Fredericksburg And Pickett's Charge, The Two Biggest Oofs Of The American Civil War
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ส.ค. 2024
- Support My Channel! Sign up 🏰 Vikings War Of Clans and get 💫 “Novice’s Relocation” item and 200 💰 Gold for FREE
➤ bit.ly/2BxnSVv
A look at the two big OOfs of the American Civil War and an attempt to decide which one was made in better faith. This week, we laugh at the “Bozo the Clown” of the Civil War, General Ambrose Burnside with those absolute units on the side of his face. Along with Lee’s overconfidence and various armchair historians like myself that judge the actions of military leaders while having absolutely no real world experience with 19th century warfare. All while taking a look at two large mistakes in the American Civil War: Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg and Marye's Heights at Fredericksburg and seeing which one had a better chance of success. Enjoy!
Thank you to Daniel Faas for the research work.
Intro Music:
Curb Your Enthusiasm Theme - Josh Laird
• Curb Your Enthusiasm T...
Outro Music:
Atlas - Normundy
• NORMUNDY - Atlas (Offi...
March:
Frog In The Well
• Frog in the Well
Clips of Note:
The American Civil War: Every Day (2.0): EmperorTigerstar
• The American Civil War...
Civil War Union March to Battle: Ethan Lowery
• Video
Union Army Marching to Battle 155 Battle Of Gettysburg: Donald Warner
• Video
Confederate Infantry on the March: General Ripper1964
• Confederate Infantry o...
150th Fredericksburg Reenactment - Sunken Road and Marye's Heights: Discerning History
• 150th Fredericksburg R...
Battle of Fredericksburg Reenactment - Sentry Box Historic Home: C-SPAN
• Battle of Fredericksbu...
Civil War Reenactment Gettysburg 2017: CraigShipp.com
• Civil War Reenactment ...
Gettysburg 2008 Civil War Reenactment ANV Marching to Battle: James Marshall
• Gettysburg 2008 Civil ...
Visiting Rebel & Union Camps: Irving P. Feldspar
• Visiting Rebel & Union...
Battle of White Oak Road Civil War reenactment in Neshaminy Park 2015: mmffff
• Battle of White Oak Ro...
Gettysburg Reenactment (Pickett's Charge): Metro Meteor
• Gettysburg Reenactment...
P.O.Box:
Potential History
P.O. Box
524 Beech Grove, IN,
46107
Support me on:
Patreon: / potentialhistory
PayPal: potentialhistory@gmail.com
Connect with me on:
Twitter: Ta...
Facebook: www.facebook.c...
#Gettysburg #Fredericksburg #oof
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA W2D1 | Fall | ต่อเนื่อง ในสัปดาห์สอง](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ElcO9uC_Dbk/mqdefault.jpg)
“General Pickett, you must look to your division.”
“General... I have no division.”
Pickett never forgave Lee for July 3rd. After visiting an ailing Lee after the war, Pickett turned to a friend and said as much.
Pickett was looking at Lee like "...General Lee, too soon".
WarlordofBritannia I read somewhere that Pickett told John singleton mosby that Lee killed his division at Gettysburg mosby told Pickett that the charge made him famous
Warlordofbritannia I read somewhere that Pickett told this to John singleton mosby that Lee killed his division at Gettysburg mosby told Pickett that the charge made him famous
That is the movie Gettysburg... In 5 seconds.
"Plan it well"
"This is a charge over an open field"
"PLAN IT WELL"
How to plan a charge well? Well... hhaha..uhmm. JUST CHARGE AT EM ALREADY! Blood for da bluud gud, skulls for da skull toilet...
@@Mestari1Gaming lol
And over fifty years later, brave men will again be commanded to advance at walking pace over open ground towards fortified positions. But this time, there will be machine guns.
@@innocentoctave and after 8 million people die in that fiasco, the world Will, finally, get the notion that JUST MAYBE, it's Not such a hot idea to charge headfirst into accurate sustained fire
@@taloob493 And then there's D-Day lol Where that was literally the whole plan.
Granted, it was an allied victory, but the overall plan was to throw waves of troops at the beaches until they secure a foothold.
"It started out as a minor scrap with a few militias and the next thing i know i am taking half the union army" I don't know whether to breathe, laugh or cry
Believe it or not, shit like this happened A LOT in warefare....Even today with modern "netcentric" battlefield management tech, it STILL happens.....It's called fog of war........
Things do happen general, that is why we have orders, is it possible that you misunderstood them ?
Thing is, he probably didn't misunderstood them....But the situation sometimes happens in such a way or so fast that he just got caught up in it and the order became redundant or obsolete! As it happened in the beginning of the Battle of Gettysburg....When Henry Heath got caught up cause he had no idea Union Cavalry under Buford was in the area waiting! Yes, you can blame this on Gen. Stuart, who was out joy riding in the North, leaving Lee's army almost totally blind in essence!
@@StryderK Which is why intel is so so important
StryderK Yawn. I’m so tired of hearing all of the blame shifted onto Stuart for every mistake made at Gettysburg. Yes, his absence was not helpful, but there were mistakes made across the entire high command of the AoNV. Getting “tangled” with the Union army didn’t fall from the sky on Heth, and the entire plan for the day was just asking for trouble. Why he or A.P. Hill thought sending two whole divisions out on “reconnaissance”, distant from support from the rest of the army, is a mystery. And when the “militia” proved too much for him initially, rather than step back and consider the consequences of being wrong, he went ahead and deployed his division. Fog of war is only a valid excuse when you aren’t deliberately disobeying orders. Rag about Stuart all day if you like, but what happened that morning was carelessly orchestrated by the Third Corps.
During the charge at Gettysburg, Confederates could hear the Feds chanting "Fredericksburg!". Says something about your plan when your enemy is mocking you for repeating a failure they themselves tried to pull off.
Was probably more like a "Remember Fredricksburg!" war chant, honestly.
@@billclearwater2783 Still, they recognized how the tables were turned and the Confederates were walking into the same kind of situation.
Wait so the Fedbois were fighting Confederates?
@@Predator20357 Always have been.
The film depicts this.
Moral of the story: I have the high ground, don’t try it.
Wing Hung Yuen but what about Battle of Breed's/Bunker's Hill of the American Revolution?
Lol.....I didn't know that Obi-wan Kenobi was in the American Civil War XD ;D;D;D;D
andrew lee Tbh with his facial hair and polite demeanor he’d probably fit right in.
Oh no, I'm not brave enough for politics
Union troops took high ground at Missionary ridge in battle of Chattanooga in late November of 1863, though, even though it wasn't even ordered (frontal assault was meant to just be demonstration,not full assault,but troops decided in heat of battle to storm the enemy and overrun them, although that was already possible because Confederate army was already being rolled on its flanks,so there is that.
"hey diddle diddle lets charge straight up the middle" -Robert E Lee
TBF, he attacked both flanks of the enemy formation the previous day so he expected them to have strengthened those sides at the expense of the middle. He also sent Stuart's cavalry to charge the enemy's rear at the same time as Pickett's charge, but Union cavalry stopped Stuart cold.
@@ElBandito F
It was his favorite tactic.
@@ElBandito Longstreet also designed the assault to start out over a mile in length, then once smoke began to obscure vision, the flank units were to oblique toward the center, so they'd hopefully have a powerful assault line a mile long compressed to an assault column half maybe quarter mile length, to punch through a 'thought to be' weakened center by the time they got within a couple hundred yards. About the only thing that went right about the attack is that the soldiers carried it out. Everything else designed to support and help the attack failed to do so.
Who the Hell put Lee in charge?
“Outdated tactics with modern weapons”
. . .
_glances at Europe, 1914_
They considered America a backwater nation att. Yeah, that was a massive mistake on their end. Germany, at least, paid more attention, propping up some ideas for tactics and anti-trench weapons that would eventually turn into stormtroopers and mustard gas, among others.
@@warmech11
I'm just sort of an enthusiast of that war. With how medieval the higher-ups thought clashing with the technology at the time and how technology evolved as the war went on, as well as the depressing and cruel reality that both sides fought for next to nothing save for maybe territory, it just seems like a perfect setting to fantasize about with respect to the actual events at least.
