Jump to content
270soft Forum
TheMiddlePolitical

Confederate States of America play through

Recommended Posts

I will be doing a Confederate State series 

-6 year terms with one term (can change) 

@jnewt scenarios

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you wont

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1861

After winning the inaugural presidency,President Jefferson Davis faces sole opposition,from former president John Tyler. He is expected to easily win. 

Davis wins with ease.

results.csv =results

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

1861

After winning the inaugural presidency,President Jefferson Davis faces sole opposition,from former president John Tyler. He is expected to easily win. 

Davis wins with ease.

results.csv =results

 

Capture.PNG

I don't think Tyler was on the record as a secessionist, but hey...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

26 minutes ago, Patine said:

I don't think Tyler was on the record as a secessionist, but hey...

But he was elected to the Confederate Congress and could not take his seat. He died before they came together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patine said:

I don't think Tyler was on the record as a secessionist, but hey...

He headed the Virginia secession convention and signed their Ordinance of Secession.  At his funeral the coffin was draped with a confederate flag.  He's the only president laid to rest under a foreign flag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jefferson Davis term 1861-1867

-In his inaugural speech after being elected by the people,not Congress (The whole reason for the snap election was cause of Davis,to prove the unity of the CSA) Davis sought to protect states rights,and the lives of every Confederate citizen. (Notice Slaves were not citizens). (1861)

-Davis under criticism,changed a lot of his personnel (from his friends to real,qualified people) he was applaud for this. (1861)

-The battle of fort Sumter occurs,with the only notable thing is that there was a single casualty,a horse. And the Civil War begins. (1861)

-The first battle of Bull Run occurs,With Union soldiers suffering casualties by a ratio of 3-1,the War starts off bad for the Union,this battled is notated for the brutality of CSA General Joseph E. Johnston,as all 78 Union prisoners were executed,Davis was appalled by this,but let Johnston continue to serve because of his victory. (1861)

-Pres. Davis enacts the "Army and Navy extension act of 1861" which automatically raised taxes on plantation owners and the wealthy of the CSA by 20%,this allowed the Army and Navy to be funded an additional 15%. They were fine with the tax. (1861)

-Pres. Davis enacts his own form of the Homestead act,except only extending to "The settlements of Oklahoma and New Mexico",He ordered Lieutenant General Edmund Kirby Smith to wipe out all Natives in the two settlements within 5 years. (Davis of course wanted to win the war first,but it was a message) (1861)

-In the Battle of Hampton roads the CSA wins overwhelmingly once again,within the last two months the CSA has been focusing on a "Victory on both land and sea" initiative,increasing production,and improvement on the navy by 50% (1862)

-In a completely failed attempt the Union trys to make a hard push south to Nashville Tennessee,they lose overwhelmingly in a battle right out of Nashville called,fittingly,The Battle of Nashville. 16,000 Union soldiers were killed with ONLY around 650 CSA Soldiers dieing,this was thanked massively to Pres. Davis for allocating funds to complete fortify Nashville. (1862)

-The battle of the Applachia occurs in Northern West Virginia,with General Robert E. Lee in charge he initiates a "Back-shock" maneuver (think Blitzkrieg") This was considered the turning point of the Civil War in which it went overwhelmingly in the CSA's favor (it already was in there favor with a vast amount of consecutive victories). 32,700 Union Soldiers were killed with 11,900 CSA soldiers dying.(1862)

-Pres. Davis makes an official announcement that the war is for "States rights,not the simple right to own slaves",Days later he announced that he would embargo cotton to European countries if they were not to help them in the war effort,3 days after that The United Kingdom and France both announced they would help fund the CSA's war effort. (1863)

-Union Pres. Lincoln says in an announcement "With the overwhelming powers of European powers and the CSA the Union is in a adherenly unfortunate place",exactly one week later,under General Robert E. Lee the siege of Washington began. (1863)

-On December 1st 1863,on the 5th day of the siege of Washington President Abraham Lincoln of the Union surrenders. (1863)

