spanishspy
Fleet admiral
Posts: 10,366 
Likes: 1,587
|
Post by spanishspy on Dec 3, 2018 18:55:23 GMT
The Confederacy loses Tredgar Ironworks, which was a major part of their industrial strength. I would reckon that the Union focuses on the Mississippi then on anything in North Carolina. Straight down the middle to cut the Confederacy in two? Exactly what they did in OTL, but now without Virginia to get in the way. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,857
Likes: 13,241
|
Post by stevep on Dec 3, 2018 23:42:28 GMT
I was wondering, would the Virginia Army take on the Federals and the Confederates to preserve neutrality.
If the north's decision not to accept the south to leave without a fight didn't affect Virginian neutrality then I suspect they would probably go against whoever attacked them 1st.
|
|
spanishspy
Fleet admiral
Posts: 10,366
Likes: 1,587
|
Post by spanishspy on Dec 4, 2018 4:06:52 GMT
I was wondering, would the Virginia Army take on the Federals and the Confederates to preserve neutrality.
If the north's decision not to accept the south to leave without a fight didn't affect Virginian neutrality then I suspect they would probably go against whoever attacked them 1st.
If they went neutral they'd be like OTL Kentucky. There was fighting there anyway. No way in hell are they fighting both at once. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 68,033
Likes: 49,439
|
Post by lordroel on Dec 4, 2018 4:08:21 GMT
If the north's decision not to accept the south to leave without a fight didn't affect Virginian neutrality then I suspect they would probably go against whoever attacked them 1st.
If they went neutral they'd be like OTL Kentucky. There was fighting there anyway. No way in hell are they fighting both at once. So they will have to pick a side ore we still will see tow parts of Virginia end up in a Virginia type of Civil War. |
|
spanishspy
Fleet admiral
Posts: 10,366
Likes: 1,587
|
Post by spanishspy on Dec 4, 2018 4:16:02 GMT
If they went neutral they'd be like OTL Kentucky. There was fighting there anyway. No way in hell are they fighting both at once. So they will have to pick a side ore we still will see tow parts of Virginia end up in a Virginia type of Civil War. There's coal, the port of Norfolk, Tredegar Ironworks, plus the roads and railroads that connect Washington to points south. Both Union and Confederacy will want the state and what it has in store. |
|
|
|
Post by EwellHolmes on Jan 21, 2019 11:52:32 GMT
What would be the implications for the Confederacy, and the whole Civil War too, if Virginia didn't succeed from the Union? Seven states - Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas - left first to form the CSA. Then it was Virginia before Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina followed Virginia. However there was major dissent in Virginia over succeeding. If they had stayed, would the following three still have left? Could the CSA have successfully fought the USA without Virginia, but more so with Virginia and others which might follow against them too? A shorter war? If there is no Virginian succession, there is no Civil War. Usually people focus on the lack of Virginian industry, manpower and leadership as a cause for quick doom of the Confederacy, but in all actuality you've just made a "Kentucky" situation stretch across the border; almost the entire frontier, sans the Oklahoma-Missouri corridor, is now neutral and neither side will attempt to break that as they don't want to force Virginia AND Kentucky into the conflict against them. Said Oklahoma-Missouri corridor cannot also support a major war effort due to the logistics and location from either side's heartland. Eventually the frozen nature of the conflict will provoke the Europeans to begin to recognize the Confederacy and that's the end of a possible conflict. If Lincoln still tries to force the issue with force, the Border States will join the Confederacy and said Europeans are more inclined to bring an end to the war. |
|
