What If?: Gages Plan Worked During the Siege of Boston?

[The Imp]

Basically, the Colonials do not have the advantage of knowing that the British will attack Charlestown peninsula and the Dorchester Heights. The source stumbles down a flight of stairs and breaks his neck(or something that prevents him from getting his message across).

Without the Colonials knowing about the attack, they do not fortify the Peninsula. Gages plan goes according to plan, with the Dorchester Heights being secured and defended. Soon after, British forces sweep down and capture Roxbury, routing the American forces in the area.

In an unopposed landing, the British under Howe take the Charlestown peninsula.

To be continued...

 

[LightSpectra]

What if: "What if" scenarios had any basis in rational thought whatsoever?

 

[The Imp]

What if: "What if" scenarios had any basis in rational thought whatsoever?

Go troll somewhere else.

 

[LightSpectra]

It's not trolling to demand some intellectual rigidity in (what purports to be) an intellectual exercise. How, pray tell, do you calculate the psychological, tactical, logistical and other factors in this counter-factual? Make them up?

 

[The Imp]

It's not trolling to demand some intellectual rigidity in (what purports to be) an intellectual exercise. How, pray tell, do you calculate the psychological, tactical, logistical and other factors in this counter-factual? Make them up?

But it is trolling when the thread is a hypothetical.

 

[LightSpectra]

But it is trolling when the thread is a hypothetical.

What's the point of a hypothetical if it's going to be nonsense? I'm asking you to demonstrate the contrary.

 

[The Imp]

What's the point of a hypothetical if it's going to be nonsense? I'm asking you to demonstrate the contrary.

Doesn't matter whether it is nonsense or not. If you argue against a hypothetical in a forum, you automatically become a troll. From here on out, i'm just going to ignore you in this thread. Happy trails.

 

[ParkCungHee]

It's not trolling to demand some intellectual rigidity in (what purports to be) an intellectual exercise. How, pray tell, do you calculate the psychological, tactical, logistical and other factors in this counter-factual? Make them up?

Counterfactuals are actually a necessary part of the historians craft, and I've seen you use them, if not make threads about them.

 

[LightSpectra]

Doesn't matter whether it is nonsense or not. If you argue against a hypothetical in a forum, you automatically become a troll.

These two sentences are remarkably supportive of each other.

Counterfactuals are actually a necessary part of the historians craft, and I've seen you use them, if not make threads about them.

It depends on what degree they are used to. "Could the Soviet Union have industrialized faster than it did?" is a question of potentiality, and can be answered. "What would the Soviet Union have done if it were more industrialized?" is a question of actuality, and cannot be answered in any sensible manner.

 

[ParkCungHee]

How about "What would have happened had Germany respected Belgian Neutrality and invaded France through Alsace Lorraine?"

 

[LightSpectra]

How about "What would have happened had Germany respected Belgian Neutrality and invaded France through Alsace Lorraine?"

One can tell you what the Germans and French themselves expected, which is somewhat useful. One can make military estimations, which is somewhat useful. But one cannot univocally say what would have happened.

 

[ParkCungHee]

One can tell you what the Germans and French themselves expected, which is somewhat useful. One can make military estimations, which is somewhat useful. But one cannot univocally say what would have happened.

I see. And while I am not expert (or even passable student) when it comes to the American revolution, why can one not make similar military estimations based on the afforementioned plans?

 

[LightSpectra]

I see. And while I am not expert (or even passable student) when it comes to the American revolution, why can one not make similar military estimations based on the afforementioned plans?

Because that's not what was asked. The question wasn't, "how many soldiers and supplies would likely be expended doing operation X?;" that can be estimated. The question was what the American and British would've done if history were radically altered, and I've already gone into a diatribe about why that's absurd.

 

[Masada]

Seriously, Lightspectra go troll somewhere else. ParkCungHee is right. Your willing to engage in counterfactuals on your own terms but refuse to countenance the possibility of anyone else having that 'intellectual' privilege. Take the whole Anglo-German war example you were talking about. How is that any different from what The Imp is asking? Wait, it isn't.

 

[LightSpectra]

Your willing to engage in counterfactuals on your own terms but refuse to countenance the possibility of anyone else having that 'intellectual' privilege.

If I engage in counterfactuals, it's only to demonstrate the absurdity of the premises. I never have and still do not posit that it's possible to derive any sort of meaningful conclusions from them. If you want to play fiction, then you can so do on the Off-Topic forum.

Take the whole Anglo-German war example you were talking about. How is that any different from what The Imp is asking? Wait, it isn't.

Because we're discussing what the theoretical options were and what respective figures thought of them, not what would have happened if the scenario were different.

 

[Masada]

Those two statements don't parse. You haven't demonstrated the absurdity of the premise at all in your Anglo-German war scenario. I did. You just blithely accepted that it was possible and worked accordingly and even drew conclusions from it to support your position.

Because we're discussing what the theoretical options were and what respective figures thought of them, not what would have happened if the scenario were different.

No. You conjured a scenario out of thin air. You didn't offer a means of why it would happen or even examine what 'respective figures' would have thought about it. You can't worm your way out of this. So I dunno go don a golden mantle walk around hell and get back to me about this fiction thing at a later date.

 

[LightSpectra]

Those two statements don't parse. You haven't demonstrated the absurdity of the premise at all in your Anglo-German war scenario. I did. You just blithely accepted that it was possible and worked accordingly and even drew conclusions from it to support your position.

That wasn't a counter-factual because we weren't discussing how the war would've unfolded; if we were, then I would've been the first one to shoot off my usual complaints about the butterfly effect and what not.

What we were discussing is why the Germans chose to carry out the Schlieffen Plan based on its hypothetical outcome. The assumption on the part of the Germans was that the Schlieffen Plan would have succeeded, thus averting a long and bloody war with the French, and possibly continuing to a naval war with Britain. Hence, if one is going to debate the ethics behind invading Belgium, one has to consider the intent: namely, that the purpose of the Schlieffen Plan was to prevent a war of attrition with France.

Notice how I'm not playing "what if?" anywhere in the above contention? Because I'm not throwing dice to see how the world would be if you magically altered some factors. Rather, we were investigating the moral ramifications of the Schlieffen Plan: its intent was to do X, so we have to consider the possibility of X. I make no presumption to say how the Great War or the world would be different had the Plan succeeded, because it's impossible to do so for the reasons given earlier in the thread. The presumption we were operating on is what the Germans thought would happen, and that was the basis behind the debate of the morality of the invasion of Belgium.

 

[bombshoo]

Is this question? Or are you beginning an alt history? Do you want to know what would happen next?

 

[The Imp]

Is this question? Or are you beginning an alt history? Do you want to know what would happen next?

Actually, I was in my computer class and could not type anymore, so I just wrote to be continued. I intend to finish it.

I was going to finish it tonight... but I don't feel like it now, so i'll try tomorrow.

 

[bombshoo]

Well then, no one should have a problem with this as a "What if Question" since it's not a question.

Looking forward to the rest!