This is the first of a series of Articles as inspired by E Pluribus Unum at RS and at TMR comparing Politics to war.
Wars are made up of many battles. Wars can be dominated by one side over another yet lost in the long run if there is not a proper respect for strategy and tactics and/or a proper respect for the lessons taught by the enemy. Most importantly one battle can decide the whole war in positive and/or negative ways!
The first one I will profile is the Battle of Gettysburg, in 1863.
A brief overview of the battle:
The Battle of Gettysburg actually happened by accident since General Lee’s plan in marching into Pennsylvania was to march on the Capital City of Scranton in order to demoralize the North by demonstrating that the Army of Northern Virginia could march on any northern capital at will and could not be stopped from doing so. The fact that this pivotal battle happened at Gettysburg is due in large part, to a twist of history that so often happens during deciding events in matters of war. Many Southern soldiers were in woeful need of shoes…and one of General Lee’s divisions ignored orders to avoid engaging Northern forces and entered Gettysburg which had the unique lure of a shoe factory.
The first day began with a few small engagements between Federal and Southern pickets and escalated in intensity throughout the day.
The battle was set up and decided over the course of three days. As already stated, day one is basically a series of minor engagements as both sides set up the initial lines of battle punctuated by a victory of Southern forces, late in the day, who pounded Meade’s Union forces and drove them from Seminary Ridge where the Union forces had set up a hasty defensive line.
As a result of this initial victory for Lee, Meade was forced to set up a second defensive line along Cemetery Ridge which had the distinction of being a far more defensible position being that it was the high ground in the area allowing the Union commander to observe southern forces as they moved about the field. The new Union lines overlooked the field over which any southern attack must march and it’s flanks were protected by the terrain on either end. The line was in the shape of a fish hook and reinforcements and re-supply could be accomplished quickly and with incredible efficiency because of the nearly circular shape of the position.
The second day was pretty much a stand off with Lee making attacks on different sections of the Union line, primarily the flanks, while the Union successfully held them back.
Day three was the key to the Battle of Gettysburg and ultimately set the stage for the eventual Union victory. Lee drew up a battle plan that we all know was doomed to failure. I believe his General Staff knew it would fail based on the Union’s superior defensive position on the high ground. General Longstreet in particular begged Lee not to order the attack. Most of Lee’s general staff were concerned in that Jeb Stuart had not made his whereabouts known in the prior two days of battle and the lack of intelligence from Stuart, which Lee had benefited from in his many victories was woefully absent. One of the things I believe was the greatest factor in Lee’s seeming invincibility up to this point, was Stuart’s many legendary rides around Union positions which gave Lee enormous advantages in previous battles since he knew what kind of force he was dealing with, where they were located, and the greatest weaknesses of the enemy to exploit for victory.
Lee was above all a brilliant defensive tactician normally picking a superior defensive position, luring Union forces to attack him, and destroying them in a counter attack aided by the afore mentioned intelligence gained by Stuart along with the individual initiative of Stonewall Jackson who had recently died as a result of wounds received at the Battle of Chancellorsville.
Longstreet recommended they move to a better position between Meade and the Union Capital of Washington DC where their forces would have the advantage. This would also give General Stuart and his Cavalry an opportunity to find them and give them crucial intelligence as to the Union’s disposition and over all strength.
In the end Lee didn't listen to Longstreet nor did he listen to the rest of his General staff...and fought the battle where they were. As a result, he sealed their fate and the eventual doom of the Confederacy with the decision to order what would later be known as Picket’s Charge.
Lee's plan was to send an entire division against the center of the Union Lines aided by an artillery barrage from his massed artillery. His plan might have succeeded were it fought on different ground...but this was Gettysburg and it was the field upon which they fought.
The key to it's success or failure was Lee's plan for the afore mentioned artillery barrage against the Union line. The general idea was to pound a hole in the Union line for Picket's division to assault. Again the field of battle proved the deciding factor. As mentioned before, The Union forces were in a line along Cemetery ridge and were generally above the artillery batteries engaged in the bombardment. This position posed a problem for Lee's strategy because the majority of the shelling went over the heads of Union forces and landed harmlessly in the valley behind...damage was done to be sure...but not nearly enough.
Then General Picket began his charge. Possessing the high ground, General Meade had the advantage because he could see the entire field separating the two armies. His artillery could sweep the entire field across which Picket would march, and finally, once the southern forces came within rifle range and were ready for the final bayonet charge against the Union line, Union troops had the advantage of being able to fire down upon a mass of men charging up hill, all this from fixed positions behind stone walls or hardened trenches which they had had three days to perfect.