-On December 15th 1863 the Unions surrender clauses were made official,100 Million Dollars(US) were forced to be paid to the CSA,The Unions army will be capped at 150,000 until the year 1893 (30 years),The Union would cede the border states of Missouri and Kentucky,However in the Unions favor,All General and Political administration of the union would be aquaited,and both CSA and USA prisoners would be released,President Jefferson Davis saying "They are our cousins and brothers,we cannot punish the people themselves". (1863)

-On January 1st 1864 Robert E. Lee and Samuel Cooper,The two generals who led the largest victories in the war were both given CSA Medal of Honors by President Davis. (1864)

-President Davis begins the Homesteading act,an order he enacted in 1861 but has had on old till the war ended,with General Edmund Kirby Smith dying in battle he instead gives the job to the brutal general Joesph E. Johnston,he is ridiculed greatly for this as even many people of the CSA called Johnston a war criminal,but Davis says the reason for it is because "He is the man of passion and commitment he will gain us this valuable land",Davis says he hopes within 8 years,with the help of the next President (as it will be his job to do so) to make the two colonies states. (1864)

-Both The senate and house,and governor officials are now elected to 6 year terms,with all elections happening in the same year of presidential elections. Pres. Davis pushed for this act called the "United Government" act. (1864)

-Two official parties are founded to be part of the next elections in 1867

          -Democrats: The party of the Revolution, the Democrats are a relatively generic conservative political party. Based in Virginia, it’s the party of the status quo. While it wishes to preserve the structural integrity of the confederacy, the institution of slavery, and the memory of the revolution it stands for little else. Its membership is composed of the rich and middle class, with upstart textile manufacturers beginning to depose the planter old guard from the ranks of its leadership. With the collapse of the cotton boom its traditional political dominance is being threatened. 

          -Whigs: A more conservative counterpart of the Democrats, the Whigs take the Confederacy literally. They are a party of state’s rights and entrenched money. They advocate the expansion slavery, possibly through foreign adventurism, non-existent tariffs, mandatory service in the state militia, and the promotion of “traditional southern values”. The Whigs are most popular in South Carolina, and the Deep South. 
         -Other parties tried to file there parties,but did not reach the required 15,000 signatures 

-Jefferson Davis does some more election adjusting,He makes 3 Senators per state,and 1 representative per 50,000 citizens in the state. The "Election adjustment act V1"(Per 50,000 FREE citizens) (1865) 

-Jefferson Davis makes the presidential election by POPULAR VOTE,saying "Popular vote is the only way the people can truly have there voices heard" (1865)

-Congress elections will be held on Feb 1 of each presidential election year around 9 months before the presidential elections (1865)

-Primaries will be done by a nation wide "Primary day" elected by popular vote,by registered members of there party (1865)

-Primaries will be held in two rounds if needed,if a candidate receives over 50% the first round they are victorious. (1865)

-The entirety of 1866 for Jefferson Davis was extremely quite,for the entire year of 1866,he initiated a slight tax increase nationwide,the CSA was enjoying there war reparations from the USA. In the 1866 budget Jefferson toned down the budget on the navy and army,though he held a formidable peace time army. Davis decided to invest into infrastructure nationally,Beginning a nationwide railroad. (1866)

-For the 1867 election President Davis supports Gold Star General Robert E. Lee,a national hero who is expected to easily win the primary,and presidency. (1867)

Overall Average approval rating:88%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congress how many senators,How many for a majority?

House of Representatives:150 total,76 for majority

Senate:39 total,20 for majority

The Map of the CSA Grey states,Red currently colonies.

 

 

1867.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would West Virginia still break off if the Confederates win the war?

IRL, they were able brake off because the Union held the stronger position in the area at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jvikings1 said:

How would West Virginia still break off if the Confederates win the war?

IRL, they were able brake off because the Union held the stronger position in the area at the time.

The Union renamed the state "Appalachian" it was cause of the anti-slavery sentiment in the state. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

How would West Virginia still break off if the Confederates win the war?

IRL, they were able brake off because the Union held the stronger position in the area at the time.

