Would Jackson have won at Gettysburg?

No. Absolutely not.

These are reasons why Jackson would not have won:

1. The Confederates were worn out. To have continued the attack would have taxed thier strength to the point that it would have snapped. Even Jackson would have given his men a few minutes rest, and by then, the Union defense on the hills would have been solidified.

2. Terrain was not in his favor. The Yanks were on a hill, and had good fields of fire that would have killed many troops before even getting within rifle range.

3. The Confederates had taken massive casualties. July 1 was the bloodiest of the 3 days, because entire units were destroyed and the casualties were high.

4. Yanks were pouring in every minute. The build up of forces would have slowed Jackson down sugnificantly, allowing the Union time to press thier advantage of troops.

5. True, the 2nd Corps would not have been broken into two corps, allowing Jackson more men on the field under his personal command. At most, he would have only had 30,000 men at the start of the battle, and he would have been facing several Union Corps (at least 2, if not more) numbering about 15,000 if there was only 2 Union Corps. Even a succesful attack would have cost the Confederates so dearly, that they would have needed a day to rest, more then enough time for Meade to form good defenses at Philidelphia and Baltimore.

Most people consider Jackson would have succedded where Ewell failed. Would he have? He would have done a better performance. But, if he had failed to carry the heights, then, think of how less men there would have been to attack the following days.

Gettysburg: 1863-2009

Well, Gettysburg is probably the most overhonored place in American History. What do I mean by that? If you ever been there, you can hardly go to any place that is even remotely untouched and left in it's natural state. Now, honors to the brave men is fine. They sacrificed alot for both sides.

But, when I went to Gettysburg, I was bummed out by the hundreds of statues that dotted every couple yards.

Now with that said: Why do people want to desecrate the monuments?! A couple years ago, several Union monuments had been vandalized, one of them lost his arm. Come on people, leave the hallowed places of America be. They stand as monuments of democracy and freedom.

Book Review on Armchair General

It's not Civil War, but, it's cool stuff.

So, in 2007, I wrote a book review for Armchair General Magazine. It's still on the website and it's been 2 years! You can find it at:

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/patriot-battles-book-review.htm

How cool is that?

Army of the Potomac vs. Army of Northern Virginia (MMG Style)

It was a week after the MMG OOB came out before I finally got the MMG OOB to work. This is what was posted on the MadMinute Games Forum.

The fighting began as Texans arrive on the scene and try to attack my dismounted Cavalry. A fierce firefight ensued as both sides called up reeinforcments.

Flanked, the Texans are routed to a small creek while thier Alabamian comrades are routed to a cornfield. Thier commanding officer, trying to stop the rout, rides forth, right into my boys waiting guns. He is killed before he hits the ground.

At this, the Rebels turn and fight again, catch my men in a deadly crossfire with artillery and two brigades. The fighting seesaws back and forth as we both push each other back. Both sides lose many men in point blank duels.

A battery of cannon blasts away dozens of men with grapshot, and a deadly fight ensues over possession of the cannon. Two Irish regiments capture a gun, then a rebel sharpshooter regiment charges them, throwing them into confusion and shoving them from the guns. One last regiment is thrown in, and all six cannons fire at the exact same time, all throwing canister at the same time, and the regiment is thrown back. Finally, I order a cavalry charge, and finally, the battery is taken.

At the same time, the rebels are broken and fall back upon thier reserves. At the same time as I push my Maine Brigade forward and turn thier flanks by advancing on thier rear. But, they run right into 6 regiments of cavalry, and after some fierce fighting, they break and run like chickens.

The rebels are scattered now all over the field, but, they still carry alot of fight. Six times they rout a regiment, then are forced to fall back. During this time, "Phantom Menace" sends a report, ranting about the day is lost, and his Maine brigade needs reeinforcments. He is killed immediatly after the report is recieved.