In the end, Lee lost Picket's entire division and was never again able to mount another offensive Campaign.
The lessons for the Republican Party?
Lesson 1)
Winning a short and immediate skirmish may be satisfying…but if you fail to anticipate your enemy’s tactics and strategy, you will lose! Lee essentially lost the battle on day one by winning the initial skirmish of the battle by forcing the Union to a far more superior and defensible position. He further compounded the problem by insisting on staying engaged in a battle which was far more favorable to the enemy rather than fighting on a field of his choosing.
As someone who has followed politics over 20 years, my greatest frustration is that Republicans continually fight on Democrat ground. Democrats are allowed to choose the ground upon which we will fight, and they are always allowed by our leaders to define the terms of battle.
Lesson 2)
When your closest advisers are telling you you are making a mistake…Listen to them! For the life of me, I can’t figure out what was going through Lee’s mind during this battle unless he was tired of the war, and wanted to lose. I can’t help but wonder how things would have been different were Jackson around because in all of Lee’s major victories, it was Jackson who delivered the master stroke. Additionally, Jackson had proven in the past that he could and would tell Lee he was wrong and even refused to participate in a battle around Richmond a few short years earlier. Had Lee listened to his Generals, and moved to another position between Meade and Washington as Longstreet suggested, he once again would have been able to set up a battle on his own terms, in a position of his choosing, and potentially destroyed Meade who would have been forced to attack him in order to protect Washington. Had such a scenario played itself out, it is my belief that the Civil War might have been settled then and there in the South’s Favor.
In this, 2008 promises to be Republican’s greatest defeat in decades. We now have a Party who is hell bent on ignoring it’s base and those who love her most. We are beset by a candidate who not only insists on fighting the war on the enemy’s terms, he is insistent that we surrender the high ground to the enemy. Not only that, having set the stage for an un-winnable battle, he insists that we charge across a wide open field, under the guns of the enemy firing from a superior position thereby destroying ourselves and the Party that we love.
Lesson 3)
Intelligence! Had Lee waited for Stuart, he’d have known the strength of the Union position. He’d have known the futility of the numerous assaults that were attempted on days two and three. He’d have recognized the wisdom of his General staff and might have moved his army to a more defensible position and won yet another victory for the South.
Where does the Republican Party fit in this? Where is the intelligence that we need to listen to? 70 years of the same strategy, the same tactics, and the same battle plans and attacks upon our Party. We don’t have to guess what the enemy is doing, or going to do…they never change…their mode of operation is as consistent and discernable as the sun rising each morning. Yet we go into every battle as if we have no clue what to expect. It’s time we became not only the party of ideas, (which we are no longer), but we must become the party of strategy and tactics. It’s well past time to learn the lessons the enemy has taught us for 70 years. We need to look to what they have done in the past and use it to counter their every move.
There is so much more I could add to the narrative of this battle and what we should learn from it…but space won’t permit it. I have made a beginning here, and hope you and our party leadership can take what I have started and carry it on!
That having been said, the 2008 Presidential elections and our nominee present us with a choice. I have made this statement before and don’t wish to repeat myself, but the subject of this article begs the question, “Do we follow this leader and make the charge that could be the death of our Party for years to come, or do we heed the lessons from the battle of Gettysburg. Do we charge with Picket, or do we retreat to more favorable ground with Longstreet?
These are questions that must eventually be answered by the Party, but today it is each of us separately that must answer these questions. I am writing this partly in response to a statement I have heard repeated over and over again that you can’t win a war by retreating and/or losing. By losing the skirmish for Seminary Ridge, Meade proved this assumption to be false…you can lose the skirmish…or the battle for Seminary ridge and retreat to a winning position for the overall battle of Gettysburg. On the flip side, Lee fought the wrong battle on the wrong field. Had he retreated to a better position the outcome of the war could have been completely different.
The questions we now face is, “Do we vote for McCain and win the skirmish?” If we win the skirmish do we lose the overall battle? If we win the skirmish and lose the overall battle, is the war over for us?
I’m not advocating not voting for McCain, but this is the elephant currently in the tent, and we all need to decide for ourselves the answer to this perplexing question and may God give us the wisdom to make the right choice in the end!
...looking forward to the continuation of this series