Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Bull Snipe
My own personal theory on McClellan was that his heart really wasn't into it. About the others I know next to nothing because I don't really focus on the battles. So far as i'm concerned, the only conflict of any importance is the one that got it started.

Once it was started, there was a very high probability the North would win it if the will to win it was retained, and Lincoln very much had the will to win it. As I've said, he was far more willing to tolerate the loss of life than was George III.

35 posted on 06/03/2019 10:35:13 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no o<ither sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

Think you are correct. McClellan was a soft war man. Use just enough war to get the Confederates to the conference table. McClellan supported that view as the Democrat Presidential candidate in 1864. He was also one of the few officers that had seen what the killing power modern infantry weapons could do. he had been an observer in the Crimean war.

“he was far more willing to tolerate the loss of life than was George III.”

He was also smarter than King George III in that he believed one war at a time was enough.


38 posted on 06/03/2019 11:06:35 AM PDT by Bull Snipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson