Civil War outcome...

Jun 2017
2,881
Connecticut
#12
Who had a stronger navy back then? The Union or (the Confederacy + France)?
The Union but the CSA created Ironclads first and before New Orleans fell had a place to make them. Union took away this advantage very quickly and the naval supremacy was never seriously challenged ever again(and if was only in doubt if the Virginia had remained unbeatable and kept just plowing through obsolete ships of the line like paper and this wasn't realistic once the US started producing Ironclads which I think several weeks or even days) . I tend to focus my fascination on naval history a bit later though and don't really have an idea about the French. If I had to guess I'd say the French and CSA(relatively non existent) would lose if only because I'd expect the US to have prioritized their navy more, the location and the UK's two power standard but I don't really know.

Only reason I know anything about this is because the Ironclads are one of topics in history I'm just drawn to. US sued the UK for making ironclads for the CSA(Brits like playing it off it as was private industry but said private industry was a huge military contractor, and regardless they paid a settlement over the damage said ships did). Anyway not sure the French development on ironclads but I know it was like the dreadnought where all the major powers had them within a few years.

And this has motivated to do some more research on the topic. Thank you.

But yeah this question still needs to be predicated on the fact if the French were joining the war the CSA basically would be right on the door of winning anyway. It's not like the French were just going to recognize the rebellion in 1861. Similar to what happened to us with the revolution, it required several years and the defeat of Burgoyne's plan for the French to put pen to paper cause they realized we weren't going to be defeated with or without their help for several years. Bless the French for helping us, but the UK had a very small path to winning in 1777 especially in the Northern states. If the CSA had reached a similar position which they arguably were close to at points in 1862,1863 they would have been recognized.
 

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,434
San Antonio, Tx
#13
Yea the North famously had so many units in reserve at the end of the war that many never saw any combat at all. I just wonder if France had provided troops and resources if things would be different. I know that the South had arguably better military commanders in charge, and if they had more manpower and resources they may have had enough to win.
When General Grant came from the West, it was curtains for the South. Lee was really only interested in Virginia and his “invasions of the North” never amounted to enough to turn the tide.
 

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,434
San Antonio, Tx
#14
The Union but the CSA created Ironclads first and before New Orleans fell had a place to make them. Union took away this advantage very quickly and the naval supremacy was never seriously challenged ever again(and if was only in doubt if the Virginia had remained unbeatable and kept just plowing through obsolete ships of the line like paper and this wasn't realistic once the US started producing Ironclads which I think several weeks or even days) . I tend to focus my fascination on naval history a bit later though and don't really have an idea about the French. If I had to guess I'd say the French and CSA(relatively non existent) would lose if only because I'd expect the US to have prioritized their navy more, the location and the UK's two power standard but I don't really know.

Only reason I know anything about this is because the Ironclads are one of topics in history I'm just drawn to. US sued the UK for making ironclads for the CSA(Brits like playing it off it as was private industry but said private industry was a huge military contractor, and regardless they paid a settlement over the damage said ships did). Anyway not sure the French development on ironclads but I know it was like the dreadnought where all the major powers had them within a few years.

And this has motivated to do some more research on the topic. Thank you.

But yeah this question still needs to be predicated on the fact if the French were joining the war the CSA basically would be right on the door of winning anyway. It's not like the French were just going to recognize the rebellion in 1861. Similar to what happened to us with the revolution, it required several years and the defeat of Burgoyne's plan for the French to put pen to paper cause they realized we weren't going to be defeated with or without their help for several years. Bless the French for helping us, but the UK had a very small path to winning in 1777 especially in the Northern states. If the CSA had reached a similar position which they arguably were close to at points in 1862,1863 they would have been recognized.
The big differences between the Monitor and the Merrimack basically revolved around the fact that the MOnitor was a big step towards modern ironclad naval ships and old thinking. With its revolving turret the Monitor was clearly the superior vessel. It is quite true that neither vessel won a victory here, but the path to the future was clear. The US Navy must have agreed because for a number of years the North continued making more monitors while the Merrimack style ships were a dead end.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,742
SoCal
#15
When General Grant came from the West, it was curtains for the South. Lee was really only interested in Virginia and his “invasions of the North” never amounted to enough to turn the tide.
Do you think that Virginia would have fallen much sooner had Lee remained in the Union Army?
 
Oct 2009
3,523
San Diego
#17
What would of been the outcome of the Civil War had the South been able to get aid from the French during the war?
They would have Lost.

The notion held by the South that if they could attain recognition from Britain or France that they might prevail reveals the stupidity of their 'thinking'.
The Union blockade could have just as easily sunk French ships bringing aid as they did Southern ships exporting cotton. The Civil war resulted in the Union having the world's most advanced navy- there was literally nothing the French could offer that could have gotten past turreted breach loading monitors.

The South was fated to lose. The people of the northern states did NOT want to have an enemy nation sharing north america, and they had both the numbers, and the industrial power to have their way- regardless of any foreign aid.
 

Menshevik

Ad Honorem
Dec 2012
9,240
here
#20
If French support makes it so that the war is still being fought by 1866, I wonder if the Chassepot rifle could be supplied to the CSA in any substantial numbers? The next question would be is if that would be any kind of significant help?
 
Likes: Futurist