Buell and Grant Surprise the Rebels at Shiloh

Civil War Daily Gazette ^ | April 7, 2012 | Eric

[Upstate NY Guy]

April 7, 1862 (Monday) Pittsburg Landing, Tennessee

General Grant tried to sleep, first under a tree near his men and then in a cabin that he found already occupied with the wounded. Through the night, Union transports and reinforcements arrived at Pittsburg Landing, bringing 25,000 much-needed men. Grant was certain that his line could withstand a Confederate attack. In fact, he was so certain, that he wanted to go on the offensive.

Meanwhile, General Beauregard, now the sole commander of the Confederate Army of Mississippi, slept in General Sherman’s tent, the former owner vacating it as the Rebels attacked the previous day. He had reported to President Davis a “complete victory,” but gave no clue as to how he would follow it up come morning. He had no idea that Union General Buell’s Army of the Ohio had joined Grant’s Army of the Tennessee. His army was scattered, disassociated and worn out. His plan must have been to attack as he took no precautions to defend against a Union assault. He believed he had Grant exactly where he wanted him. And he was wrong.

As the rains fell over friend and foe alike, Grant arrayed his men. He did not, however, command the entire Union force...

[x]

I deserve to have better countrymen than you.

Do you really, though?

You champion one system of very imperfect liberty -- a mix of liberty for some and oppression for others -- and you b*tch about another blend of freedom and unfreedom. Somehow you alone are better that that, and the rest of us aren't.

The world being what it is, and perfect liberty being an impossibility, a lot of people throughout history have felt that they deserved better with a lot more reason than you do now.

You may not have what you want or want what you have, but you don't deserve a better world than the rest of us, nor would you create a better world if you had your own way.

[central_va]

You champion one system of very imperfect liberty -- a mix of liberty for some and oppression for others

Nobody defends slavery.

[central_va]

If you really feel that way, you are beneath contempt.

My guess is 'ole happy rain isn't to offended with little barb of yours coming from one of the chief Free Republic Federal boot lickers.

[x]

But you do gloss over it. You champion a system or a political order of which slavery was a central part. You exalt it as something perfect in spite of slavery.

The Confederacy was an imperfect system and so is our own. If you celebrate the Confederacy, don't act as though you are too good for the world of today.

[rockrr]

If you celebrate the Confederacy, don't act as though you are too good for the world of today.

Because you're decidedly not.

[Happy Rain]

They hate out of envy FRiend—only true Southernors totally understand the last full measure our brave outnumbered and starving Confederate veterans gave to keep the—Devils in Dress Blues Dress Blues Dress Blues, Devils with Dress Blues on—from raping our women and livestock while they burned looted and murdered their way through our blessed land.

That kind of honor is an alien concept to any Damn Yankee.

[rockrr]

Hmm. When she talked about “murdering, raping,looting and burning savages” I just assumed she meant rebs ;-)

[jmacusa]

Oh go piss up a rope Mr. “I don’t deserve’’. You never did anything to help anyone in your whole rotten life. Me? I was an adult literacy tutor for a few years. I was involved in a WW2 veterans group and took a number of these men to area schools to give their stories to school kids. Ever donate blood? I have. You’re nothing but ignorant, stupid ass loud mouth romancing an evil entity from a hundred and fifty years ago that took the most bloodiest and costliest war in our history to end. So you deserve better countrymen? What a joke. We all deserve better in this world and we, the decent people of it don’t deserve the likes of you.

[Ditto]

I have a serious question for you if you can calm down a second. I want your opinion on something:

I'm a pretty calm guy all the time.

Somebody that hates the Federal Government, but has loyalty to the citizens of their state, the republic and the Constitution, can that person be a patriotic American?

I don't hate the Federal Government... I just don't trust them. The same can be said about my state and local governments.

For the last 40+ years, we have allowed the Federal and State governments to run rampant with promising goodies while bloating bureaucracies, accumlating debt, and lining the pockets of politicians at all levels.

