GDG- Re: turning points

[Biggsk at aol.com]

Hello,
 
I think you need to define what a "turning point" really is.  The Army  
considers a turning point that battle or campaign where the fortunes of one  side, 
in decline before it, will reverse course and ultimately lead it to a  victory 
for that side.
 
There is no set timetable for that victory and those fortunes might not  come 
immediately after the turning point, but the result is what matters.
 
Thus, Midway, May, 1842, was turning point of the Pacific War for the  
sinking of four mainline Japanese aircraft carriers broke the offensive back of  the 
Imperial Japanese Navy.  Despite this, the Guadalcanal Campaign  (August-end 
of the year almost factoring in other Solomon Islands efforts),  while being 
very grim at times for our side, especially in the Navy department  (Savo 
Island, naval battle of Guadalcanal, etc.), we still marched on to  ultimate 
victory.  There remained a lot of battles and losses, but the end  result came 
because of Midway.
 
We could play the counter-factual card here and state that if we had lost  in 
the Solomons, Midway would not have been a turning point, but it is what did  
happen that makes it so.
 
The same argument can be for the Gettysburg Campaign therefore - the AOP  
lost pretty much all the time and then wins a big game on home court.  They  
muddle it up somewhat at Mine Run but bang up a couple of Lee's brigades at the  
Rappahannock and then when Grant arrives, they still get drubbed at times but  
keep moving forward to win in the end.  Gettysburg gave the AOP the  
confidence it needed at a very good time when it needed it.
 
While I think that from a political aspect Antietam is more important  
because of the preliminary EP, having deeply studied the CS supply situation, I  can 
categorically state that Britain was never going to recognize the CSA as a  
nation for two huge reasons:
 
1) They could never hold their borders, especially out West, and no nation  
without secure borders is a real nation.  You can check this out in  diplomatic 
history for more proof.  If you are to be a nation then your  borders must be 
intact, and with Tennessee pretty much removed in February, 1862  (although 
some of it was recovered for a year), and the rivers giving the Union  virtual 
movement carte blanche, the CSA stood no chance of being  recognized.  The 
fall of New Orleans and Memphis gave the Federals control  over most of the most 
important economic artery in America without Vicksburg and  also added to the 
border troubles of the CSA.  It simply was not going to  happen.
 
2) The Brits were making way too much money selling war materiel to BOTH  
sides.  Why jeopardize that by jumping off the fence into one camp or the  other? 
 The rest of Europe, especially France, who would dearly loved to  have 
recognized the CSA so as to allow them to turn a blind eye to Mexico, would  not do 
so until the British lion did.
 
Greg Biggs



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.