessed with having a decisive battle that would swing the war until at least the Battle of Mine Run as shown and even later than that. He would follow Meade to Pipe Creek and at least get a bloody nose depending on how long it would take him to realize he is banging his head against a stone wall. If he pushes it as much as "Pickett's Charge" it could wind up being a decisive battle... for Meade.
 

jahenders

Banned
We're all apparently forgetting that Lincoln was bombarding the Army of the Potomac with messages calling upon THEM to attack LEE. So the apparent acceptance without due consideration of another defensive battle by the AotP south of Gettysburg in the event of a Southern victory there is not really warranted.

If the AotP gets beaten, retreats in tatters, and is then reinforced with scattered units, then a defensive battle is appropriate (if they can get Lee to cooperate and attack). Lincoln isn't likely to press a hastily assembled force, with dubious morale, to attack unless Lee refuses battle and attacking him is the only way to get him out of the North
 
If the AotP gets beaten, retreats in tatters, and is then reinforced with scattered units, then a defensive battle is appropriate (if they can get Lee to cooperate and attack). Lincoln isn't likely to press a hastily assembled force, with dubious morale, to attack unless Lee refuses battle and attacking him is the only way to get him out of the North

It isn't going to retreat in tatters. The best it can do is push the AOTP back the 1st day, in which case most of the army isn't there yet and falls back to Pipe Creek. That said Lincoln isn't going to push for an immediate offensive after even the marginally defeat it would be.
 
It's pretty much certain the AotP will not get destroyed, but if they are badly hurt (40,000+casualties) how long would the North take to get another army together? If half their forces are gone and AoV heads for home when will the North be able to get back on the front foot and attack?

They can't take too many men from the west as it will weaken them there and it takes time to train new men. I can't see it happening until at least October before they can do much. After November the weather can really set in and then it's put back until at least April 64. Of course the North will still win but how much longer will it take and how many more deaths?
 
It's pretty much certain the AotP will not get destroyed, but if they are badly hurt (40,000+casualties) how long would the North take to get another army together? If half their forces are gone and AoV heads for home when will the North be able to get back on the front foot and attack?

They can't take too many men from the west as it will weaken them there and it takes time to train new men. I can't see it happening until at least October before they can do much. After November the weather can really set in and then it's put back until at least April 64. Of course the North will still win but how much longer will it take and how many more deaths?

If the AOTP takes 40,000 casualties Lee is going to take similar which will be a higher percentage of his army. Lee rarely took a less percentage of his army in casualties as he had the highest casualty percentage of any general North or South. It would weaken Lee more than it would Meade as Meade can afford taking more.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
If the AOTP takes 40,000 casualties Lee is going to take similar which will be a higher percentage of his army. Lee rarely took a less percentage of his army in casualties as he had the highest casualty percentage of any general North or South.

This is true. Fredericksburg was the only battle where the enemy army lost a higher percentage than Lee did. And I can't think of any realistic scenario in which Lee could inflict much heavier losses on the enemy without significantly increasing his own losses. It would have been possible, if a few brigade commanders had performed a bit better on July 1, for the Southerners to capture several thousands more prisoners than they did IOTL, but that wouldn't be enough to make a decisive change.

It would weaken Lee more than it would Meade as Meade can afford taking more.

In the long run, sure, but not really in the short term. The numerical advantage of the AotP vis-a-vis the AoNV was much less pronounced at Gettysburg than at previous battles because all the two-year regiments had all gone home. It was going to take some time to recruit new regiments and no one knew whether the draft would be effective or not. So Meade had to be more careful of casualties than, say, McClellan during the Seven Days or Grant in the Wilderness.
 
4 words.

Confederate States of America

No but seriously Lee would have had a huge advantage and would have likely won the war making Grant surrender to him instead of the opposite.
 