They would of likely still broken off DURING the war (which they did, 1863, right in the middle - and no Confederate military campaign was focused on the area), and got themselves entrenched, and given the recalcitrance of the population and the lack of use to planters of the rugged, Appalachian land, it was let go to the Union in the peace settlement. After all, even if the Confederacy won it's independence, they wouldn't immediately be in a military or economic position, logically, to fight for TOO many concessions, as any victory they'd won would depend heavily on Union political and social war weariness, not decisive and maintainable Confederate military supremacy. Besides, the Confederate SHOULD be collapsing in a years here due to the Khedive of Egypt selling inexpensive cotton abroad in large quantities without a stain of "slave labour" label, if things are progressing at all realistically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Patine said:

They would of likely still broken off DURING the war (which they did, 1863, right in the middle - and no Confederate military campaign was focused on the area), and got themselves entrenched, and given the recalcitrance of the population and the lack of use to planters of the rugged, Appalachian land, it was let go to the Union in the peace settlement. After all, even if the Confederacy won it's independence, they wouldn't immediately be in a military or economic position, logically, to fight for TOO many concessions, as any victory they'd won would depend heavily on Union political and social war weariness, not decisive and maintainable Confederate military supremacy. Besides, the Confederate SHOULD be collapsing in a years here due to the Khedive of Egypt selling inexpensive cotton abroad in large quantities without a stain of "slave labour" label, if things are progressing at all realistically.

@Patine Literally in my pre-notes I have that as "The Confederates Great depression" so good prediction good sir as it's still going to happen :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congress elections 1867

ELECTIONS

HOR: 85 Democrats,65 Whigs

Senate:22 Democrats,17 Whigs

Governors:9 Democrats,4 Whigs

Senate Majority Leader:Francis P. Blair Jr. (MO)

Senate Minority Leader:Albert Gallatin Brown (MS)

House Majority Leader:John T. Harris (VA)

House Minority Leader:John McQueen (SC)

Governor Majority Leader:John Breckenridge (KY)

Governor Minority Leader:Sam Houston (TX)

MAP:Black-Not CSA,Dark Grey-Colonies,Blue-Democrat Majority,Yellow-Whig Majority,Pink-split

 

HOR MAP:

Capture.PNG.4aacaaaebdc0198614b7a9707492ee40.PNG

SENATE MAP:

Capture.PNG.875d224aa4e995384250b4caff5a45b0.PNG

GOVERNORS:

Capture.PNG.b0f945c7de094fb1df6075974f6b428c.PNG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Congress elections 1867

ELECTIONS

HOR: 85 Democrats,65 Whigs

Senate:22 Democrats.17 Whigs

MAP:Black-Not CSA,Dark Grey-Colonies,Blue-Democrat Majority,Yellow-Whig Majority,Pink-split

 

HOR MAP:

Capture.PNG.4aacaaaebdc0198614b7a9707492ee40.PNG

SENATE MAP:

Capture.PNG.875d224aa4e995384250b4caff5a45b0.PNG

 

 

Shouldn't the parties take different names than the ones that existed before secession. As I believe I'd brought with the creator a modern Texas secession scenario (I think that was@jnewt , too, in fact), it is practically unheard of for a part of a nation, after seceding and becoming fully independent, to continue to use party names that existed in the nation they seceded from, unless said party was SPECIFICALLY built around advocating and promoting secession of that region (for instance, and independent Quebec would likely still have a Parti Quebecois, an independent Scotland would likely still have a Scottish National Party, and an independent Wales would likely still have a Plaid Cymru, and the Irish Free State (later Republic of Ireland) still maintained a Sinn Fein (which later split into it's current largest parties, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, and the Sinn Fein label, and claimed successor to that party, reorganized later in Northern Ireland), but no other parties that were active in Ireland from a British political pedigree exist there anymore (despite strong similarity in name, symbol, and colour, the Labour Party of Ireland is NOT a successor of the British Labour Party, but formed decades later independently).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Shouldn't the parties take different names than the ones that existed before secession. As I believe I'd brought with the creator a modern Texas secession scenario (I think that was@jnewt , too, in fact), it is practically unheard of for a part of a nation, after seceding and becoming fully independent, to continue to use party names that existed in the nation they seceded from, unless said party was SPECIFICALLY built around advocating and promoting secession of that region (for instance, and independent Quebec would likely still have a Parti Quebecois, an independent Scotland would likely still have a Scottish National Party, and an independent Wales would likely still have a Plaid Cymru, and the Irish Free State (later Republic of Ireland) still maintained a Sinn Fein (which later split into it's current largest parties, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, and the Sinn Fein label, and claimed successor to that party, reorganized later in Northern Ireland), but no other parties that were active in Ireland from a British political pedigree exist there anymore (despite strong similarity in name, symbol, and colour, the Labour Party of Ireland is NOT a successor of the British Labour Party, but formed decades later independently).

