- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:53 am to ClientNumber9
Ive pondered what a platoon of modern US infantry could have achieved in historical war.
While the AK/AR rifles would give immense advantage short term, it could be mitigated by cannon fire in the medium term.
Obviously, one attack helo would turn the tables drastically but Id think a modern infantry platoon with an attached mortar platoon would have the capability to dramatically alter world history prior to WWI. (Of course, assuming unlimited ammo)
While the AK/AR rifles would give immense advantage short term, it could be mitigated by cannon fire in the medium term.
Obviously, one attack helo would turn the tables drastically but Id think a modern infantry platoon with an attached mortar platoon would have the capability to dramatically alter world history prior to WWI. (Of course, assuming unlimited ammo)
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:53 am to BigBinBR
quote:
Line formation was largely abandoned by the end of the civil war.
By the summer of 1864 the Civil War turned into a precursor of the trench warfare of WWI
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:54 am to ClientNumber9
quote:
Could the Confederacy, in the late stages of the war (1864) have won the Civil War with 100 AK-47s and a million rounds of ammunition?
So 10k rounds each.
Are we assuming the guys we give the guns to will be decent with them from the start, or is there a period of adjustment where they are wasting more rounds?
Essentially just a few of them would make most locations unassailable by an army in those days.
I don't think giving them the AKs so late in the war would "win" the south the war, but I think if you use them correctly you could leverage that advantage into a settlement.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:54 am to ClientNumber9
I think if they had sniper rifles they could have won.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:54 am to ClientNumber9
The Union would have just thrown more Irish immigrants into the fire
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:55 am to ClientNumber9
In 1864, No. Things were too far gone by then.
In 1862, Yes
In 1862, Yes
Posted on 2/24/25 at 7:59 am to texag7
MG42's might not have done it.
I don't see how any single small arm type would have altered the outcome substantially. The south was split by naval blockade and small arms can't fix that. Bringing your new toys to bear effectively requires more logistics and the south had none of that to start with.
I think it could significantly influence the outcomes of individual battles but no matter what, the south loses the war.
Now a single modern warship would be a far more interesting hypothetical IMO.
I don't see how any single small arm type would have altered the outcome substantially. The south was split by naval blockade and small arms can't fix that. Bringing your new toys to bear effectively requires more logistics and the south had none of that to start with.
I think it could significantly influence the outcomes of individual battles but no matter what, the south loses the war.
Now a single modern warship would be a far more interesting hypothetical IMO.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:02 am to ClientNumber9
No.
They would have needed a better navy
They would have needed a better navy
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:04 am to RogerTheShrubber
what about one single apache helicopter
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:05 am to barbapapa
Probably not, without unlimited ammo.
The blcokades and not having an industrial base were the Souths biggest obstacles.
The blcokades and not having an industrial base were the Souths biggest obstacles.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:07 am to ClientNumber9
They weren’t winning regardless. We had more men, more support, and higher morale. 100 AKs isn’t going to kill 2,000,000+ soldiers.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:08 am to ClientNumber9
Henry Turtledove thought so.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:09 am to barbapapa
Assuming it could stay armed and operational, that would basically hinge on if some artillery captain got off a lucky shot or not. Any kind of attack helicopter on that battlefield would likely have broken the enemy with very little effort and probably very little ammo. Itd be insurmountable.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:11 am to barbapapa
quote:
one single apache helicopter
No. The minie ball was bigger than a .50cal round, which people, especially the left, forget.
quote:
two most popular rifled muskets were the .69 caliber Harpers Ferry and the .58 caliber Springfield.
The south could have had 1,000 claymores and it wouldn't have made a difference.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:13 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
A few more interesting hypotheticals IMO
- 2 way radios?
- One satellite image per day?
- infinite MRE's?
- modern sleeping bags?
- modern boots?
- penicillin?
Those would all make a bigger difference for the south than 100 modern infantry rifles IMO.
- 2 way radios?
- One satellite image per day?
- infinite MRE's?
- modern sleeping bags?
- modern boots?
- penicillin?
Those would all make a bigger difference for the south than 100 modern infantry rifles IMO.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:13 am to ClientNumber9
quote:
How could Lee best unveil them on the battlefield to make the biggest difference?
Maybe not stand in formation 100yds from the enemy.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:14 am to OweO
quote:
I think if they had sniper rifles they could have won
They did
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:15 am to ClientNumber9
quote:
Guns of the South by Harry Turtledove
First thing I thought of when I saw the title.
Posted on 2/24/25 at 8:15 am to ClientNumber9
No.
But I’ll play the game.
Give the AKs to your absolute best soldiers and presumably train them. Split them in to groups of 10-15 guys. Have them rove behind the lines attacking supply lines, attacking the trains, ambushing troop columns to attempt to kill with hit and run as many Yankees as possible without being killed or captured.
But I’ll play the game.
Give the AKs to your absolute best soldiers and presumably train them. Split them in to groups of 10-15 guys. Have them rove behind the lines attacking supply lines, attacking the trains, ambushing troop columns to attempt to kill with hit and run as many Yankees as possible without being killed or captured.
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News