But in every war, one side always has greater resources than the other, but that advantage does not always equal success. Lee, and his early opponents, focused entirely on winning battles. But in every battle won, Lee lost a greater percentage of his resources than his opponents. It was a mathematical certainty that he would run out first. When Grant took command, he forced Lee's rate of expenditures even higher, eventually forcing Lee entirely off the field and into defensive trenches around Petersburg and a slow, certain last stand. Grant understood the math. Lee didn't, until it was too late.
Washington, at even much greater disadvantage than Lee, forced the enemy to spend resources in a higher proportion than he did. They were running out faster than him. I simply don't understand how Lee, a man who lived his life in the shadow of Washington, did not emulate his strategy better when faced with a similar situation.
At Fredericksburg, Lee lost 6% of his forces while Burnside lost 11% of his.