Well since the Democrats are (In a way) The independence party of the CSA they keep there name,and the Whigs take a new form,and were dead,and now brought back by the CSA,parties will change,and disband and such and new ones will come,as you will see in this timeline. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

Shouldn't the parties take different names than the ones that existed before secession. As I believe I'd brought with the creator a modern Texas secession scenario (I think that was@jnewt , too, in fact), it is practically unheard of for a part of a nation, after seceding and becoming fully independent, to continue to use party names that existed in the nation they seceded from, unless said party was SPECIFICALLY built around advocating and promoting secession of that region (for instance, and independent Quebec would likely still have a Parti Quebecois, an independent Scotland would likely still have a Scottish National Party, and an independent Wales would likely still have a Plaid Cymru, and the Irish Free State (later Republic of Ireland) still maintained a Sinn Fein (which later split into it's current largest parties, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, and the Sinn Fein label, and claimed successor to that party, reorganized later in Northern Ireland), but no other parties that were active in Ireland from a British political pedigree exist there anymore (despite strong similarity in name, symbol, and colour, the Labour Party of Ireland is NOT a successor of the British Labour Party, but formed decades later independently).

Also since you've quoted I updated the post with leaders,and governor totals/maps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Congress elections 1867

ELECTIONS

HOR: 85 Democrats,65 Whigs

Senate:22 Democrats,17 Whigs

Governors:9 Democrats,4 Whigs

Senate Majority Leader:Francis P. Blair Jr. (MO)

Senate Minority Leader:Albert Gallatin Brown (MS)

House Majority Leader:John T. Harris (VA)

House Minority Leader:John McQueen (SC)

Governor Majority Leader:John Breckenridge (KY)

Governor Minority Leader:Sam Houston (TX)

MAP:Black-Not CSA,Dark Grey-Colonies,Blue-Democrat Majority,Yellow-Whig Majority,Pink-split

 

HOR MAP:

Capture.PNG.4aacaaaebdc0198614b7a9707492ee40.PNG

SENATE MAP:

Capture.PNG.875d224aa4e995384250b4caff5a45b0.PNG

GOVERNORS:

Capture.PNG.b0f945c7de094fb1df6075974f6b428c.PNG

 

Just so you know, using that program, you can isolate those states so that the North doesn't even show up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

Just so you know, using that program, you can isolate those states so that the North doesn't even show up.

How do you do that? that'd be extremely useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1867 Primaries (for primaries I won't be using PI)

Democrat candidates 

-Gen. Robert E. Lee

-VP Alexander Stephens

-Sec. John C. Breckenridge

Three powerful candidates,all very close too Pres. Davis vow for the nomination,of course done by popular vote. Lee and Breckenridge try to one up each other for who was more responsible for the war effort,Stephens is kind of an outlier,even though he is VP. Breckenridge is much more articulate,while Lee is much more aggressive,living up to his General stature. Lee's program included keeping "The South Great" while investing more into a peacetime army,and investing in trading infrastructure. Though something that turned off some citizens,and politicians was his stance on the USA. He vouched to cut the war reparations by 2/3 (They've paid 2/4 so they'd have minimal left to pay),and he said how he wanted to have close relations with the USA. Breckenridge didn't make the USA a part of his campaigning, Stephens was anti-rail road pro homesteading,while Breckenridge was pro both. Lee said he would consult to his domestic advisers for an opinion. All candidates encouraged immigration,but with strict application. Gen. Robert E. Lee's most controversial position was his position on slavery,to allow it not to expand to new territories and contain it were it is now. Breckenridge and Stephens were very strict on this issue saying it will remain and expand. And then came primary day. 