I don't blame Battlefield 1 for taking an interest in the more experimental weapons and armor (since it _is_ still a video game) and appreciate it hopefully making much more people interested in learning about the war. I even began to wonder about medieval armor mixed with the 19th century look of the early war with more prominent cavalry, a barely-breathable atmosphere, and even drastic war rituals and desperate cults near the likes of Warhammer 40K.
It was just a really interesting time with many possibilities to think about and stories to tell from it, not to mention the horror and hopelessness it seemed to dawn on everyone involved in the frontlines.
It's so fucking ironic! But if Europe general would stop licking their own asses and pull their head out of the hole in the center and just studied the American Civil War in detail, they would've realized what would happen! The later part of the Civil War just like a huge way of God was saying, "SEE WWI?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Take a look here! Cause this is a prelude!!!" The only reason why it didn't last long was the war had already lasted two years and Robert E Lee and the South just didn't have the resources and men...Always a huge focal point in ANY War of Attrition! North has a bottomless pit of men and material and a general named Grant (finally) to use it! And when it did, the South was done! And the trench warfare was what happened when BOTH sides realize that the romantic assaults of the Napoleonic age was over due to modern advances such as rifle muskets, later superseded and replaced by breech loaders. Long range artillery that had range of at least 1 mile and much more selection of ammo such as the deadly cannister shots etc.........The only thing missing was airplanes....But that would soon come enough along with another modern war piece....Tanks.....
@Darth Cronal Tanks were invented by the British in a response to not being able to break the entrenched defensive lines and were only introduced late in the war. The tanks were not at all reliable, many of them breaking down before they even got to where they were supposed to attack. Armored cars existed, but cars need at least half-decent roads and there weren't very many of them. You talk about armored personnel carriers, but don't seem to understand that European nations still relied mostly on horses and dogs to carry equipment wherever the train rails didn't go. This was still true for some parts of the German army in the _second_ world war.
Previously, artillery was mostly direct fire. The importance of indirect fire and the tactics it enables (like the creeping barrage) were completely new at the outbreak of the war or were first used during the war. Artillery was one of the biggest killers in the fields of Northern France and Flanders, probably only seconded by disease through bad hygiene and living among rotting corpses with little food and water for months at a time.
Aerial combat was revolutionized during the war (i.e. the introduction of synchronization between the propeller and the front machine guns). It was never-seen before and had a huge impact on the battlefield. WW1 saw the beginning of strategic bombing of industrial targets and specialization of aircraft into fighters and bombers. It's only by the end of the war that the Entente forces started combined operations of aircraft, armor, artillery and infantry working together to break the German lines.
Not all fronts devolved into static trench warfare. The eastern front, the war in the Balkans and Africa had a lot of movement.
Blue uniforms with bright red pants
"Plans are useless, but planning is indispensable." - Eisenhower
One of those military quotes that are exaggerated but essentially true.
I think a better one is:
“A plan that is not flexible is no plan at all” or however the exact phrasing
@@warlordofbritannia "The tactical result of an engagement forms the base for new strategic decisions because victory or defeat in a battle changes the situation to such a degree that no human acumen is able to see beyond the first battle. In this sense one should understand Napoleon's saying: "I have never had a plan of operations." Therefore no plan of operations extends with any certainty beyond the first contact with the main hostile force." -Von Moltke the Elder, Prussian Field Marshal.
A war can’t be won just by brave and heroic soldiers, although that helps. Logistics aren’t sexy but what good are soldiers with no supplies.
@@Gj23jk2 wow a multi-quote!
@@stevek8829 Me quoting Von Moltke quoting Napoleon, apparently.
“If your a fan of wars further back, say... the time of the Vikings....”
Me: don’t do it....
“YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN VIKINGS WAR OF CLANS”
NOOOOOOOO0000OOO
Glad he’s getting paid tho
DAMMIT MAN
The game that uses Vikings as a buzzword and has nothing else to do with Vikings!
EVERY HISTORY CHANNEL ON TH-cam!!!!
I can't stop laughing at Burnside's card "Some say the real rebellion was his hair rebelling from his head to his face" ... I'm super mature
I always though Picket's Charge was a cavalry charge, and was surprised to find that it was a slow walk across a mile of open ground, towards an enemy dug in behind a stone wall. If you were Union, you had to be unlucky to get wounded. If you were Confederate, you have to be very lucky not to get killed.
There WAS also a cavalry charge planned to come from the other direction to divert Union forces: Union cavalry fended it off.
@@bkjeong4302 I thought it was a cavalry attack too.
@@bkjeong4302 So fun fact guess who was in command of the Union Cavalry one George Armstrong Custer
@@kingofjedi31 Goddamnit
If you've ever been to Gettysburg, you'll instantly notice that Cemetery Ridge is basically the best possible place to kill people from. You've got massive open fields of fire DOWNHILL.
Did I mention this was in July heat?
Fun fact: at Gettysburg, the federal soldiers chanted”Fredericksburg” or “give em the Fredericksburg” because even the army of the Potomac recognized the fact that Pickett’s charge was idiotic
This WAS the same man that nearly started a war with the British a few years earlier!
Gettysburg is a really underrated movie.
The acting and setting is perfect ... the music, and some of the editing is a crime against history!
Pity that Gods and Generals is a piece of garbage.
Fr I could watch that shit all day
@@Significantpower the extended cut was good, watch that one
Panzer Picture Ted Tuner died during that battle.
_The two biggest oopsies of the American Civil War_
*Oofsies
The South shutting off their own trade, anyone? (Who the hell thought it was a good idea to stop making money during a war, anyway?!)
Meade meddling with a good plan at the Battle of the Crater anyone?
The South rebelling in the first place?
@@Significantpower At the very least shooting first by attacking Fort Sumter.
What about Cold Harbor?
Speaking of Lee at Gettysburg... "It seems out of character."
Sadly, no. It was a disastrous REPEAT of Malvern Hill of the seven day's battles. Where he sent his troops to charge....uphill...against entrenched infantry behind stone walls and dug-in guns. The only difference was the order of magnitude of the disaster. And the fact that he'd squandered irreplaceable forces, that would all but guarantee the Confederacy's eventual loss.
@Matthew Chenault: The primary differences at Gaines Mill were that unlike most battles, the Confederates *outnumbered* the Union forces 57, 000 to 32,000, the Confederates managed to focus most of their combat power along a narrow front of the much longer Union line, while pinning the Union flanks through cavalry feints, and the Union supply chain was hopelessly snarled by McClellan's decision to both relocate his base of supply abd withdraw away from Richmond.
The Confederacy never had more than a punchers chance of winning the war, they had to take gambles or accept eventual loss. With Lincoln in the White House, any chance they had was effectively ended-the President was never going to accept anything less than capitulation by the South. Incidentally and many folks don't know this-Jefferson Davis knew he had little chance to beat the Union and offered to pay off the South's share of the national debt to avoid open conflict. He even offered to pay for Federal properties located in the South-like Fort Sumter. Davis formally made this offer to Lincoln before the war started, but Lincoln refused to even receive the delegate bringing the offer. The Confederacy was screwed before the war even started.
@@pimpompoom93726: You can shorten your first sentence to: "The Confederacy never had... a ...chance of winning the war."
No Republican president (and the Republicans had the largest plurality when the Democrats could not agree on a policy on slavery) could possibly accept the dissolution of the Union, their own party would have impeached (or lynched) any who tried and replaced them with someone who would fight to maintain the United States as one nation.
As for *why* the South could not win, their almost complete lack of industry and their complete inability to find outside allies doomed any long term chance of success. Their only faint hope of success was to entirely stand on defense and bleed the North....praying to cause enough Northern casualties before the 1864 election as to bring a peace party to power. But their own internal political dynamic and mythic beliefs required that they waste resources on senseless forays beyond their borders from the clown show in New Mexico to Missouri & Kentucky to the Antietam and Gettysburg campaigns
@@ilikehardplay I don't disagree with you that the South had very little chance of prevailing in their desire for secession, but I can't except that the Republican Party was so determined to defeat the Confederacy that they 'would have impeached (or lynched) any who tried...'. The northern public was war weary by 1863 and tired of the growing casualty figures. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was intended to move the argument for continuing the war to a higher ethical plane, it was a political act. Even so, the 1864 election was a competitive race with George McClellan on the Democrat ticket. Lots of northerners couldn't see the need for continued bloodshed. Lincoln prevailed, but it was a close issue. In retrospect, had the Confederacy fought a defensive war-as Jefferson Davis wanted-they would have had a far better chance. But, with Lincoln in the White House it was only going to end one way. I sometimes wonder if the South had prevailed at Gettysburg would Lincoln have won reelection? The whole course of events might have been different. As for slavery, it was doomed no matter what happened-it wasn't economically viable with growing agricultural technology.
@@pimpompoom93726: "I can't ACCEPT the Republican Party was so determined to defeat the Confederacy that they 'would have impeached (or lynched) any who tried...'."
I'd suggest you go read some specific histories of the origins of the Republican party... Foner's "Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men" is particularly good. While the majority of the party was free-soilers, rather than abolitionists, neither of those camps were willing to see the Union divided by Southern Democrats whom they had felt bullied by for years. So long as there was a chance of a resolution short of war or dis-union, a portion of the party led by the Whigs was willing to counsel for negotiation.... even in the face of Southerners unilaterally seizing federal forts and arsenals. But an open attack on the garrison at Ft. Sumter? That was a step too far for all but the most pacifist Whigs.(if you want to understand how polarized politics had become, read "The Field of Blood: Violence in Congress and the Road to Civil War") Sure, Lincoln had come out of the Whig party.....but his base of support in the Midwest were almost to a man Free Soil proponents.....and had been objecting to "slave-power" since John C. Frémont was their candidate for president.
"the 1864 election was a competitive race with George McClellan on the Democrat ticket"
Not really. Lincoln won all but 3 states, NJ, DE, & KY and won the electoral college by 212 to 21. Even had McClellan managed to win every state he did not lose by more than 5% of the popular vote (NY, PA, CT), that still would have resulted in a Lincoln win, 148-85. That's not particularly close. Moreover, while the Democratic Party tended to be dominated by anti-war "copperheads," who wrote a "peace platform" for their candidate, Gen George B. McClellan ran on a personal vow to continue the war until the South surrendered.
I've stood at Gettysburg about where Lee was. You look across that field they had to traverse, past the fence, picture thousands of defenders behind that ridge, and you just know "No way." It absolutely does not take 20/20 hindsight to wonder WTF Lee was thinking.
First time i visited, I came over the hill behind the Union position and though "What a great spot to kill people from".
Lee underestimated the strength of the Union line and may have been more than a little overconfident/desperate to get a major victory on Union soil.
@@MandolinMagi Yeah laying down behind the wall at cemetery ridge is a surreal experience. That approach was insanity
I think Lee wanted to end it quickly as stated the longer the war continued he couldn't win the war because if he retreats he still would be facing a union army which has replaced it's losses
@@axel665 The best defense is a good offense but only if you can win while on the offensive. Lee invaded the north twice and twice he was pushed out.
Banjo absolutely killed me at the start!
The "Curb Your Enthusiasm" theme.
Curb your Charges
I'm the 550th like!
Yep! I see what you mean! 😜🤪😜🤪
Lee lost on average 40 % of his troops in every battle, yet Grant is called ’the butcher’.
Monothefox
Because people look at the absolute casualty numbers (where Grant has higher losses) and ignore the relative casualty numbers (where Lee has higher losses), even though it’s the latter that really matters.
Edit: Also, Lee lost 20% of his troops on average, not 40%, so even he didn’t lose all that many troops (for comparison, Grant lost 15%).
Grant lose's alot less troops then Lee if you view it as Campaigns and not battle's.
Grant is a Gambler and know's he will lose's some battle's but it allow for less lose's at later date's considering the Entire Army of Northern Virginia, and all Confederate field armies are captured within 1 year of his Generalship of the war, which is around 400,000 + Prisoners of war alone.
I always thought he was called the butcher because he liked a nice cut of steak.
@@mondoseguendo6113 he actually couldn't eat bloody steak. All the meat he ate had to be cooked very well.
@@mondoseguendo6113 Actually (since we both apparently like military trivia) Grant was a gourmet chef's misery, he liked his beef charred....And refused to let any meat that was even pink be served at his table (his staff apparently developed very strong teeth & gums)....
Imagine the pressure of being assigned 15 THOUSAND lives.
And then watching them get butchered.
Tell that to the supreme commanders in world war 2
sloop napoleon commanded 600k soldiers in russia of which 20k returned
WW2 Generals: Those are rookie numbers
WW2 Russia that's a skirmish.
"AVOID WHAT IS STRONG!!!!!!"
"ATTACK WHAT IS WEAK!!!!!!!!"
Sun Tsu, THE ART OF WAR
and if no place is weak what then? for sun tsu can be proven wrong and then some.
Paula Snoga
In all fairness, Lee did attempt that as the day before the Confederates had been pressing hard at the flanks where the high ground was situated. His assessment was that the Union had to have reinforced the flanks leaving the center less defended than the other parts where fighting occurred. Unfortunately, the Union did anticipate the attack at the center and Longstreet knew that an attack on such unfavorable ground over such a long distance could not succeed but if the plan did work, it would leave the Union army divided and liable to be encircled. Lee took a gamble because he knew that in the long run he would be defeated in a war of attrition and had to take any chance offered to decisively beat the Federal forces, even if the odds were unfavorable. After all, at Chancellorsville he had done just that and had great success.
Sun Tsu NEVER LOST a battle. Lee should have listened to Longstreet and redeployed his troops to the right and move in between George Gordon Meade and Washington D.C. There was some sort of possibility that Lincoln MSY HAVE BEEN forced to sign for peace or removed from Office. The sentiment of The North remaining in THE CIVIL WAR was EXTREMELY LOW!!!!!
@@stripes497 doubt that he would had lost a few battles if not the ones that counted then skirmishes he would had lost. but I would say him never losing a battle is something that everyone will say that did not happen even he lost a few battles along the way.
@@TheManofthecross If there is NO WEAK PLACE, then reassess the situation and choose another location to fight the battle. NEVER EVER ATTACK YOUR ENEMY WHEN HE HAS THE ADVANTAGE!!!! NEVER!!!!!
Confederates: * fail to take the high ground *
Obi wan: *you're dead to me*
Didn't they have the high ground at Fredericksburg? Or am I mistaken
"Driving obsession for a decisive victory"
*Japan would like to know your location*
Japan, wins a handful of battles against the U.S.A at the start
Literally the entire rest of the war
AMERICA!!! FUCK YEAH!!! FREEDOM IS THE ONLY WAY, YEAH!!!
@@echo4428 Warrior culture VS Military with Industry.
Japan could not afford to replace loses of Destroyers, So US Subs targeted them the most crippling Japans anti submarine capabilities. Near the end of the war Japan had US Subs hunting wooden sailing ships just off their coastlines because there was not much left to hunt.
@@tanith117 simply put don't start a war you know you can't win
+@@tanith117+ Correction; Military with Industry that had been through the the meatgrinder of the Civil War and the Western Front within 60 years of each other.
@@echo4428 i respect the Japanese for staying in the war for that long with limited resources in comparison to the French and Italians. Still can't believe the French surrendered within a month to the Nazis and the Italians switching sides in the middle of the War. And what's even more hilarious is that the French tried to reclaim their lost colonies only to get their asses kicked by guerrilla insurgents.
That banjo version of the “Curb your enthusiasm” theme absolutely killed me.
Fun fact: the guy (Callixa Lavallée) who wrote the Canadian national anthem was a French-Canadian who really liked minstrel shows touring Montreal and decided to go visit the South, realized how fucked up slavery was, joined a Rhode Island unit as a musician, got wounded at the battle of Antietam and moved back to Canada.
Don’t ever leave the West. The world is a diverse place and you won’t like how morally and culturally different people are from you. The south did nothing wrong, victims of imperialism.
@@joepetto9488 Shut up and go be a neo-Confederate somewhere else.
@@joepetto9488states rights to what bro?
@@dude2273 right to choose bro :) no one is forcing you to own slaves.
@@joepetto9488 To choose slaves, to choose being a horrible human being, you wonder why murder and abuse are not rights as well right? Horrible thing should be treated as such, with Justice and Fairness, get Douglassed racist slave supporter.
"I don't have a division"
Biggest oof of the movie. I press F.
Talon Haribon F
F
F
Poor picket. If he weren't a disgusting treasonous insurgent slaver I'd feel sorry for him.
@@Scriptedviolince calm down son its only been how many years?
@Matthew Chenault I don't know why you're sorry. I feel great.
Meanwhile in general sherman's office
"You can't commit warcrimes if there's no geneva convention"
Atlanta was asking for it.
@@Hopeofmen Do it again general Sherman!
Lieber Code USA NUMBA ONE
Destroying infrastructure to stop the enemy from using them is a valid tactic.
@@bkjeong4302 Yeah, and Sherman's troops avoided killing Southern civilians (mainly because that takes time). Only a few hundred people (mostly combatants) died, in a war where thousands died in minutes during major battles.
You want ACW war crimes, try assholes like Forrest outright massacring American troops as they surrender.
During his previous invasion of the North, he was even more adventurous. At Antietam, Lee was not far from losing his army (and becoming the biggest failure of the war) as he had a river behind his back - had he met an opponent more decisive than McClellan, it would have been an epic game over for him.
The failure at Antietam was not so much McClellan, as his subordinate Generals ignoring his orders. Had all of them initiated their attack at dawn as ordered, they would have overwhelmed Lee's forces. Instead, only I Corps on the right flank attacked at dawn, allowing Lee to concentrate his forces to repel them. They were eventually supported by the IInd Corps by mid-morning...but their attack had petered out by mid-day when the Sumner finally committed the V Corp into battle in the center....and despite making some progress, refused to commit his VI Corp reserves to force a breakthrough. Finally, Ambrose Burnside, on the left flank with the IX Corps was supposed to have *also* attacked at dawn....but dithered until late afternoon looking for a ford rather than strongly charging the one bridge over Antietam Creek. When he finally *did* put his troops into motion, the battles along the right and center were done, and Lee could shift reserves to repell his attack. Instead of using the superiority of Union forces to overwhelm the much outnumbered Confederates, they were fed in piecemeal...and defeated in detail.
McClellan is the only general to beat Lee three times in pitched battle.
@@ilikehardplayWasn't subordinates not following directions art of why Burnside lost at Fredericksburg?
And even then Mclellan still inflicted more than enough casualties to confederates in percentage.
I don’t agree. He could have attacked on the 15th or 16th while Lee’s army was still divided.
Even with a 2-1 advantage McClellan held back the 5th Corp.
He failed utterly. When Lee crossed the river he sent a brigade consisting of three regiments to get gunned down.
Having been to Gettysburg and seen the ground, it's unforgivable to have sent that attack in. Going up against the best artillery park in the war, with better gunners than your army and with high ground on either side was a crime.
It’s not high ground tho
This isn't your average everyday oof... this is an ADVANCED Ooof!
*Rush oof*
Justin Y. wow I caught you just as you commented.... This is a huge accomplishment I think.
You literally just go on random videos and comment.You have such a variety of different videos that you watched.This convinces me you know your legend and just do it on videos or subjects that seem random.
No
Potential History demonetized confirmed.
The banjo “curb your enthusiasm” intro made the whole video even before it started.
ok so in short
fredericksburg: US major fucky-wucky
gettysburg: CS major fucky-wucky
I think the CS major fucky-wucky was Franklin or Nashville when George Thomas destroyed Bell Hoods entire army.
CS was worse because they saw this exact thing happen before.
@@kirknay Agreed
kirknay Gettysburg was not the end all be all if Wheeler would have heals Atlanta then Lincoln wouldn’t have been re-elected.
@@humbertoflores2545 Agreed, Franklin was essentially the Picketts Charge of the west and there was no reason for it to happen. It was just Hood sending thousands of men to be needlessly butchered
That’s a lotta damage
Robert E Lee: *HOW BOUT A LITTLE MORE*
I'm really excited to see you branching out and doing other historical wars and time periods man! Care to give a few hints as to what new frontiers of historical memery you'll explore next?
Luke Marchand I’m hoping napoleonic wars lol so much memability
Suleiman Magnificat being a boi
Opium wars at some point and Vietnam are what I have in my sights currently.
@@PotentialHistory Awesome man, both of those sound incredibly hype!
@@PotentialHistory DUDE! Vietnam sounds like an amazing topic to cover. I'm incredibly excited and looking forward to your future video releases.
Meade: "Don't try it General Lee I have the high ground"
Lee: "You underestimate my army"
More like
Meade: "It's over General Lee! I have the high ground"
Lee:"You underestimate my Army"
Meade:"Don't try it"
@@panzerschiff9805 Lee after gettisburg "I hate you"
Potential History: “As 2019 begins…”
Me: What do you mean? It’s 2020!
*checks description*
Also me: Oh.
Now it's 2021.
@@supersarge24 *aging intensifies*
I wish we could relive 2019
Ah yes, the 'Decisive Battle' concept. Always hampered by that little detail of the enemy not wanting to give you one... unless it is on their terms.
Me: “I should go to sleep, it’s really late”
*potential history uploads*
Flo Ris what country you from ?
True
I live very close to Gettysburg practically live in it but for being known so much for it's paranormal activity I don't see shit.
ALEXANDER JONATHAN Ceskoslovensko?
@@marshalondro9692 I live close to Fredericksburg...just...just the wrong one...
The one in texas... oof
@@dukeofmecklenburg-strelitz8030 Fredricksburg today ain't much now-a-days only really go there for the mall.
ALEXANDER JONATHAN yeah I’ve been there too and while i didn’t see anything paranormal either, it was still pretty eerie and creepy. Although whether it was because I was at a place where thousands of men died in a short timeframe or something “paranormal” idk.
Gotta love that HOI4 training an building queues
John Bell Hood at Franklin: "Mayre's Heights or Picket's Charge you say? Hold my mint julep!"
Yeah. Franklin was worse than either. It made even less sense, and effectively destroyed Hood's army - something not true of Mayre's Heights or Pickett's Charge.
@@richardmalcolm1457
Hood was desperate. He missed his chance at Spring Hill. If he didn't attack Schofield would be easily able to unite his forces with Thomas and his men. After that, it's over. Hood only had that chance to win. Not saying it was the right move, but it is understandable that a desperate general and army will make a desperate assault. Also by jove they breached and almost broke that line. It was desperate fighting to close that breach. Some family history involved in that fight with the 72 Illinois who had all their officers wounded or killed as they were on the Union right side of that breach.
@@jamess7576 Hood *was* desperate, no question about it. But I don't think desperation alone can justify a move when that move has no sognificant chance of success, or worse, provides no valuable strategic gain to compensate for the certain cost. Contrast with Chancellorsville, which was *also* a situation of desperation for Lee, who faced a better supplied army with twice his numbers which had pounced on both his flanks; but against that, he had the critical advantages of advantageous terrain and superior knowledge of same, superior subordinate commanders, and knowledge also that his opponent's character gave a good chance of of him being able to execute his daring flanking maneuver.
Even so, if I were to try to cut Hood some slack here, it would have to be on the basis of a good record in senior command. And Hood had pretty consistently flunked that test. His true ceiling was no higher than division commander (and a very good one at that).
@@jamess7576 Hood was badly addicted to laudnum by this time and it certainly affected his judgement.
When you're up against the Rock of Chickamauga and stuck with fewer troops than he has, and he is on the defensive, I'd say your chance of victory is about 0%
He might've been better off trying to harass Sherman, although that too would've been difficult.
Hey if we're going to the Civil War, can we talk about the meme-able first conflict between ironclad ships?
That always makes me chuckle, although it definitely wasn't funny for crews who had to endure the ringing of ship's hulls from bouncing cannon balls, deafening sound of cannonade and intoxicating smoke.
* Dink *
@@axelmaldonado2642 * dink *
Okay guys, here is the plan, we are going to take all of the troops who were specially trained and equipped to carry out the assault after the detonation of the mine, and replace them with troops who do not have any of that.
Drachinifel's video? Might be to much of competition.
>"because there's a lot of wars and conflicts spanning
human history that have funny and interesting aspects to them"
>"war"
>"fun"
>after the invention of fire weapons
If you think weapons are what made war unfun I have some Nature documentaries about great apes you need to watch.