You live in some fantasy that says that a Confederate victory 150 years ago would have taken government off your back. That's a silly dream. Politicians, state, local and Federal will always be on your back (while pretending to only be offering a helping hand) as long as we allow them. It is no different North or South. The more money they have to work with, the more they will be on your back, and the more corrupt they will be.

What makes you think that States Governments care more about your rights than the Federal government?

Neither one gives a damn if we don't hold their feet to the fire. Some of the worst rights violations have been by the states... be it the old-time lynching or the modern no-knock raids.

I'm in favor of getting back to limited government and taking their money away from them. That way the thieves we now have in government will go back to some ordinary criminal activity instead of pretending they are public servants.

You want to throw Massachusetts out of the Union? Yes, they voted 62% for Obama last time. But the task is to explane to only 12% of the people in that state why they are mistaken!

I can guarantee you that you aren't going to do that by celebrating Jeff Davis and the Confederate Cause and advocating secession.

It makes FreeRepublic look bad, which is the only reason that I respond to you... I don't want your rants to go unchallenged. What you preach is not conservatism. It's not States Rights. It is anarchy.

[central_va]

the decent people of it don’t deserve the likes of you.

I have an idea, the next time you donate blood tell them to take it all. :)

[central_va]

I can guarantee you that you aren't going to do that by celebrating Jeff Davis and the Confederate Cause and advocating secession.

Secession is a viable concept that has it's own merits regardless of past attempts. Get it? The Confederate Cause? I defend the republic and little 'r' republican ideals.

Hey when I post the rebel flag do you get embarrassed?

"Rebellion is always an option" I think the FR founder uses that as a tag line. Does that embarrass you too?

[central_va]

Hmm. When she talked about “murdering, raping,looting and burning savages” I just assumed she meant rebs ;-)

As far as I know the raping was at a minimal by Yankee bushwackers, unless you include the livestock.

[BroJoeK]

Happy Rain: "Those born on Southern soil who fought for the murdering, raping,looting and burning savages who laid waste the land that enabled their very existence were the bastard fathers of the bastard scalawags who were the treacherous running dogs of the avarice infested and hate infected Satan spawned carpetbaggers. "

central_va: "As far as I know the raping was at a minimal by Yankee bushwackers, unless you include the livestock."

Late in the war, there was burning and looting on both sides -- Chambersburg, Pennsylvania comes to mind -- but it's hugely important to remember that compared to most any war you can think of, the US Civil War was fought mainly by gentlemen who did not deliberately assault civilians.

As for post-war scalawags and carpetbaggers, no one here has defended them, and all generally agree the South had a hard go of it for many years.
But a more neutral report describes scalawags as just another political party, no more or less corrupt than others:

"In South Carolina there were about 100,000 scalawags, or about 15% of the white population.
During its heyday, the Republican coalition attracted some wealthier white southerners, especially moderates favoring cooperation between open-minded Democrats and responsible Republicans.
Rubin shows that the collapse of the Republican coalition came from disturbing trends to corruption and factionalism that increasingly characterized the party’s governance.
These failings disappointed Northern allies who abandoned the state Republicans in 1876 as the Democrats under Wade Hampton reasserted conservative control.
They used the threat of violence to cause many Republicans to stay quiet or switch to the Democrats...

"...Scalawags were denounced as corrupt by Redeemers.
The Dunning School of historians sympathized with the claims of the Democrats.
Agreeing with the Dunning School, Franklin said that the scalawags "must take at least part of the blame" for graft and corruption.
'But their most serious offense was to have been loyal to the Union during the Civil War or to have declared that they had been loyal and thereby to have enjoyed full citizenship during the period of Radical Reconstruction.'

"The Democrats alleged the scalawags to be financially and politically corrupt, and willing to support bad government because they profited personally.
One Alabama historian claimed: 'On economic matters scalawags and Democrats eagerly sought aid for economic development of projects in which they had an economic stake, and they exhibited few scruples in the methods used to push beneficial financial legislation through the Alabama legislature.
The quality of the bookkeeping habits of both Republicans and Democrats was equally notorious.'

However, historian Eric Foner argues there is not sufficient evidence that scalawags were any more or less corrupt than politicians of any era, including Redeemers."