Round 1 

(1): Gen. Robert E. Lee-40.1%

(2): Sec. John C. Breckenridge-34.7%

(3): VP Alexander Stephens-25.2% (eliminated) 

It is widely believed,though he had controversial positions,Gen. Lee's wartime efforts pushed him into the second round,Stephens had the least charismatic attitude,and was not considered a strong leader. We move to the second rounds,which in all accounts is considered a tossup.

Round 2

(W):Gen. Robert E. Lee-53.8%

(L):Sec. John C. Breckenridge-46.2%

Robert E. Lee chooses Virginia Senator Robert M.T. Hunter,which is widely regarded as an excellent pick,Hunter was actually expected to run,but opted not to. (NOTICE:VP's are aloud to be from the same state in the CSA)

ROUND 1 MAP-Lee Blue,Breckenridge Green,Stephens yellow

Capture.PNG.5777c7ec80f8e65c7f01574f807a2905.PNG

ROUND 2 MAP-Lee Blue,Breckenridge green

Capture.PNG.ad340b6b684bb04ab28d8adf8694792b.PNG

 

Whig candidates.: 

-TN Sen. Andrew Johnson 

-TX Gov. Sam Houston

-GA Gov. Joe Brown (Withdrew from primary one week before primary day)

This was a tough,tough fight. With only two men vowing for the Whig nomination there would only be one round regardless. Sam Houston continually called Andrew Johnson "A phony,a fake Whig,a fake Confederate" Johnson was Lincolns VP nominee only up to before his inauguration (until December 1860) but regardless,he was still his nominee. Though Johnson was strongly for states rights Houston contingently said he would "Sell the Confederacy to the Union",Houston touted how he use to be president,and has experience (President of Texas). Though Johnson had a tough,cowboy like rhetoric to counter it. Houston and Johnson were definitely both harsh,rough,and tough speaking men. Throughout the whole primaries they hurled insults at each other,back and fourth. This made many inter-party members afraid,saying they were tearing the party apart,which was completely true. At the very last minute (A month before the primaries) Georgia Governor Joe Brown entered the race. He was definitely the most articulate,calm person of the 3,But at the end of the day,him and party members realized he couldn't win,he withdrew one week before primary day. 

Round 1

(W):TX Gov. Sam Houston-64.7%

(L):TN Sen. Andrew Johnson-35.3%

At the end of the day,the simple fact that Johnson was the Confederates recent enemies VP destroyed his chances. Houston celebrated at his home in Houston Texas.

TX Gov. Sam Houston selects his VP to be North Carolina Rep. George Washington Logan a young,energetic man. 

ROUND 1 MAP: Johnson yellow,Houston Red

Capture.PNG.b80e2c21d17e82fac67bdd2e795b63ef.PNG

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

The 1867 Primaries (for primaries I won't be using PI)

Democrat candidates 

-Gen. Robert E. Lee

-VP Alexander Stephens

-Sec. John C. Breckenridge

Three powerful candidates,all very close too Pres. Davis vow for the nomination,of course done by popular vote. Lee and Breckenridge try to one up each other for who was more responsible for the war effort,Stephens is kind of an outlier,even though he is VP. Breckenridge is much more articulate,while Lee is much more aggressive,living up to his General stature. Lee's program included keeping "The South Great" while investing more into a peacetime army,and investing in trading infrastructure. Though something that turned off some citizens,and politicians was his stance on the USA. He vouched to cut the war reparations by 2/3 (They've paid 2/4 so they'd have minimal left to pay),and he said how he wanted to have close relations with the USA. Breckenridge didn't make the USA a part of his campaigning, Stephens was anti-rail road pro homesteading,while Breckenridge was pro both. Lee said he would consult to his domestic advisers for an opinion. All candidates encouraged immigration,but with strict application. Gen. Robert E. Lee's most controversial position was his position on slavery,to allow it not to expand to new territories and contain it were it is now. Breckenridge and Stephens were very strict on this issue saying it will remain and expand. And then came primary day. 

Round 1 

(1): Gen. Robert E. Lee-40.1%

(2): Sec. John C. Breckenridge-34.7%

(3): VP Alexander Stephens-25.2% (eliminated) 

It is widely believed,though he had controversial positions,Gen. Lee's wartime efforts pushed him into the second round,Stephens had the least charismatic attitude,and was not considered a strong leader. We move to the second rounds,which in all accounts is considered a tossup.