Pedro Barbosa Duarte Be jade wave as fun when it was people dying from arrows and spears and shot.
Hunter Smith
This, would you rather be shot or hacked to death, war ain’t pretty.
War was never not hell
Ivan Ricaña but you’re also in the Middle Ages, so I mean, life is pretty garbage
To quote; “‘when would you want to live in history?’ I wouldn’t”
SO SO GLAD someone talked about the southern half of Fredericksburg. The subsequent waves of attacks on Marye’s Heights ought to be understood as a tactic to keep the Confederates from advancing and mopping up disorganized Union units scattered on the fields just before the heights, as you said.
One thing though that’s not commonly mentioned was that the attack in the southern areas on Jackson’s corps was supposed to be a lot more expansive. Only Meade’s brigade was able to breach the line, and only briefly. In reality, two entire grand divisions of the Army of the Potomac with several corps between them were supposed to attack Jackson’s positions. That’s 50,000 men, making the Pickett-Pettigrew-Trimble Assault at Gettysburg look paltry with even 15,000. The issue is that the order given by Burnside HQ was to “Carry the Fredericksburg Richmond Potomac,” a railroad which- on Burnside’s map, cut deep right into Jackson’s positions. In reality, the Fredericksburg-Richmond-Potomac Railroad stopped about halfway through the field. As a result, you had tens of thousands of Union soldiers standing by not attacking the positions in front of them. Had they been moved forward, good chance even Jackson’s reserves would have been repelled and Fredericksburg could have actually been a Union win.
No. There was a stream and a mile of forest between the confederate forces. They weren’t mopping anyone up. Also the attacks at Fredericksburg came before the ones at prospect hill. Weirdly incorrect view
Fun fact, after the 69th New York (an Irish regiment) took huge casualties at Fredricksberg. During the battle of Gettysburg the 69th PA (Another Irish regiment) was heard shouting “Remember Fredricksberg” and various other things in Irish Gaelic. They felt they had avenged their Irish brothers from the slaughter that was Fredricksberg.
Gods and Generals was an unfocused, preachy slow slog, but I cried at the scene where the Irish fought the Irish. And yes, my being Irish had something to do with it
@@IrishCarneyNice, what county are you from?
@@TheIrishvolunteer USA. American-born, of Irish descent on both sides. Father's side is from Roscommon
@@IrishCarney Oh
Joke: ww2 memes
Woke: civil war memes
Who’s more Chad though *THE SHERMAN* or *THE BOMBER HARRIS?*
@@rnrailproductions5049 Hmm. I don't think Sherman was thorough enough in dismantling southern slave society.
The ULTRACHAD BOMBER HARRIS wins again.
The Trashman YES
Bespoke: dogs war memes
@@pladderisawesome Harris wins. It was the CSA that actually started the fires that burned ATL, though unintentionally when they demolished the arsenal and rail depot. Unfortunately late hot dry weather caused the sparks to fly.
NICE. This era isn't touched on very well. Most people focus on the World Wars. I recently built a Kentucky Rifle caplock from scratch to learn just what they had to deal with in the mid 1800s... Wicked fun project but man, I cannot imagine carrying a muzzleloader into battle.
It didn't have to be that way which is the sad part.
But, for many wars peopel did.
They look terrible, because they are terrible nowdays, back few hundres years, and they was deadly weapon
@@komiks42 And rifled muskets in particular were the most advanced state of the art infantry weapons available. A lot of men fought all the way through the Civil War with a smoothbore
I once heard Lee in a documentary or lecture on youtube described as one of the most valuable assets of The Union, in some ways like Napoleon and Hitler he was fighting a defensive war but kept going on the attack
Hitler did everything but fighting a defensive war and going on the attack, literally the opposite
Yeah well let’s see their opposition put up such a fight
@@joepetto9488 Wow, I didn't even remember making this comment, anyways, there can be no doubt Lee was fantastic on both the offence and defensive.. I think the original video I was talking about, was just pointing out the lack of men/equipment to resupply him, whereas a defender, traditionally takes roughly 3 times the strength to defeat.
And to an extent there was some criticism of his focus on Virginia, when the western theatre was in desperate need of help and strong leadership, but by the time Longstreet was allowed to go west, the situation was beyond saving.
@@NjK601 I think he was correct about the West. The war was decided in the east and sending men west was sending them to defend land that wasn’t strategically useful the western portion accounted for less than 15% of the Confederacy’s economy. Virginia itself produced more material than the rest of the states combined.
@@joepetto9488 When Lee failed to support Vicksburg and instead decided to invade Pennsylvania, he gave the Union uncontested control over the entire Mississippi River, allowing them to use it to ship men and material around as needed. Gettysburg ended the invasion of the North, losing Vicksburg ended the Confederacy, they just refused to admit it.
Lee was probably thinking of his reputation too when he attacked on the third day at Gettysburg. He was an engineer by training, and the first thing he'd done when they gave him command was dig trenches around Richmond - but the newspapers had called it too passive and cowardly, and he had a chip on his shoulder because of it.
There was also the Confederate cavalry attack on the Union rear that was stopped by Custer. So Pickett's Charge was somehow even more complicated than illustrated here.
Hey Garret, sorry I missed your comment about Stuart's aborted attack before I replied. It's good to see someone else actually does their homework!
Good video, but you missed one of the major reasons Lee ordered the attack on Cemetery Ridge: that the attack actually succeeded on July 2nd. A brigade of under the commander of BrigGen Ambrose Wright (around 3000 men) actually captured Cemetery Ridge along with 20 cannon early in the afternoon on the 2nd. Wright requested reinforcements from his commander MajGen Richard Anderson who refused to act because he never received orders from his commander LtGen AP Hill to press the attack. Wright withdrew his brigade from Cemetery Ridge after 3 hours because he had no support and his brigade was exposed and out in the open. Wright reported to Lee in detail the Federal positions behind Cemetery Ridge along the Baltimore Pike. Part of Lee's thinking was that if a single brigade can take the position with no support then three divisions with massed artillery can take that position.
That was one of the biggest problems of the Civil War; half the time, charges and momentum were entirely capable of defeating fortified positions, while the other half resulted in devastating losses; between generals with tactics and strategy based on musket warfare, too many inexperienced officers, and a massive disparity in equipment (as some troops were equipped with highly-modern weapons like lever-action rifles with multiple-round capacity and modernized, rifled artillery, versus others with muskets and other obsolete equipment).
Even in WWI, small numbers of troops on the offensive could sometimes seize fortified trenches with barbed wire, machine guns, artillery support, and even superior numbers; yet usually trying to achieve the successes of a few men with the initiative rarely paid off when you trade surprise for numbers.
@DOPYTC 1 Apparently there's a type of rifle called a "rifled musket", which hopefully is an understandable cause of this confusion...where a musket later had its barrel rifled.
Unfortunately, people continue to refer to them as muskets in references to the civil war, causing a great deal of confusion for those of us repeatedly hearing about muskets in the Union Army :/
@DOPYTC 1 recently read about the battle of Königgrätz which the Prussians won against the Austrians to cement themselves as the dominant power in Germany, and often it is said that the Prussians won because of their better rifles. Breech-loaded rifles compared to Austrian muzzle-loaded ones, with a firing rate about twice as fast... yep, that's a big battle winner right there, but it wasn't actually as relevant as it's often made out to be. At the beginning of the battle, the Austrians had the upper hand since they had well defended positions, superior artillery, and their rifle-muskets actually had a higher range and accuracy compared to the Prussian breech loaders. The Austrian commander, however, Ludwig von Benedek, was too hesitant to press his advantage and missed several opportunities that might have won him the battle. There were moments when the Austrians could have performed a devastating cavalry charge, or push back the Prussian infantry advances, but he stayed passive - despite advice from his officers that putting pressure on the Prussians would be the best choice now - and let the opportunities pass. That allowed the Prussians to reinforce their strength as reinforcements arrived later in the day, concentrate their now increased number of forces, and push against the Austrians and overwhelm them at closer range where their breech-loading rifles were superior. Benedek's indecisiveness during the battle spelled the end of his military career.
Often, it wasn't superior or inferior arms that won or lost a battle, but indecisiveness of commanders who didn't press their advantages when they had them. That happened both in Europe and in the US Civil War regularly.
