4 hours ago, Duckwing said:

Gettysburg was truly the high watermark of the Confederacy. If Jackson was alive he likely pushes up Cemetery Hill on the 1st day and thus ends the battle.

At that point Lee has the high ground and the tactical defensive/strategically offensive strategy of Longstreet works like a charm.

If, on the 2nd day, Lee listens to Longstreet and goes around the Roundtops, he'll run into 5th and 6th Corps in reserve. Who knows what happens then.

Pickett's charge was just Malvern Hill redux with higher losses of irreplaceable veterans. Lee could have done a Bush, declared victory, and marched around Meade forcing him to make a mistake.

Lots of if then maybes...

There's a lot wrong here.  Now... if you were to argue that had Jackson been there he'd have gone up Culp's Hill on the first day, then you might be able to build an argument.  Having Culp's Hill likely would have derailed the defensive position that the Union put together between Day 1 and Day 2.   Jackson's corps was taken over by Ewell, partly... and the rest was taken over by A.P. Hill, when a new corps was created.

33 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

I'll give my take on why the US has a such high level of anger and frustration. There's obviously a myriad of issues at play, but IMO the greatest culprit is the American higher education system. Critical thinking and the Socratic method have been the bedrock of the modern enlightenment age. However, our educational system has perverted the idea of critical thinking over the past 30 years or so. Critical thinking has now devolved into simply being critical. In short, look at a subject matter and find things to criticize. This subtle, yet profound change in our educational system has produced a society of people that constantly need to find the fault in anything and everything in life. If anyone is interested more in this, I recommend the Coddling of the American Mind.

I agree in part, although it is not even close to the only reason. Society (in general) and social media (in particular) seems to be inundated with critics who never achieved any level of higher education.

12 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

I'll give my take on why the US has a such high level of anger and frustration. There's obviously a myriad of issues at play, but IMO the greatest culprit is the American higher education system. Critical thinking and the Socratic method have been the bedrock of the modern enlightenment age. However, our educational system has perverted the idea of critical thinking over the past 30 years or so. Critical thinking has now devolved into simply being critical. In short, look at a subject matter and find things to criticize. This subtle, yet profound change in our educational system has produced a society of people that constantly need to find the fault in anything and everything in life. If anyone is interested more in this, I recommend the Coddling of the American Mind.

Well, the college educated are not the people currently rioting, killing unarmed suspects, denying the effectiveness of vaccines, the existence of a pandemic, protesting wearing masks, or marching with guns on state capitols. 

There are some larger problems. Some of these problems are institutional.  I agree that critical thinking skills are important.  There is fundamentally a problem with discourse in this country.   Every issue, it seems, needs to be highly polarizing and politicized.  On issues like the murder of George Floyd, we should be able to acknowledge the criminal acts of the police officers involved and also acknowledge that not all cops are ****.  

5 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

There's a lot wrong here.  Now... if you were to argue that had Jackson been there he'd have gone up Culp's Hill on the first day, then you might be able to build an argument.  Having Culp's Hill likely would have derailed the defensive position that the Union put together between Day 1 and Day 2.   Jackson's corps was taken over by Ewell, partly... and the rest was taken over by A.P. Hill, when a new corps was created.

Are we having an is Stonewall Jackson an elite General debate on the blog today? 

42 minutes ago, justrelax said:

Here's a link to the William Whiting essay on the War Powers that I mentioned elsewhere. Not a bad read. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/aew5618.0001.001/1?view=image&size=100

Thanks - now my productivity is really shot this afternoon. 

1 hour ago, justrelax said:

In simplest terms, all the Confederacy had to do was not lose, whereas the Union had to win.

Ehhh.  I think that’s largely from the view of the war as contained in the A of Potomac v A of Northern VA.  New Orleans fell in 62, with it the Mississippi. Confederate navy never mattered after Hampton roads and the blockade starved the south. Sherman showed that a northern army could be supplied and rip up the south. It was never going to happen. 

4 hours ago, Duckwing said:

Gettysburg was truly the high watermark of the Confederacy. If Jackson was alive he likely pushes up Cemetery Hill on the 1st day and thus ends the battle.

At that point Lee has the high ground and the tactical defensive/strategically offensive strategy of Longstreet works like a charm.