If the AOTP takes 40,000 casualties Lee is going to take similar which will be a higher percentage of his army. Lee rarely took a less percentage of his army in casualties as he had the highest casualty percentage of any general North or South. It would weaken Lee more than it would Meade as Meade can afford taking more.

If the battle takes place as OTL, maybe, but the OP wasn't that, so both North and South meet somewhere else, so who knows. Lee could be able to chose the ground and then things can be very different.
 
If the battle takes place as OTL, maybe, but the OP wasn't that, so both North and South meet somewhere else, so who knows. Lee could be able to chose the ground and then things can be very different.

No matter where they meet Lee is going to take casualties in the same neighborhood, outside of the Battle of Fredericksburg he generally took a higher percentage of casualties than his opponent and Meade is not Burnside.
 
4 words.

Confederate States of America

No but seriously Lee would have had a huge advantage and would have likely won the war making Grant surrender to him instead of the opposite.

How ? By black magic? He would have a huge disadvantage anywhere in PA.
 

jahenders

Banned
This is true. Fredericksburg was the only battle where the enemy army lost a higher percentage than Lee did. And I can't think of any realistic scenario in which Lee could inflict much heavier losses on the enemy without significantly increasing his own losses. It would have been possible, if a few brigade commanders had performed a bit better on July 1, for the Southerners to capture several thousands more prisoners than they did IOTL, but that wouldn't be enough to make a decisive change.
.

The one (somewhat) possibility is the one presented in Gingrich/Forstchen's "Gettysburg" -- Lee listens to Longstreet's recommendations to not attack entrenched Union forces at Gettysburg. Instead, the AoNV steals a night march and shifts East, taking up a strong defensive position between the AotP and DC all but forcing Meade to attack. Meade makes multiple attacks to try and dislodge Lee and has his army badly battered and scattered in the process. Lee quickly moves to raid key Union points nearby. The Union has to quickly scrape together forces to resist the AoNV. It's a good book/series.
 

jahenders

Banned
No matter where they meet Lee is going to take casualties in the same neighborhood, outside of the Battle of Fredericksburg he generally took a higher percentage of casualties than his opponent and Meade is not Burnside.

Indeed -- the moniker "the butcher" could be more logically applied to Lee than to Grant. (Bonekemper III, Edward H. “The Butcher’s Bill.” Civil War Times L, no. 2 (April 2011): 36-43.)
 
Indeed -- the moniker "the butcher" could be more logically applied to Lee than to Grant. (Bonekemper III, Edward H. “The Butcher’s Bill.” Civil War Times L, no. 2 (April 2011): 36-43.)

Exactly, he took a higher percentage of his men as casualties than any other Army Commander, North or South.
 

Spengler

Banned
If the battle takes place as OTL, maybe, but the OP wasn't that, so both North and South meet somewhere else, so who knows. Lee could be able to chose the ground and then things can be very different.
Why would Meade attack when all he has is time and he has a perfectly good position to fight Lee? Also for whomever here is thinking the South could pull a Chanceloresville or Fredrickburg those were battles that were victories for very specific reasons. Both involved Lee fighting men who certainly were not at all of the same quality as Meade was, neither being fit to command over fifty thousand men. Both also involved Lee fighting on home turf and relying on local knowlege to help hisin the battles. Both battles involved Lee being given extensive time to choose his own ground to fight which he would not have had the chance in Maryland or especially PA. Fredricksburg would obviously never happen as Lee being able to have such defenses required him facing an enemy who had no wherewithal to send out cavalry and find a different place to fight. Also concerning Cavalry the AoP now had a cavalry force that could rqual Lee'sso he unlike at Fredricksburg is not going to be able to use them like he did the year previously. So Lee has to face reality and is not in a position to score a crushing victory on the AOTP. Reayashis actions the previous year showed when he couldn't get his way like inthe Seven Days he just attacked.
 

Spengler

Banned
Lincoln was quite patient with his generals. He got on Mcclellans ass for not even bothering to fallow Lee. Which Meade had no problem in doing.
 
Top