@DOPYTC 1 A very good number of smooth-bore muskets (typically .69 caliber) were used, especially in the first two years of the war. These were the weapons most commonly held by the various state militias prior to the war. The state militias made up most of the armies for both sides, in the early going. In addition, some of the early arms purchased in Europe were smooth-bores. The commonly used ammunition for these weapons was a single ball, combined with some buckshot. (Referred to as "buck and ball", by the soldiers.) If a regiment had a mix of rifled and smooth-bore long arms, the rifled weapons would be issued to the companies designated for skirmishing, and the smooth-bores to the companies that formed the main battle line. By 1863, the federals were almost entirely equipped with rifled weapons (1853 Enfields or 1861 Springfields), and the rebs had many more rifled muskets (1853 Enfields).
Edit to add: Grant's Army of Tennessee probably had the highest percentage of smooth-bores. As late as April of 1863, about 44% of the 37,000 (or 16,000+) carried them.
This is false. Wright didn't even start his attack until near dusk, as it was at the tail end of the attack by Longstreet that started at the other end of the line and he had to wait until those attacks went in before he could start. It is even uncertain where exactly Wright was sitting at the culmination of his attack - the defenders of the hill had been diverted south earlier to stop the initial parts of the attack. The entire 6th corps had entered the battle and swept away the rest of the attack and might have missed Wright in the dark, but an isolated brigade in the dark is hardly "holding the ridge for hours". It is doubtful that Wright told Lee as much as he implied in later magazine articles where much of this stuff originated, as it would then be remiss of Lee never to mention to Longstreet these facts when he was balking at the attack on the third. It is more likely that Wright stopped short of the ridge in the darkness, as there were ruined batteries all over the field by the time he started in. Wright actually had 1400 men and his troops were driven back and nearly routed by a pair of Union regiments in the counterattack. There is no historical evidence that Wright spoke to Lee on the 2nd or 3rd at all. Wright was later court-martialled by his superiors after the battle for some faults and had to fight to keep his post. This might explain why he later cast his testimony so strongly to blame his superiors when it was clear that G'burg was the 'last chance'.
I still find it hilarious that in the civil war where you have now 2 fairly massive states waging total war and their capitals are literally a days march from each other.
You flunk geography. DC and Richmond are well over a hundred miles apart. No infantry on Earth can do that in a day. Stonewall Jackson's troops were called "foot cavalry" for their astounding speed of thirty miles a day, but that was from extreme motivation plus being on their own turf and knowing the shortcuts
Good analysis - would add that Lee was also influenced by his prior victory at Malvern Hill in 1862 where a costly frontal attack against entrenched Federals succeeded in breaking the Federal line prompting the end of the Pennisula Campaign
I highly recommend you take a look at Athens and their Sicily campaign during the Second Peloponnesian War. I don’t think anyone has been more incompetent or unlucky than Athens during that war.
Alcibiades did nothing wrong!
Gylippus FTW!
The Sicily campaign is evidence for the failures of democracy on a grand scale.
"Hey, fellow Athenians, how about we send the entire military and navy to Sicily while we're at war with Sparta!"
"Hey, that sounds like a swell idea, Alkibiades! You're so handsome and well spoken, you'd never lead us astray!"
*one year after hearing nothing back from the army*
"Hey what happened to our army?"
*"Gone, reduced to atoms upon landing"*
I was not prepared for that Robert E. Lee card. lol
Even though it was a bit ignorant.
EdSkywalker man, that card was spot on, don’t even.
@@EdVarkarion yeah it just outright gets his slavery stance wrong
I think the core mistakes of the two battles are closer than you realize. Both are examples of the sunk cost fallacy with inverse relationships between what costs were sunk and what was risked in turn. Fredericksburg was more or less lost when the river crossing was delayed and Lee dug in. Repositioning and trying for less contested crossing was the wise move. At the decision point, the Union hadn't lost much and they proceeded to risk (and lose) a lot in pursuit of that minor expense. Gettysburg, on the other hand, had its decision point much latter in the battle. Lee could have slipped south and forced the Union to follow and fight on ground of his choosing after the second day. But he had lost a lot more in the two days of fighting. While in absolute terms Lee risked a comparable amount of men; but in relative terms He was risking any chance of Confederate victory. Burnside wasn't risking ultimate victory at Fredericksburg like Lee had at Gettysburg.
Grant at Cold Harbor: Hold my beer.
That was really on Meade. Grant told Meade he wanted an assault conducted-Meade did little on planning it. Many of the veteran units simply refused to try advancing any further under the murderous fire and dug in without being told.
Seeing all those little figurines on the floor, I have to ask. Have you ever partaken in HG Wells "Little Wars"? Or for that matter any other form of Miniature wargaming? Might be a fun idea for one of the games nights.
Why does your comment says it was posted two days ago when the video was uploaded today?
Time travel magic I think?
EndlesNights what sort of warp fuckery is this?
@@spacemarinechaplain9367 this comment right here inquisitor
Perhaps something to do with Necron technology that I was bombarded with?
i.imgur.com/t75Nckx.gif
Can you cover the Filipino-American war next?
Arguably the most forgotten war in all of American History. I first found out about it when I was like 10, and it got nothing but a brief mention in high school. Very interesting topic indeed!
This war inflicted more American casualties compared to the previous war against Spain
@@shinsenshogun900 Makes sense considering the PA war was more of an insurgency. Whereas the Spanish-American war with the exception of San Juan Hill (even though the Spanish still lost) was a total disaster for Spain.
Honestly, the main reason why philippines lost to the americans is that emilio aguinaldo ordered an assassination on gen. Antonio luna in which is the only capable general at the time of the war. After his death the mishaps of the philippine army just escalated from here on out.
Yup, he had to approve the order because he got persuaded by his pro-American cabinet members and an incompetent rival general to immediately cease his temper by intrigue, being tired and scared of being disciplined by a senior military officer, who was recently appointed as the chief commander of the Philippine Revolutionary Army in the Northern Front after the Span-Am War, facing the Walled City of Manila, taken by the Americans in the previous war.
The order was carried out by the President's Provincial Brigade after Luna arrived into a town where the President 'was' residing, and then Aguinaldo had already left northwards, leaving a cabinet member that Luna despises. After being bamboozled, he gets into a courtyard where he gets shanked, shot, and slashed by the Provincial Brigade with Krags and bolo machetes. The slaughter of the general and his accompanying aide ended up being the eventful and self-destructive moment where the American offensives gathered momentum enough to crush the wild chase against Aguinaldo through a pincer into northern Luzon.
Luna's crack Luzon Army was reduced and reformed mainly into Aguinaldo's young hatchetman Greg Del Pilar, who carries on the fight 'til December 1899. Many good officers sympathetic to Luna either joined Del Pilar or deserted as fugitives. The war lasted far longer, even after the President got captured, into September 1901.
The deification of Lee is incredibly frustrating because it's completely unwarranted. The Southern strategy of fighting a defensive war that was designed to drag out the fight and hope that mounting political pressure on Lincoln would force an armistice was sound and may well have worked if Lee showed more patience. What happened at Gettysburg was Lee completely abandoned a working strategy in favor of one of the biggest military gambles in history maybe in the hopes that it would bring an end to a truly pestilential war or to stroke his ego and his belief of he and his army's invincibility.
Lee's track record up to Gettysburg is near flawless but look at his opposition. Incompetent political Generals who Lincoln would routinely hire then immediately fire once they fucked something up.
Now compare Lee's track record after Gettysburg. He spends most of his time trying to repel attacks on Richmond as two Union armies slowly pincer the Confederacy making it bleed to death. The major difference after Gettysburg is Lee had to tangle with Grant and Grant pressed him everywhere so much so that Sherman had all the room he needed to hew the Confederacy in half and burn their cities to the ground. The Confederacy did win battles after Gettysburg but they were middling to ineffectual. A raid on an abandoned Union fort, a delaying action, successfully harassing Union supply lines, disabling a railroad junction, committing war atrocities against captured Black Union soldiers. These were the big victories of the South and Lee after Gettysburg.
His record is shit after Gettysburg. The South was scorched in hellfire and Lee couldn't do a damn thing to stop it.
