Wrapped in Flames: The Great American War and Beyond

Nice to see Grant having a frustrating campaign, though I wonder how more frustrating it would be if it were Jackson and not Bragg commanding the Western Theatre, not that Lee could afford to lose his services permanently like that. I get the feeling however that even though Thomas is out of the picture, Kirby is going to get a thrashing when he heads off but we'll see.

I believe that there is an alternate history novel series with that premise, Jackson goes West I think. Full disclosure I have not read it.

The war now hinges on the 1864 election.

Also you're splitting the election into  two parts? You bastard, you're going to leave me frothing at the end of Part I.

I'm hoping to!

I never heard of that, it's truly awful

Much of Forrest's life is full of awful tales. While he was, indeed, a very talented cavalry leader, he was not a good person. His pre-war life was as a successful slave trader, and post-war he founded the KKK and was instrumental in trying to destroy the political lives of freedmen.
 
I've tried to not be too indiscriminate with people killed TTL, but generally been even handed in handing out death to both sides.
Honestly, the loss of Sherman and the life of Jackson put the CSA in such a better position that OTL. I mean who wouldn't trade the Wizard in the Saddle for Stonewall, even tactically.

Stonewall being alive removes Lee's biggest weakness, and grants him his biggest strength. This puts the Eastern theatre on much much more if an even footing than it had ever been, plus 60,000 v 81,000. Is significantly more doable, than I originally considered even TTL.

I am so excited to see how it goes, especially with Grant having been pushed backed by Jackson. How is the war in the far West going?
 
Cant wait fot the 1864 election , i am hoping for an independent cenfederacy , i think it would be a very realistic possibility , the union have lost much more men than in otl , how much more will the american people stomach, but the wourst is the economy , its really terrible for what i undurstood , plus that line about the confederate dollar being a more valuable currency than the U.S dollar is really terrible ( and maybe some kind of forshadoing for something ? ) , and with a much better confederacy than in otl . it will take a lot more blood and resorces to defeat and ocupy , it will be to much for the american people to tolerate , peace will be the best option in most people minds .
 
I hope not. The idea of an independent Confederacy with many people in chains makes my skin crawl.

I still hold hope that the Union can win, but we shall see what the 1864 election holds.
 
I hope not. The idea of an independent Confederacy with many people in chains makes my skin crawl.

I still hold hope that the Union can win, but we shall see what the 1864 election holds.
Its not real life , so i dont really care x'D
But of course that is true , but i think it could really hapen and i really like confederacy tl , i find really interesting to think about how the confederay would develop .
 
what I love is I think most timelines would do a "shaded in mystery " type thing.like "ots unlikey that sheridan personally striked the blow" or "despite popular view" ths glorious union for example has a scene where Ewell and hooker are right in front of each other and then both claiming not to have fought each and I thought thats where this was going
Here, you straight up have a general kill another in single combat...and Everyone knows thats what happened

Like WTF

a Completely good WTF but still unexpected from this timeline.
 
Honestly, the loss of Sherman and the life of Jackson put the CSA in such a better position that OTL. I mean who wouldn't trade the Wizard in the Saddle for Stonewall, even tactically.

Stonewall being alive removes Lee's biggest weakness, and grants him his biggest strength. This puts the Eastern theatre on much much more if an even footing than it had ever been, plus 60,000 v 81,000. Is significantly more doable, than I originally considered even TTL.

I am so excited to see how it goes, especially with Grant having been pushed backed by Jackson.

Jackson was probably Lee's most skilled corps commander, and the two had a relationship not unlike Grant and Sherman, with Longstreet playing a fine second fiddle to Jackson. Lee was, in my opinion, not far wrong when he said he had as good as lost his right arm with Jackson's death. Tactically, they were a battlefield combination that was hard to beat and one which, for the Union, was thankfully ended at Lee's greatest victory at Chancellorsville.

Now Lee may have 60,000 men going into 1865, but the Army of the Potomac is still going to have better than 90,000. The garrison of Washington is still formidable with 30,000 strong, and forces can be further raised/freed up from other departments. The only subtractions would be those being mustered for further coastal expeditions in 1865. So while Lee won't be facing quite as dire a situation at the start of the 1865 campaign season, he's still taken some pretty serious losses that will be hard to replace, even with the draft.

How is the war in the far West going?

Truthfully, something of a stalemate. After the Battle of Glorietta Pass pushed the Confederate forces over that imaginary border line, skirmishes, raids, and occasional near battles have been the norm. The forces commanded by Sibley in the far west really just need to hang on while Harney's Union troops also need to do the same. Neither Richmond nor Washington can spare men for this front, and Harney had to detach troops to deal with political rancor as well in the West. Troops which were, historically, detached from California to deal with the Confederates were forced to remain in California for the ultimately unsuccessful defence of San Francisco.