[central_va]

Late in the war, there was burning and looting on both sides -- Chambersburg, Pennsylvania comes to mind -- but it's hugely important to remember that compared to most any war you can think of, the US Civil War was fought mainly by gentlemen who did not deliberately assault civilians.

We both know the entire "March to the Sea" and the South Carolina campaign were slash and burn operations. You lose credibility when you make statements like that. Ridiculous.

[rockrr]

You said, "As far as I know the raping was at a minimal by Yankee bushwackers, unless you include the livestock." and yet are concerned with someone's credibility? LMAO

[BroJoeK]

central_va: "We both know the entire "March to the Sea" and the South Carolina campaign were slash and burn operations."

Yes, as I said, burning and looting on both sides.
Confirmed reports of assaults on civilians: very few.

Indeed no doubt, a careful study would show more assaults on Southern Union loyalists by Confederates than Union Army assaults on Confederate civilians.

[Happy Rain]

Comparing the war crimes of the Confederates to those of Sherman on his march to the sea and Sheridan laying waste the Shenandoah Vally is an ultimate nonstarter.

[central_va]

Yes, as I said, burning and looting on both sides.

That is a distortion of history and I won't let you get away with it. For example, during the invasion of PA Lee order his troops to PAY for everything they appropriated - no looting. There was no mis-conduct and it was not tolerated. The reason I know this is because I have researched history, both sides are not equally guilty. the difference is the South ordered ransacking to NOT to happen and when it did, which it did on a few occasions, it was punished. Any pillage incidents by the South was an anomaly and was not ordered or tolerated. The NORTH ordered pillaging and looting TO happen.

To tell the truth I wish the Southern Armies HAD acted like Sherman's bummers. The South played the gentleman to the North's rapist.

[central_va]

These Southern haters and liars all turn out to be liberals in the end and Jim Robinson eventually zots them. It takes forever though. They screw up on other topic/threads and their true (red) colors come out. Their main guy was non-sequitur, got zotted defending the repeal of DADT over a year ago. He attempts to come back but it is so easy to spot him.

[BroJoeK]

central_va: "during the invasion of PA Lee order his troops to PAY for everything they appropriated - no looting..."

"To tell the truth I wish the Southern Armies HAD acted like Sherman's bummers. The South played the gentleman to the North's rapist."

I'm certain you well know that:

1. Whatever "payments" Northern farmers received for their stolen goods was in worthless Confederate IOUs.
2. Southern Armies DID act like Sherman's bummers, on occasion.

For example: Chambersburg, Pennsylvania was visited three times by Confederate armies:

1. "On October 10, 1862, Confederate Maj. Gen. J.E.B. Stuart, with 1800 cavalrymen, raided Chambersburg, destroying $250,000 of railroad property and taking 500 guns, hundreds of horses, and at least "eight young colored men and boys."[38]

2. "During the early days of the 1863 Gettysburg Campaign, a Virginia cavalry brigade under Brig. Gen. Albert G. Jenkins occupied the town and burned several warehouses and Cumberland Valley Railroad structures and the bridge at [nearby] Scotland.

   From June 24–28, 1863, much of the Army of Northern Virginia passed through Chambersburg[40][41] en route to Carlisle and Gettysburg, and Robert E. Lee established his headquarters at a nearby farm."

3. "The following year, Chambersburg was invaded for a third time, as cavalry dispatched from the Shenandoah Valley by Jubal Early arrived.[5]
   On July 30, 1864, a large portion of the town was burned down under orders from Brig. Gen. John McCausland for failing to provide a ransom of $500,000 in US currency, or $100,000 in gold.[42][43]
   Among the few buildings left standing was the Masonic Temple, which had been guarded under orders by a Confederate mason.[44]
   Norland, the home of Republican politician and editor Alexander McClure, was burned even though it was well north of the main fire.

   'Remember Chambersburg' soon became a Union battle cry.[45]"

Note the 1862 kidnapping of "eight young colored men and boys". And what was their fate?

But also note that except for the unknown fate of those "young colored men and boys", we are only talking about burning and pillaging, not rape and murder.

The same is true of Northern armies in the Confederacy.