Round 2

(W):Gen. Robert E. Lee-53.8%

(L):Sec. John C. Breckenridge-46.2%

Robert E. Lee chooses Virginia Senator Robert M.T. Hunter,which is widely regarded as an excellent pick,Hunter was actually expected to run,but opted not to. (NOTICE:VP's are aloud to be from the same state in the CSA)

ROUND 1 MAP-Lee Blue,Breckenridge Green,Stephens yellow

Capture.PNG.5777c7ec80f8e65c7f01574f807a2905.PNG

ROUND 2 MAP-Lee Blue,Breckenridge green

Capture.PNG.5777c7ec80f8e65c7f01574f807a2905.PNG

 

Whig candidates.: WILL UPDATE

-TN Sen. Andrew Johnson 

-TX Gov. Sam Houston

 

The Cherokee and Chocktaw Nations were promised full Confederate Statehood for their military support if the Confederacy won independence. What happened their? Why hasn't that even been addressed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Patine said:

The Cherokee and Chocktaw Nations were promised full Confederate Statehood for their military support if the Confederacy won independence. What happened their? Why hasn't that even been addressed?

Read:They were never promised,it was addressed as in "Pres. Davis enacts his own form of the Homestead act,except only extending to "The settlements of Oklahoma and New Mexico",He ordered Lieutenant General Edmund Kirby Smith to wipe out all Natives in the two settlements within 5 years. (Davis of course wanted to win the war first,but it was a message) (1861)"

President Davis begins the Homesteading act,an order he enacted in 1861 but has had on old till the war ended,with General Edmund Kirby Smith dying in battle he instead gives the job to the brutal general Joesph E. Johnston,he is ridiculed greatly for this as even many people of the CSA called Johnston a war criminal,but Davis says the reason for it is because "He is the man of passion and commitment he will gain us this valuable land",Davis says he hopes within 8 years,with the help of the next President (as it will be his job to do so) to make the two colonies states. (1864)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATED PRIMARIES FOR WHIGS:take a look,now on to the general. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1867 Presidential Election

Democrat-Gen. Robert E. Lee/VA Sen. Robert M.T. Hunter

Whig-TX Gov. Sam Houston/NC Rep. George Washington Logan

The General election was hard fought,Houston couldn't attack Lee like he could Johnson,because Lee was a war hero,This made Houston's tough man rhetoric be toned back a bit. Lee was less informative on policy questions than Houston was,but Lee stuck on his Union war reparations cut and not expanding slavery. Houston constantly toughted states rights,and also was the one to bring up the acquisition of Cuba. Lee was toned back on this issue,but Houston's view was aggressive. Lee talked about expanding the railroad,and was less prevalent on homesteading then Houston was,Houston basically wanted to take every territory available. At the end of the day the election was closer than every expected,it took till 3 weeks before inauguration day to get official vote counts.

1867results.csv

Capture.PNG.0ad297c18f6d0d390715e02582cbebff.PNG

2nd President of the CSA:Robert E. Lee

2nd Vice-President of the CSA:Robert M.T. Hunter

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Read:They were never promised,it was addressed as in "Pres. Davis enacts his own form of the Homestead act,except only extending to "The settlements of Oklahoma and New Mexico",He ordered Lieutenant General Edmund Kirby Smith to wipe out all Natives in the two settlements within 5 years. (Davis of course wanted to win the war first,but it was a message) (1861)"

President Davis begins the Homesteading act,an order he enacted in 1861 but has had on old till the war ended,with General Edmund Kirby Smith dying in battle he instead gives the job to the brutal general Joesph E. Johnston,he is ridiculed greatly for this as even many people of the CSA called Johnston a war criminal,but Davis says the reason for it is because "He is the man of passion and commitment he will gain us this valuable land",Davis says he hopes within 8 years,with the help of the next President (as it will be his job to do so) to make the two colonies states. (1864)"

Of course, "wiping them out and clearing and securing their land for settlement," would be a lot harder in this case because Stand Watie and the other Cherokee and Chocktaw commanders would be armed to the teeth, entrenched, and battle-hardened, and there'd be no Union Army to disarm them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×