Mikes question in reverse....

[PatrickDunn]

I'm back....

I think a more "interesting" question ( taken from the last thread)
would be...

If the South...before the end of the war - had FREED it's slaves
and armed them, would the NORTH have been able to continue
with the fighting ? Could Lincoln have sustained his invasion of
the Southern states had the issue of Slavery been taken off of
the table ?

IMHO, the effect of a move like that would have been like
pouring vinegar into milk. I can imagine Federal troops
shooting "freed" black troops in battle.... How interesting
would that have been ?


Jeff

[RickAllen]

Regarding Lincoln, I dont think there is anything he would not resort to.


Regards,

Rick

[PatrickDunn]

Perhaps...

Kind reminds me of the mess Bush got us in, had he known there
were no WMD's he still would have gone ahead with it. "Just do it
and we'll make our case for justification later!!! "

Sad thing is he most likely did.

Him and Abe cut from the same cloth :bounce:

Jeff

[markpeters]

Jeff,

[Teej]

[quote="PatrickDunn"]I'm back....

<Snip>

IMHO, the effect of a move like that would have been like
pouring vinegar into milk. I can imagine Federal troops
shooting "freed" black troops in battle.... How interesting
would that have been ?

What an intriguing scenario. IMO, should that have happened, Lincoln would have gone back to "Plan A," where the goal of the war was to preserve the Union. By this point in the war the only thing that would have satisfied the Lincoln Administration would have been complete capitulation of the Confederacy, also just my opinion.

Regards,
Teej
_________________
"Form platoons! Draw sabers! Charge!"

~J.E.B. Stuart~

[MarylandReb]

It would be interesting to see statistics of how many Union soldiers were fighting to free slaves....I'm sure it would have been pretty low. Think New York draft riots. As well as how many confederates would have stopped fighting if slaves were freed and given arms.
_________________
He who finds no pleasure in a naked sword, a falcon's flight, a noble horse, a beautiful woman, has no real lust for life. (Early German Sword inscription)

Mark

[Teej]

[quote="MarylandReb"]

It would be interesting to see statistics of how many Union soldiers were fighting to free slaves....I'm sure it would have been pretty low. Think New York draft riots. As well as how many confederates would have stopped fighting if slaves were freed and given arms.

All excellent points, Mark, particularly the last one. I would imagine Confederate desertions would have sky-rocketed.

Teej
_________________
"Form platoons! Draw sabers! Charge!"

~J.E.B. Stuart~

[PatrickDunn]

IMHO, more Confederates were fighting because their home were
being invaded than the desire to continue slavery. Just as in the
North, more men were fighting to preserve the Union as opposed
to eliminating Slavery. With the help of Hollywood and a few
historical "revisionsts" slavery has becomes the dominant cause
im most peoples beliefs.

With the flow of blood turned up after Gettysburg, IMHO, Lincoln
would be hard pressed to `hold back those in the north that were
of the opinionto - let them go their own way.

Like I said earlier, Lee supoported the concept of allowing the
blacks into the Army. He said at one point that if they are to
be freed ultimately...it may as well be us doing it. Arm them
and let them fight for their homes. The thought process at that
time was to let Virginia and a few other States allow this thus
NOT giving the impression of the Confederate Government doing
this.

Can you imagine a black Conferedate brigade lined up against
a black Union Brigade ? Any bet's on who would prevail ?


Jeff

[MarylandReb]

Blacks did serve the Confederate army! They just did it by not by carrying arms to any extent. By cooking, working on wagon trains, digging and building fortifications.......this allowed more whites to man the battle lines. I'm sure after the Nat Turner scare and John Brown....not many southerner's were interested in large scale arming of Black Troops. Same on the Union side, while Blacks did actual fighting....many more worked in prison's, did manual labor or were sent west. Unfortunately there was just as much racism on the Union side as on the Confederate side.
_________________
He who finds no pleasure in a naked sword, a falcon's flight, a noble horse, a beautiful woman, has no real lust for life. (Early German Sword inscription)

Mark

[Teej]

[quote="PatrickDunn"]

IMHO, more Confederates were fighting because their home were
being invaded than the desire to continue slavery. Just as in the
North, more men were fighting to preserve the Union as opposed
to eliminating Slavery. With the help of Hollywood and a few
historical "revisionsts" slavery has becomes the dominant cause
im most peoples beliefs.