After the death of him, seven enemy officers are killed in attempts to rally thier men. The enemy breaks, and nearly four regiments are lost and they will cause my men no trouble. Their last artillery battery keeps up a steady fire, trying to save thie army from total disaster. I send my cavalry in another charge, which picks up all but one cannon. It will keep up a pesky fire that does no damage.

Finally, after thirty minutes of pure agony for the rebels, they mount several cavalry charges once again the brave Maine boys. They break, and Chamberlain is killed during this exchange. The Maine boys head for the woods and refuse to come back out until the cavalry is cleared out of thier front.

I send my zouvees against the cavalry, along with an Iron Brigade regiment. Together, they rout the enemy cavalry. During this time, the rebels make one last charge, with a full sized regiment against a badly mangaled cavalry regiment. A classic duel starts, which ends with the rebels in total rout.

With that, major victory!

Score: 10,624
Losses: 3,034
Enemy losses: 2,938

Was the South or North Right

That is probably the biggest of all contreversies when it comes to the Civil War. What most people don't realize is that both sides had excellant points. Let me point out a few I have thought of over the past while (meaning 3 points each side). Let us start with the South.

South:

1. The Founding Fathers had been for the right that man has to speak up against things they feel threatening from the government. Whether they meant rebillion when the North had not yet really taken away rights is questionable.

2. The Constitution did not condemn seccesion.

3. There had not been a true definition given over the power the state level governments had compared to the central government.

North:

1. The nation had been made centralized for the purpose of perserving democracy and defnding the common man from tyrany. Had the South succedded in breaking away, democracy would have failed and the common man would lose his rights, especially since power hungry nations would have gobbled up the remnants of the United States.

2. The Constitution did not support seccesion.

3. Many in the South were leaving to keep thier slaves. That was not a legit reason to leave the Union, and the North had the right to treat the South as traitors, since they were techinically that.

Conclusion: I think overall the North was right, but, the South sticking up for themselves allowed the Nation to define what was what and what would become of the new Union created.

I Corps Commander

Mad Minute Games, when they were making an OOB (Order of Battle) for all members of thier site for the game, Take Command 2, they asked all members to put what they would like to command. I love the game and decided to try my luck at getting a command.

I asked if I could be the commander of the I Corps of the Army of the Potomac, and it was amazing when I played it for the first time and saw myself leading troops into combat.

They reorganized it over the past year, and since I've been unable to play it, promoted another man in my stead. But, they promised me a command when I am able to return to playing; hopefully my old command.

Was Hooker Drunk at Chancellorsville

Now, it is common knowledge that Joseph Hooker was a drinker. But, new information is of the opinion that Hooker was not drunk at Chancellorsville. Unearthed in recent years is some things that point to Hooker not being drunk.

1. Hooker swore off liquor arely days before his Chancellorsville Campaign. This would explain his 'losing nerve' which migh have been withdrawls!

2. Hooker did not make clear choices and this is a sign of most alcholics going off the booze. They can't think clearly.

3. Before Chancellorsville, he was known as a stout fighter.

4. Hooker threw up violently during the battle of Chancellorsville, something that happens to addicts going off booze.

4. After Chancellorsville, during Chattanoga, he was again fighting like he once did.

5. Hooker's own reason why he lost gives us a clue to he was going through withdrawls: "I was not hurt by a shell and I was not drunk. For once I lost confidence in Hooker, and that is all there is to it." What man leaving his booze has faith in himself? He goes crazy because he is trying not to drink, and his body is going crazy on him because it has no liquor.

6. The War Committe itself asked if he was drunk, and one good Reverand Henry Ward Beecher stated that Hooker had abstained from alchol, and the only known treatment for his wond was a tiny bit of whiskey.

7. Colonel Sharpe of the Secret Service said that any man who said Hooker was drunk "lies through his teeth."

8. The ultimate testimonial: Darius Coach in his After Action Report, himself says that it was this very reason he lost: he wasn't drunk!

As such: Hooker was not drunk. He just tried to swear it off at the wrong time.