If, on the 2nd day, Lee listens to Longstreet and goes around the Roundtops, he'll run into 5th and 6th Corps in reserve. Who knows what happens then.

Pickett's charge was just Malvern Hill redux with higher losses of irreplaceable veterans. Lee could have done a Bush, declared victory, and marched around Meade forcing him to make a mistake.

Lots of if then maybes...

 

 

 

If Lee had won more completely on Day One at Gettysburg - which he did - if you isolate Day One it was one of the greatest victories of the war for the Confederates, Meade would simply have withdrawn to a prepared position at Pipe Creek and let Lee batter himself to pieces against it, as he did on Days Two and Three at Gettysburg.

8 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

Are we having an is Stonewall Jackson an elite General debate on the blog today? 

We could, but unfortunately, he couldn't last the whole war.  Such is the nature of war.  

9 minutes ago, NCiggles said:

Well, the college educated are not the people currently rioting, killing unarmed suspects, denying the effectiveness of vaccines, the existence of a pandemic, protesting wearing masks, or marching with guns on state capitols. 

There are some larger problems. Some of these problems are institutional.  I agree that critical thinking skills are important.  There is fundamentally a problem with discourse in this country.   Every issue, it seems, needs to be highly polarizing and politicized.  On issues like the murder of George Floyd, we should be able to acknowledge the criminal acts of the police officers involved and also acknowledge that not all cops are ****.  

The devolving of the higher educational system doesn't just affect those that attend college. It creates a system that infects the whole of society from the top down

1 hour ago, ToastJenkins said:

We are still relatively young as a country and we have high expectations

You know it's almost like the whole country are Eagle's fans at heart and don't know it.

5 minutes ago, QBhunter58 said:

I agree in part, although it is not even close to the only reason. Society (in general) and social media (in particular) seems to be inundated with critics who never achieved any level of higher education.

IMO, social media and the media in general are the #1 reason why our country and society is taking a dump.  Add to that a higher education system that is failing us and it just gets worse.  Social media is straight up poison.  Go on twitter and look at tweets. 99% of people who tweet, especially about controversial topics have no respect for the language, their fellow man or what anyone thinks anymore.  Facebook is just as bad .  Then you have the media who does nothing but divide our country.  They could be the glue that mends our country but instead the media continues to rip and tear and do anything possible to add flames to the fire.  

I also don't know if this comes from the everyone gets a trophy mindset but no one wants to admit when they are wrong.  Everyone thinks they are right all of the time.  Not only that but it's  I'm right, you're wrong so I'm better than you and you are a POS human.  People on social media are full of such hate.  There's also no more critical thinking.  Nobody wants to sit back and look at all of the facts and with a clear head make a statement or decision.  People are so reactionary anymore with their thoughts and beliefs.  Conversation and debate is non existent on social media.  It's also one of the reasons I come to the EMB for conversation because the majority of us on here seem to actually talk out our thoughts and feelings on all things be it Eagles football or hot topics.  

I would love to see where our country would be today if Facebook and twitter were never invented. The good things they provide are far outweighed by all of the negatives. 

24 minutes ago, Allhaildawk said:

Ehhh.  I think that’s largely from the view of the war as contained in the A of Potomac v A of Northern VA.  New Orleans fell in 62, with it the Mississippi. Confederate navy never mattered after Hampton roads and the blockade starved the south. Sherman showed that a northern army could be supplied and rip up the south. It was never going to happen. 

I will freely acknowledge that after Lincoln won reelection the Confederacy was doomed, but that was November 1864. I would go further, and say that the fall of Atlanta doomed the Confederacy, but that was at the beginning of September 1864. Sure, the blockade deprived the South of a great deal, but it hardly starved it. It was the fall of Vicksburg, not the taking of New Orleans, that closed the Mississippi. The port was closed in 1862 but a steady stream of supplies, particularly horses, crossed the river to supply Confederate forces until Grant took Vicksburg. As regards this last item, I see the fight at Champion Hill as one of the great turning points of the war. When Pemberton lost that one Vicksburg was doomed, but it was a near thing.

24 minutes ago, justrelax said:

If Lee had won more completely on Day One at Gettysburg - which he did - if you isolate Day One it was one of the greatest victories of the war for the Confederates, Meade would simply have withdrawn to a prepared position at Pipe Creek and let Lee batter himself to pieces against it, as he did on Days Two and Three at Gettysburg.