While the Indian Territory has fallen into Confederate hands, it is unlikely to hold against a major Union expedition should the resources be spared.

So, while the Confederates are ascendant for now, the Union could eventually shift sufficient forces to change all that. Will they? Guess we'll find out!
 
what I love is I think most timelines would do a "shaded in mystery " type thing.like "ots unlikey that sheridan personally striked the blow" or "despite popular view" ths glorious union for example has a scene where Ewell and hooker are right in front of each other and then both claiming not to have fought each and I thought thats where this was going
Here, you straight up have a general kill another in single combat...and Everyone knows thats what happened

Like WTF

a Completely good WTF but still unexpected from this timeline.

Glad you enjoyed that little face off!

If anyone had good odds against Forrest as a tactician and a fighter, I'd give the nod to Phil Sheridan!

Expect many romanticized portraits of that in the future regarding the American spirit TTL...
 
So when will Spain help the union or any other super power that wants the usa to win
Spain in 1864 shouldn't be considered a Super Power. At minimum, in Europe it is behind the UK, France, Russia, Austria, Prussia and the Ottoman Empire (And possibly Hanover, Bavaria and the Kingdom of Italy)
 
Of course I know it's not real life, but given that Britain and France aided the Confederacy, it could lead to sentiments that their cause is just despite the reason for intervention is not because Britain and France support slavery.
The history of the world is filled with instances of cowntries supporting regimes that they deslike for many reasons , mostly for practical self interested ones , so nothing weird there , this is not going to change how peoples view slavery , pleople hate it more and more in the west and its going away sooner or latter , also at this point there is still plenty of slavery in the world , Brazil , middle east , africa , etc , so is not as if the confederacy is the last bastion of the institution , i dont think it changes much perception wise .
 
The history of the world is filled with instances of cowntries supporting regimes that they deslike for many reasons , mostly for practical self interested ones , so nothing weird there , this is not going to change how peoples view slavery , pleople hate it more and more in the west and its going away sooner or latter , also at this point there is still plenty of slavery in the world , Brazil , middle east , africa , etc , so is not as if the confederacy is the last bastion of the institution , i dont think it changes much perception wise .

Ah. Fair point.
 
So when will Spain help the union or any other super power that wants the usa to win

Well, never. The foreign powers with both the ability to do something about the war or provide any assistance to the US - Britain, Spain, and France - were all distinctly operating, if not directly against US interests, then very much at odd angles to it. Russia was the only European power which might have had an interest or ability to intervene in even a small way. However, that would only be at the sufferance of Britain or France.

Spain and France were both spitting in the eye of the Monroe Doctrine during the war quite blatantly, and had no interest in either helping the US, or not being kind to the Confederacy.

Spain in 1864 shouldn't be considered a Super Power. At minimum, in Europe it is behind the UK, France, Russia, Austria, Prussia and the Ottoman Empire (And possibly Hanover, Bavaria and the Kingdom of Italy)

Well one thing Spain had compared to other European powers was a large navy, being (I think) the fifth largest in the world in 1860. Even in the 1870s, Spain was not a slouch as a naval power. One reason the Virginius Affair never escalated to war OTL was because the US had allowed naval spending to slip so badly that Spain was actually enough of a naval threat that war would have been unrealistic in the short term thanks to every government's favorite pass time, budget cuts. Spain meanwhile had been fighting a bloody - if pointless - naval war with almost all of South America, giving it as much near term experience as the USN, and perhaps more practical battle experience. Though that was eventually rectified, it showed Spain at least commanded a bit of muscle in at least the mid-19th century still.

By the end, well, not so much!
 
I'd be pretty interested to see how things in Britain and/or Canada are going down after the peace treaty too.

Small hints to their status will take place at the end of the 1864 election, but 1865 will be dealing with the post-war issues, mostly around things like economics, loss, and the future of the ceded territories.

In the 1864 year in review chapters we will be seeing a lot of how that's managed for Britain!
 
Honestly, this timeline has been so good but every time I read about General Bragg I can’t help but pity every soldier under his command because Jesus Christ is the man a pretty atrocious field commander
 
Honestly, this timeline has been so good but every time I read about General Bragg I can’t help but pity every soldier under his command because Jesus Christ is the man a pretty atrocious field commander

Well, he wasn't completely atrocious. Not the best, but certainly not the worst. It was very lucky for the Confederacy he wasn't in command at the start of the war at least...
 
Well, he wasn't completely atrocious. Not the best, but certainly not the worst. It was very lucky for the Confederacy he wasn't in command at the start of the war at least...
he’s definitely not the worst, I just held out hope someone like Jackson, Hardee or Cleburne(who is my dark horse pick for arguably one of the best commanders period)
 
Top