the war due to rigid, self righteous and excessive individualism of their own aristocracy. Could the Confederacy have achieved independence under other leadership? William H. Trescot, a distinguished South Carolina, wrote to a friend on March 1, 1862: "Lee...is the only man in the revolution whom I have met that at all rises to historical size." This discerning estimate, made while Lee was relatively obscure, was to be abundantly confirmed by subsequent events. Lee was not a politician, but he was remarkably intelligent and he grew rapidly as his responsibilities increased. His magnanimity, personal magnetism, and tact might have been a powerful force in combating the South's excessive individualism and molding its dissident elements into something approaching a team. Certainly he displayed more of first-rate statesmanship than any other person who rose to high position in the CSA (Wiley). What if the South would have realized that getting rid of slavery would have achieved independence? Would such a move have wrecked their economy? What if the South would never had carried the war into the North? At least four fatal flaws occurred in the strategy of the South early in the war: 1. Placing much of their military assets into defending the Mississippi River with large fortifications (ala Professor Mahan the master engineer at West Point). 2. Trying to do too much with too little...the two invasions into the North brought about Antietam and Gettysburg both were not only perceived as military victories for the North...but also were perceived as great political victories for Lincoln. 3. They needed a fine tuned defensive strategy in maintaining control of Kentucky. The strategy here could have been offensive. What if? 4. Probably the most important flaw...they failed to achieve a successful diplomatic relationship with potential foreign allies. War takes on a barbaric nature very quickly. When looking at the p...