If the confederacy didn't want Georgia burned down, they shouldn't have fired on ft sumpter.
Lee's reputation wasn't flawless before Gettysburg. The 7 days battles was a massive fuck up. Horrific losses for the south and the Union was able to withdraw.
@@aaroncabatingan5238 I said "near flawless." The day the Army of Northern Virginia marched into Pennsylvania, Lee had the full faith and confidence of his men. The day wagons of wounded Confederates headed toward the Potomac River, Lee's aura of invincibility had been shattered, the magic was gone.
I mean you have a point to an extent but don't take it too far by implying he was a bad general. At some point, some type of offensive had to happen and the results of that battle are VERY DIFFERENT (Gettysburg) if the orders are not found by union troops. Really fascinating stuff. Lee was always outnumbered and outgunned. What the south was able to accomplish with their lack of resources is actually astonishing. The union probably could have won the war a lot sooner. Had they like you said not had such politicized generals. But hey that's an Abraham Lincoln for you. And a lot of his romantication started before the war as he was highly regarded in the coming months of the civil war because of his actions during the Mexican-American war. Grant definitely had a better grasp of the concept of a campaign instead of a singular decisive engagement which definitely gave him the upper hand so good on him.
I know this is a late response, but I was listening to Civil War historian and author Sean Chick and he said that there was a number of factors that made Lee commit to an offensive. One is of course hindsight but more importantly, Lee was also aware of the limited timeframe the South had. Unless the South chose a guerrilla war (which Lee largely did not support) he felt that it was in the South's best interest to deliver an overwhelming victory in the shortest amount of time. And as maybe a third distant goal, an offense into PA would give Northern Virginia some respite from the fighting, strike some amount of fear into the Union, and procure some needed supplies.
Lost to history was the artillery was supposed to move up with the infantry, and a second wave unleashed once the first reached the wall, but given the utter failure of organization the attack was insanity, also Lee's health was failing but this wasn't as well known, but I really appreciate this video on these battles. Well done.
failing to take the high ground the downfall of all armies
*IT'S OVER ANAKIN, I HAVE THE HIGH GROUND!*
SonnyDog830 ITS OVER CSA, I HAVE THE HIGH GROUND!
You underestimate their power
Protip: March your Army to the top of Mt. Everest, defeat everyone in the world.
Tell that to Napoleon at Auchlitz
"..ad infinitum..."
Oooo, well hello Mr Fancypants!
I think Grant's attack at Cold Harbor can also qualify as an "oof" as large as these two.
It wasn't as devastating compared to those battles. The losses are often inflated for Union casualties and the Confederates lost about 5200 in that assault not bad really compared to Fredericksburg and Pickett's Charge that was the only time Grant ordered a mass charge on fortifications which ended horribly.
@@generalfred9426
That is only because he never had to charge a prepared fortification until the Overland Campaign. At Fort Donelson, the Confederates were surround and after some fighting gave up. The seize of Vicksburg was a battle of attrition. Spotsylvania Courthouse and Cold Harbor are examples where Grant did attack fortified positions and it ended badly at least for his men. His only saving grace was that he could sacrifice 3 or 4 times as many men as Lee and still prevalent through attrition continuing the blood letting. Lincoln had found his General that could do the math.
A General that did not save the Republic, or protect the Constitution, and only forced a Union, or should I say Empire.
Lincoln was our Julius Caesar, who is remembered as a sainted hero, but in reality is a tyrant, and died as one.
@@ambrosephill9 Sorry pal don't got time for your Lost Cause bullshit
I remember that Lincoln said after one of Grant's 'defeats' against Lee: "if we lost a battle like this every day for a week, we would have won the war."
Grant's strength in that environment was that, unlike EVERY OTHER Union general that got pummeled by Lee, he just did not retreat. On his first encounter with Lee, Lee beat him worse than he had beaten any other Union general. Grant retired to his tent and wept, but stayed on the battlefield to continue the fight.
Also, Grant learned. That is one of the points of this video: that you should not repeat your own or your opponent's mistakes.
@@generalfred9426
Sorry dude, the fight for independence against an overarching oppressive central government is never a Lost Cause.
1860 to 1865 is just the first quarter.
The funny part is that the very people, groups, and interests the Union supposed fought the war on behalf of, Is now destroying that very country.
It is so funny. The MSM demonize the people of the "Lost Cause" all the while promoting the destruction of the country, Constitution, and the Republic.
LOL!!!!!
Excellent analysis! Thank you for breaking down both of these key actions. Your insight into Lee’s motivations was especially interesting.
Man seeing your toy soldier setup reminded me of my seventh grade report on Gettysburg. I made a sand table/diorama type thing using little plastic army men. Always bugged me that they were revolutionary war toy soldiers molded in red and blue though. Don't remember if I got a good grade on it or not. That was almost 40 years ago. Great videos on a great channel man. Keep em coming. *:-)*
Just like how I owned the blue and the gray civil war board game ( on middle school)
I collect toy soldiers, many of them are on my channel.
I did basically the exact same thing in the 5th grade. The project was a kind of educational show and tell, so you could cover whatever you wanted but it had to be educational, I set up a little diorama of the battle of Little Round Top. Thanks for the kind words and I'm excited for what's next!
@@PotentialHistory "Stop hiding behind your little toys and fight like a man!"-The Soldier
"There are many wars in human history with aspects that are funny and/or interesting".
Well you know the old equation, comedy = tragedy + time.
George McClellan is the reason why Burnside is viewed so harshly by history due to Burnside being the only successful general during the first battle of bulls run, and almost winning it before he got blindsided by who I believe to be stonewall jackson, although I may be wrong. After Burnside’s success McClellen saw him as a major competitor and used his power to pin a huge chunk of his own blunders on burnside as well as do his best to paint him in a negative light
Fun Fact: There was so much smoke because of the artillery that it basically covered the area in a thick cloud of smoke, so both sides kept overshooting each other
I don't know how many people will see this (or care) but if you are looking for an engaging and well-written/well-researched account of the Battle of Hampton Roads (between the CSS Virginia and the USS Monitor), then you need to read "Iron Dawn" by Richard Snow.
He manages to write in such a way that he provides you with context and backstory about practically everyone involved in the conflict without making you feel bogged down by all of the information. Seriously. It is a REALLY good book.
Thanks for the heads up.
Can you do Operation Cottage? You know, that time 313 Canadians and Americans were either killed or wounded in an operation against a Japanese enemy that wasn’t there. I know this maybe weird, especially coming from a guy who’s Canadian (so many must be curious why I want to talk about this blunder), but I wanna see you do a video about this
There's not much to say, the Japanese mined the island when they left and almost all of the casualties were caused by mines and other traps as the troops searched the island. The only notable thing was the Canadian and American forces landed on opposite sides of the island to trap the Japanese and when they met in the center mistook each other as the enemy, causing some friendly fire.
thatrandomguy231
Still a military meme worthy of a video
@@fortis3686 oh that wasn't a pancake eh?
Canada isn't real
That was the invasion of Kiska Island right? I few years ago for A.P. US History, I did a presentation on the Top 10 US military failures. That was my #10 because while hilarious (and tragic), the Americans and Canadians faced no real consequences for such a blunder.
As Atun Shei once pointed out about Lee, a suicidal frontal attack was "his signature move"
He also got fired tho
"We'll concentrate all our guns on that one small area. When the artillery has had its effect, your charge will break the line." Sounds WAY too much like the Somme 50 years later. With similar results.
Lee's strategy was basically sound in the 1800's thinking. Hit them on the right flank, hit them on the left, then move against the center.
Hindsight being what it is, the 3rd day's engagements at Gettysburg should have never happened.
In fact, Longstreet tried to convince Lee that to swing the army into a more advantageous position was the right move to make.
Lee should have began to withdraw his forces at the end of the 2nd day, forced Meade to follow, allowing Lee and Longstreet to
select ground better suited for his army.
I think that Lee smelled an opportunity to possibly end the war by having Great Britain enter on the Southern side.
He gambled and he lost.
The Battle of Fredericksburg was a humiliating defeat for the Union Army, and the fault lies squarely with General Ambrose Burnside.
Burnside sent his men into a meat-grinder.