I don't know about that. It all depends on Lee and Meade and their strategic view. Meade falling back to Pipe Creek was extremely likely...but would Lee have battered his head against it? Not sure. Lee was by nature an aggressive general but why would he attack a prepared position when he could have manuvered Meade out of it? 

 

 

 

 

46 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

The devolving of the higher educational system doesn't just affect those that attend college. It creates a system that infects the whole of society from the top down

Never been to college, I am a conservative for the record. I don't need college to tell me that it's wrong to choke a guy to death that is already in restraints, that I shouldn't riot or steal from business owners in retaliation for things that the police did , I wear a mask in public where I supposed to and can't figure out how that is a "violation of my rights" when I'm wearing it to protect others and consider it one of the least political thing about this whole damn virus.I know that hating people on skin color or for any reason is wrong. It's not education or the lack thereof it's pretty much an "I don't care about anyone else just me"attitude. I would go into the reasons why I think some of society feels that way but I will keep that debate out of the blog.

But I do hate the Cowboys

15 minutes ago, Duckwing said:

I don't know about that. It all depends on Lee and Meade and their strategic view. Meade falling back to Pipe Creek was extremely likely...but would Lee have battered his head against it? Not sure. Lee was by nature an aggressive general but why would he attack a prepared position when he could have manuvered Meade out of it? 

 

 

 

 

That's what he did at Gettysburg, after all. His blood was up. That aside, Lee was in hostile territory. He was by nature, as you say, an aggressive general. His purpose in comin north, protestations aside, was to smash the A of P. Well, now it was in front of him. We should recall, too, that Lee was north of Meade. A Union army was between him and home. He would have to fight it and he wanted to fight it. If he smashed it he could turn on Philadelphia, or New York but only if he smashed it.

What might have happened is unknowable but I think Lee would have followed Meade and attacked.

1 hour ago, NCiggles said:

Well, the college educated are not the people currently rioting, killing unarmed suspects, denying the effectiveness of vaccines, the existence of a pandemic, protesting wearing masks, or marching with guns on state capitols. 

There are some larger problems. Some of these problems are institutional.  I agree that critical thinking skills are important.  There is fundamentally a problem with discourse in this country.   Every issue, it seems, needs to be highly polarizing and politicized.  On issues like the murder of George Floyd, we should be able to acknowledge the criminal acts of the police officers involved and also acknowledge that not all cops are ****.  

I cant recommend this video enough. I posted it once in CVON but it applies everywhere on this board, and everywhere in this country. Dont let the thumbnail fool you its not just about masking or not masking. Its about the ability to have productive debates, and respect for both sides in general. I thought this was great.

Dont be scared off by 40 minutes, the main talk is about 23 and then he does some Q&A, though I enjoyed that too. 

 

4 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I cant recommend this video enough. I posted it once in CVON but it applies everywhere on this board, and everywhere in this country. Dont let the thumbnail fool you its not just about masking or not masking. Its about the ability to have productive debates, and respect for both sides in general. I thought this was great.

Dont be scared off by 40 minutes, the main talk is about 23 and then he does some Q&A, though I enjoyed that too. 

 

TL/DW

6 minutes ago, greend said:

Never been to college, I am a conservative for the record. I don't need college to tell me that it's wrong to choke a guy to death that is already in restraints, that I shouldn't riot or steal from business owners in retaliation for things that the police did , I wear a mask in public where I supposed to and can't figure out how that is a "violation of my rights" when I'm wearing it to protect others and consider it one of the least political thing about this whole damn virus.I know that hating people on skin color or for any reason is wrong. It's not education or the lack thereof it's pretty much an "I don't care about anyone else just me"attitude. I would go into the reasons why I think some of society feels that way but I will keep that debate out of the blog.

But I do hate the Cowboys

I don't disagree with any of that, but that wasn't point. We, as a society, are taught/conditioned to find something to complain about. Regardless of the subject matter or topic, people often find it necessary to mentally search for a way to tear down said subject matter. We've become conditioned to criticize everything.

47 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

The devolving of the higher educational system doesn't just affect those that attend college. It creates a system that infects the whole of society from the top down

I will take a look at the book.  I think it's probably too complex an issue to lay the blame on one thing.  Some of the problems like racism and our response to this issue have been longstanding.  