Sorry, Jeff, I will have to disagree with the above statement but that's really another thread. However, I will say that I go along with whoever said, "secession caused the war and slavery caused secession."

With the flow of blood turned up after Gettysburg, IMHO, Lincoln
would be hard pressed to `hold back those in the north that were
of the opinionto - let them go their own way.

Wouldn't it be fair to say Lincoln had been dealing with this attitude since 1st Manassas?

Like I said earlier, Lee supoported the concept of allowing the
blacks into the Army. He said at one point that if they are to
be freed ultimately...it may as well be us doing it. Arm them
and let them fight for their homes. The thought process at that
time was to let Virginia and a few other States allow this thus
NOT giving the impression of the Confederate Government doing
this.

"Desperate times call for desperate measures" but I still maintain that had Lee's plan been implimented in any real way the results would have been disastrous for all concerned.

Teej
_________________
"Form platoons! Draw sabers! Charge!"

~J.E.B. Stuart~

[MarylandReb]

I agree Teej, white Confederate troops would not have trusted armed Black soldiers. While we can explain away the war wasn't about slavery, it most certainly played a part in it as well social caste, money and greed, sectionalism and many other "ism's" that come to mind. I've read just as many Union accounts of the soldier's total lack of trust and respect for black soldiers, then add the fear of a slave insurrection or uprising to the Confederate soldiers mind.


here's a copy of a letter authored by Lee

http://www.pointsouth.com/csanet/greatmen/lee/arming-slaves.htm
_________________
He who finds no pleasure in a naked sword, a falcon's flight, a noble horse, a beautiful woman, has no real lust for life. (Early German Sword inscription)

Mark

[Teej]

[quote="MarylandReb"]

I agree Teej, white Confederate troops would not have trusted armed Black soldiers. While we can explain away the war wasn't about slavery, it most certainly played a part in it as well social caste, money and greed, sectionalism and many other "ism's" that come to mind. I've read just as many Union accounts of the soldier's total lack of trust and respect for black soldiers, then add the fear of a slave insurrection or uprising to the Confederate soldiers mind.

Mark, I think you may have misunderstood me. The way that I look at it, no matter what other reason is given whether it be economic, state's rights, etc., it always comes back to slavery. The economy of the South was based on slavery, the rights being argued over was the right to own slaves and to carry them into new territories. Whenever you hear the argument that less than 10% of Southerners owned slaves to any great degree you have to remember that the other 90% benefitted in one way or the other from that 10%.


here's a copy of a letter authored by Lee

http://www.pointsouth.com/csanet/greatmen/lee/arming-slaves.htm

Hmm...some interesting letter. Notice that in Lee's plan only the the slave who enlisted would be given immediate freedom while his family would continue in slavery until the end of the war at which time they too would be freed even if the enlistee did not survive. The caveat being that that promise was only good if the enlistee "discharge their duties faithfully." In other words Lee is almost offering a hostage situation to ensure not only "faithful service" from the enlistee but at the same time offers a measure of comfort to the white soldiers with whom they'll be serving. The implication being that the former slave/enlistee will toe the mark for the sake of his family back home. This is just conjecture on my part.

As for fear of slave revolts such as Nat Turner and the John Brown situation. White Southerners lived in perpetual fear of slave revolts or rumors of slave revolt to the point that it was almost a way of life for them However, Brown was a different story. IMO, I think it was his martyrdom by the abolitionists and Northern press that, right or wrong, gave Southerners the impression that should the worst case scenario happen, they could expect no protection from their government.

Teej
_________________
"Form platoons! Draw sabers! Charge!"

~J.E.B. Stuart~

[markpeters]

Teej,

[MarylandReb]

[markpeters]

Mark,

Let's be honest, MARK is a quality name, wherever it's found. :bounce:

Welcome to the group.

Best wishes,

Mark

PS. Your family left England in the 1650s? For goodness sake, why would they want to have done that?