The key to a Union win at Fredericksburg was Prospect Hill. Prospect Hill was vulnerable to superior numbers, and then turning
north he could have drove through Fredericksburg with a flanking maneuver ultimately making Richmond vulnerable.
Instead, Burnside chose to confront the Fredericksburg defenders with his main force and sent Meade to deal with the rebels at Prospect Hill. Driven back by Jackson, Meade begged for reinforcements, but by that time Burnside was fully engaged and reluctant to send any forces he
had at his disposal.
Burnside threw 14 Brigades at Marye’s Heights and Southern infantry cut down wave after wave of Union soldiers.
Nine times he threw men against the Marye’s Heights. Think on that. Nine times.....
that moment around 7:20 came so out of left field i actually spit out my drink and am now fully awake
Since Lee was depressed after the results of Fredericksburg and chansloresville, b/c of the disparity of resources. In my opinion he saw the situation for what it was. He and all the other confederate troops would rather pursue a war they can’t win into the ground instead of swallowing their pride and tell economic slave holding juggernauts, slavery… it’s over. A lot of good men died that didn’t need to.
I think General Hood's performance at Franklin was a much bigger oopsie than both Gettysburg and Fredericksburg
Holy fuck something is wrong with your compass
I believe Hood actions at Franklin's was because he thought Lee should've done a second charge and Hood was wounded to see or be in the first Gettysburg charge.Hood was as, Lee said" all Bull forward and little considerations for his rank and file infantry suffering.
Please do more American Civil war Videos!!!
Please dont. bloody tea haters *grumbles in british*
I see a hair floof pfp
the gecko You best silence your tongue or I will throw the tea in the harbor again.
General Der Gebirgstruppe Ferdinand Jodl we don't send the tea over there anymore why do you think all your tea is rubbish feel free to dump you cola hamburger tea
the gecko still upset about the state of the empire, NON EXISTENT
Love the new parts of history that u have included! One thing that is interesting is that Robert E. Lee was given an opportunity to command the union army, but the day prior to that, Virginia, his home state, joined the confederacy. So he decided to join the confederacy because he didn’t believe in fighting against his own state.
That's cause the U.S was more like 5he E.U
And yet most of his relatives remained loyal to the US government and fought against him.
Lee: Send all your men into that suicidal meat grinder when youre ready.
But please, do plan it well
Pickett: 0_o
That Curb banjo, oh god did I laugh, thank you for that.
Holy shit non ww2 content?! It’s the end times!
Iconic Arms received a new episode on Ahoy's channel. The signs of the apocalypse indeed.
He did also cover the Battle of Tsushima in an earlier video.
Just a PS. It makes me really happy and proud to see young people interested and enthusiastic in history and making these interesting videos. It gets to me when I watch the Ranger videos and battle talks available here on YT and 95% of the audience are grey hairs like me or kids in tow with their parents. God bless ya all!
Pickett’s charge, because Union could afford to lose the men while the south couldn’t. Especially since there was option for Lee to back out of a fight.
I think another reason for Lee’s decision was his overconfidence. His army had achieved, as you said, victory after victory against unfavorable odds, and after a while this constant winning made Lee too big for his britches. So when faced with a decision that he might win but had a good chance of loosing, he chose to take the gamble because “well I’ve been winning so far”.
even before the video I'm calling Pickets charge the worse call. not only was it the reason the army of Northern Virginia would never be combat effective again, it happened after fredericksburg, how anyone could see what happened their and think 'No we can do that, for real guys' is an idiot.
Thomas Duponti JEB Stuart was supposed to flank the Union during Pickett’s charge but he thought he was riding into a trap and retreated leaving Pickett all alone. So it really wasn’t all too bad of a plan
@@robbyatwood7734 oh so it was two pronged attack?
where have we seen that plan fail before?
oh right,fredericksburg.
Except there is no proof that is what Lee had in mind. Its a myth.
@Matthew Chenault okay...still doesn't disprove my point, a month or a minute a stupid assault is a stupid assault the whole point of my comment was the reason pickets charge was worse was because it came after fredericksburg, lee should have learned that lesson and not committed basically the same assault he himself halted.
Thomas Duponti I guess the problem with Lee was he planned out battles a little too much and sometimes forgot what you draw up on paper won’t always work perfectly. I guess West Point would do that to you. Pickett’s charge was a bad idea because everything had to go right for it to work and one thing going wrong would be disastrous, just too much risk. Fredericksburg was an awful idea on paper and an even worse idea in practice.
American Civil War is the equivalent of Owning laser guns but using caveman tactics
Predator 20357 id really say the first few battles of ww1 take the cake.
I just wanna stream and have a good time you may be right
Meanwhile in the imperial guard.......
The civil war is people trying to copy Napoleon's style of warfare, but with modern toys
@@kstreet7438
Especially since with the American Civil war there was no past precedent to rely on; we can understand the mistakes of the commanders made in the American Civil War because they were simply ignorant of the impact that rifled muskets and more modern artillery had on warfare because they simply had no prior knowledge to learn from. In The Great War (WWI) the generals had prior knowledge from the American Civil War and the Jappo-Russian War of 1905; they just ignored the information and analysis made from those conflicts. In fact many commanders of the initial battles, especially on the British side knew exactly what was going to happen and raised their concerns, but were ignored, or were forced into untenable situations by French Generals unwilling to listen.
You forgot to mention JEB Stuart being in the union rear to keep out reinforcements and cause chaos. But Unknown to Lee, Custer protected the union exposed underbelly
I have scrolled and scrolled and finally found your comment. Thanks for mentioning that there was more than Pickett's action on day three. On the third day, Lee's failure may be better viewed as parts of the whole being too interdependent for independent success. If the cavalry and other elements weren't fought back that center forced march might have been different.
Lee had a Third choice put forth by Gen. Longstreet. The Confederate army could have gone around the right end of the Union army heading towards Washington D.C. making the Union Army pursue the confederates who then could have chosen the ground that they wanted to fight on, not the other way around.
I was hoping for German tanks part 2, but this is still very appreciated. Thank you
Flo Ris oh I would love to see the union up against like 2 tigers.
Another infamously dumb frontal attack was the charge at the battle of Franklin. The Failed Confederate charge was so devastating that the army of Tennessee ceased to be an effective fighting force afterwards!
Yep. Also June 3, 1864 when Grant assaulted entrenched positions at Cold Harbor. The most lopsided casualty rate since Fredericksburg.
There were a lot of infamously dumb frontal attacks in that war, on both sides.
Jonathan Winskie
But why?
Bk Jeong Because much like the First World War, both sides were completely unprepared for the advancement in technology. The tech changed but the tactics stayed the same.
@@jonathanwinskie9788 The American Civil War should have been the first indication that warfare was changing. It didn't hit the rest of the world that the old ways had to die out until WW1.
I visited Gettysburg and stood at the center where the charge hit and Jesus....its so open. With a gentle slope up to that wall and zero cover
Extremely good point about Lee not learning from Fredericksburg. And I think to the Gettysburg Movie where Longstreet wants to "redeploy" to ground of THERE choosing somewhere, NOT Gettysburg. You would think EVERY GENERAL WOULD KNOW....1) Don't fight if you don' t have the High Ground. The Ground is key...ALWAYS KEY to victory....except overwhelming numbers. 2) NEVER launch a mass infantry assault over OPEN GROUND...towards a FORTIFIED/HARDENED POSITION...in particular armed with a lot of cannons.
GERMAN TANKS PART 2 OR *G U L A G*
@ItsRainingGopniks 123
What he said.
Holy hecc 93 likes in one night?
The first half of Fredricksburg is essentially America's first amphibious assault and urban battle. So basically D-Day and Hue City combined.
Nope, Vera Cruz was the first one. When we invaded Mexico.
In the words of Sun Tzu “you can’t save a defeat”
Banjo Your Enthusiasm is something I didn't realize I needed in my life.
Hmm yes, today I shall charge my troops into Battle. *Clueless*
My grandfather fought and was wounded at fredericksburg with the G-26th Georgia voluntary regiment. Recovering in Richmond then returned to Georgia to join the Confederate army in the F-26th regiment and sent to fort mcalister.
This actually wasn't the first time. Lee had done something similar at Malvern Hill in 1862.
The Union could afford a Fredericksburg, while the traitors couldn't afford a Gettysburg.