32 minutes ago, Duckwing said:

I don't know about that. It all depends on Lee and Meade and their strategic view. Meade falling back to Pipe Creek was extremely likely...but would Lee have battered his head against it? Not sure. Lee was by nature an aggressive general but why would he attack a prepared position when he could have manuvered Meade out of it? 

 

 

 

 

Funny you ask that... that's exactly what Lee did at Gettysburg.  Meade had the position... and Lee went right after him, two straight days and more than decimated his army.   (sadly, the word decimated is incorrectly used as a complete annihilation, or near to it - it's 'only' the loss of 10% of the troops.  It was an old Roman discipline tool used when Roman generals thought that their army had performed dreadfully, almost cowardly.  They would line up and every 10th man would be executed.)

Lee bashed his army against the flanks on Day 2, losing a great many men with nothing to show for it, and followed it up with the blunder of Pickett's Charge (which is really Lee's charge, as Pickett was merely following orders) and bashed his army against the middle.  

 

Lee could have maneuvered around the right of the Union and fought on different ground... but Lee got excited and let the euphoria of Day 1 override reason.

2 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

I don't disagree with any of that, but that wasn't point. We, as a society, are taught/conditioned to find something to complain about. Regardless of the subject matter or topic, people often find it necessary to mentally search for a way to tear down said subject matter. We've become conditioned to criticize everything.

I don't know.  It seems people have complained about things for a long long time.  Like for as long as there have been things, people have complained about them.  

1 minute ago, NCiggles said:

I don't know.  It seems people have complained about things for a long long time.  Like for as long as there have been things, people have complained about them.  

Of course. It would be silly to suggest that complaining is unique to America or modernity. What is unique, however, is the phenomena of making an argument, just for the sake of making an argument, for the purpose of discrediting something. 

10 minutes ago, Giddyunc said:

I don't disagree with any of that, but that wasn't point. We, as a society, are taught/conditioned to find something to complain about. Regardless of the subject matter or topic, people often find it necessary to mentally search for a way to tear down said subject matter. We've become conditioned to criticize everything.

Want to know what cures some of that? Going through hardships. We've had it good for a long time in America regardless of who's in power. For the most part people are well taken care of here so it causes people to knit pick some. I think we're spoiled. My grandparents and parents went through the depression they hardly ever ****ed about anything. And the spoiling honestly started with my generation (Just past Vietnam war and nothing since that hasn't been volunteer to do my dirty work) I've had it pretty good in my 58 years.

2 hours ago, Giddyunc said:

I'll give my take on why the US has a such high level of anger and frustration. There's obviously a myriad of issues at play, but IMO the greatest culprit is the American higher education system. Critical thinking and the Socratic method have been the bedrock of the modern enlightenment age. However, our educational system has perverted the idea of critical thinking over the past 30 years or so. Critical thinking has now devolved into simply being critical. In short, look at a subject matter and find things to criticize. This subtle, yet profound change in our educational system has produced a society of people that constantly need to find the fault in anything and everything in life. If anyone is interested more in this, I recommend the Coddling of the American Mind.

I agree with this to a point. Real critical thinking is the ability to discern important information from non-important information and then have the ability to act on that information. It is not about being critical, which is a different thing, that's like red teaming/adversarial thinking, which can involve critical thought but is not comprised completely of it.  Most of the college courses I see still have a basis in critical thought, but the people pervert it through follow-on thought processes/biases, to include instructors, though there does seem to be a prevalent focus on identifying fallacious/misleading/biased information vs. identifying important information to take away, which is what I think you're getting at. Sorry for the rambling. I do agree that America, in it's current polarized/adversarial state, is almost completely devoid of true critical thought. I think our 2 party political system has created a very us vs them environment which foments discord and has been given an increasingly large platform through media and social media, both of which are highly biased and filled with misinformation. So if you combine the lack of true critical thought and a highly biased/misinformed populace that has been weaponized against each other, you get this environment.

Union owes its GB victory to ,Joshua Chamberlain, he fought off a brutal attack on little round top, his troops ran out of amo, so fixed bayonets and fought confederates off....if not for Chamberlain and his troops,union is out flanked ,and rolled up...they would have turned unions own artillery, on union troops.