Post
Experience Project iOS Android Apps | Download EP for your Mobile Device
Rampant corruption and black marketing of commissary stores by unscrupulous quartermasters of the Confederate States Army left Rebel soldiers starved and hungry, unable to fight at full strength. Did it doom them in the end ?
Studmuffin11 Studmuffin11 36-40, M 10 Answers Jan 9, 2013 in Community

Your Response

Cancel

How is this a question? There are countless accounts of the war and your question is designed to filter racist. What would you ask if the south had won?

Best Answer

Something to do with to much inbreeding too.

Best Answer

probably yes indeed the laugh is on the Rebs who went down based on their corruption

Best Answer

I think it had more too do with the fact that the south was almost entirely Agricultural rather than the Solid Manufacturing ba<x>se the north had. Plus the North had tons of railroad, way more people, Far more wealth, and economic strength.<br />
<br />
Once the North got their sh*t together after the first year the south never stood a chance. Even if the CSA had managed to hold the mason dixon and become their own country they didn't have the technology, ports, or infrastructure to survive on their own without trade with the north.<br />
<br />
Anyone who says otherwise is either lying or working off whitewashed/southern sources.

Best Answer

actually, the North not only had more technology than the south, but also more food crops than the south. People don't realize how much food crops were grown in northern states like Iowa, Michigan, Illinois, Kansas, NY, NJ, Mass. Minn.

Best Answer

I didn't mean the south grew the nation's food, I meant the north's main economic strength was in manufacturing, trade, and innovation, compared to the south's heavy reliance on a slave labor based agricultural economy. That was my point.

Best Answer

okay another thing that hurt the south is that their railroads were not of the same standard gauge so at every major city they spent precious time transferring to a different track or train while their soldiers were needed on the battlefield

Best Answer

That and the fact that they had less than ten percent of the nations rails didn't help either.

Best Answer
1 More Response

They were doomed even before corruption could set in. They were doomed by their agricultural economy.

Best Answer

I would say that it had more to do with the lack of supplies in general. Yes, there was corruption but that was on both sides. They were DANGEROUSLY close to winning the battle of Gettysburg and marching right into Washington. If they'd had the same supplies and manpower as the North they probably would have crushed them.<br />
<br />
Luckily that isn't how it played out.

Best Answer

Nope the Union army under Meade at Gettysburg was much larger than the Rebel one and they would have called out the state troops of NY,NJ, PA, DE, MD also to stop Lee's army. The Union army would have a strength of about 225,000 men with that call up and if they lost at Gettysburg they would have regrouped and sought another spot to stop the Rebs so no the Rebels would have still not made it to Washington. Plus there were two more Union armies in Virginia, the Army of the James under Butler-45,000 men and the Army of Virginia -about 100,000 men that could have marched up and blocked Lee within days before he would have even got close to Washington

Best Answer

Yes, that generally being my point that the South lost the war because they lacked supplies and men. I am well aware that the union army was much bigger however as you admit much of the Union army was out of position to defend at Gettysburg. Lee's troops came dangerously close to flanking the army at Little Round Top. There's no saying exactly WHAT would have happened had they been successful but if you look at the history of prior battles the union troops broke and fled many times when flanked or divided. If that had happened and the southern troops had moved quickly enough they could have taken Washington before the could swung the other armies up to have intercept them.
Did it happen? No. Would it have definitely have happened that way if the line had broke? Absolutely not. Is it possible? Yes, many historians have speculated on that being one of the most likely results had the South taken the hill at the battle of Gettysburg.

Best Answer

Lee's army would not have made it to Washington before the union forces because Gettysburg is at least 100 miles from there and besides Washington had a garrison force there of at least 45,000 more troops with hundreds of cannon. not including militia from the area and cavalry Lee had no chance

Best Answer

I don't think any one aspect is ever the cause of a defeat, but that probably contribute.<br />
and id say the cause of tht causenwas the deeply ingrained culturenof what I'd call economic and technical laziness as a result of an econmy ba<x>sed on slavery instead of innovation.<br />
<br />
I think at that time the north was automating with reapers as one example, producing many times the output of food and materiel what the south could hope to produce.

Best Answer

the south had plenty of food its just that it wasn't getting to the soldiers in large enough quantities and on time. many corrupt quartermasters would hoard the goods and sell them in secret. None of the top Rebel brass did much about it.

Best Answer

no but "its"*** corruption may have. God thwarts the plans of the wicked.

Best Answer

? So the NYC plane attackers werent wicked? Logiicfail

Best Answer

ultimately, He does, in my OPINION

Best Answer

Related Questions