Posted on 01/17/2019 8:15:01 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
Too funny. He was kicking Union ass for a year and a half before Gettysburg, which he would have won had Jackson still been around.
>>Greatest American STRATEGIC general.<<
Perhaps, but had he heeded the advice of his “Old War Horse” at Gettysburg, there might not have been any surrender at Appomattox. And he rightfully held himself responsible for that defeat. Nevertheless, I still consider him to have been one of our country’s greatest generals, second only to George Washington.
How much ass did he kick at Malvern Hill? At Sharpsburg? Lee was able to read his opponents quite well and he was blessed with very inferior opponents. Grant would have won the battle of 7 days and would have crushed Lee’s army at Sharpsburg - either of which would have ended the war. Grant also would have sent Meade the reinforcements he needed at Friedcksburg after he breached Jackson’s line and thus rolled the South’s entire flank. The repeated charges at Maries (sp?) Hights would never have happened.
It is true.
Sometimes it appears to me that the winners of wars are those who avoid the most mistakes.
Lee was the tactician. He had no grand strategy for winning the war. Sherman was the strategist who had problems managing individual battles.
And one of Grant's attributes was that he never made the same mistake twice. In fact, his only major tactical mistake was the disastrous third charge at Cold Harbor and he admitted as much. He did get caught with his pants down on the first day of Shiloh but I put that much more on Sherman than Grant. And the way Grant followed up and won the victory anyway shows his brilliance as a general.
>>He was kicking Union ass for a year and a half before Gettysburg, which he would have won had Jackson still been around.<<
Probably true, but he also could have won it without Jackson had he listened to his “Old War Horse”. He chose not to and subsequently had to admit that he himself was responsible for the defeat. Still, Gen. Lee was one of the greatest Generals in the history of our country, in my view second only to General Washington.
Correct! Didn’t Custer make his way into a majority of Civil War Pictures?
My beautiful Confederate battle flag will be proudly flying from dawn to dusk on Saturday in honor of Gen. Lee. Anyone sees it and doesn’t like it is invited to come and take it, if they can.
Again, too funny.
Jackson had to defend the area east of Fredericksburg and south of the Rappahonock. He set up a three-tiered line of defense, with A.P. Hill commanding the first line, Taliaferro and Early commanding the second line, and D.H. Hill commanding the third line. In the middle of A.P. Hill's line, near the RR tracks, there was a natural gap that was considered to be untenable for defense, but which would serve as a funnel through which Union forces under Meade would naturally flow. When Meade's forces went through this funnel, they were set upon by Early and Taliaferro's forces, and chewed up, being forced to retreat.
+1
>>Correct! Didn’t Custer make his way into a majority of Civil War Pictures?<<
Gen. Custer was very much a Showboater alright, but he was also a fearless commander throughout his career. At the Little Big Horn, his brother Thomas was also killed and his head was bashed beyond recognition by rocks. He was only identifiable by a tattoo of his initials on his arm. He was also the first soldier in American history to become a double recipient of the MOH, awarded before the LBH battle.
Not the greatest but among the great. Washington, Patton, Stonewall Jackson and Sherman were likely the best we have had.
“Lee was the tactician.”
I disagree.
Knowing the South was greatly outnumbered in terms of both men and materiel, Lee’s strategy was to remain mobile, spread the Union forces and keep them guessing. That worked, especially with Jackson’s brilliant Shenandoah Valley campaign. But Lee also knew that there was no way the South could prevail in a protracted war, so he decided that the only way for the South to win would be to win a decisive battle on Northern soil, and then march toward D.C. and invest the Capital, upon which he believed the North would seek terms and let the Confederacy go on its way. Hence, that is why he invaded southern Pennsylvania, and why he fought at Gettysburg. Remember, the Union had been getting bloodied all over the Eastern Theater, and its hold on the Mississippi Valley was not all that secure.
Lee saw Gettysburg as his best — and probably only — chance to win on terms favorable to the Confederacy, and historians agree. The Confederacy reached its zenith at Gettysburg, and it never recovered from that defeat; indeed it never COULD have.
And you may be right. I think stories about this vary depending on who you read.
I have Edward Godfrey’s brilliant and chilling report on the Little Bighorn debacle. Tom Custer was calmly smoking a cigarette just before descending into the fight. His brother upbraided him for it. Tom also won two medal of honors for bravery. Quite a guy.
Parlor-ish. The window treatments, the pictures, the table, all indicate a sitting room to me.
Had Sedgwick reinforced Meade like Meade was begging, Jackson would have been rolled up like a blanket.
How do you figure that? With four times the population, it's not hard to overwhelm someone with casualties.
Even Mary Lincoln said Grant was a butcher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.