Grant was facing Pemberton at Vicksburg. It was a siege.
And Cold Harbor was worse than Pickett's Charge.
In sheer dead, maybe. As a percentage of the respective total forces, much less so. Lee squandered more than he could afford. And contrary to Grant at Cold Harbor, who (thanks to lousy recon by Meade) didn't know how dug in the CS forces were, Lee could see perfectly what the Union postion on top of Cemetery Ridge was.
Now I will cut Lee some slack, too. If we believe that Stuart was supposed to hit the Union rear at the same time, the attack might have gone down as one of the most brilliant of the war, and it might have even won the war for the south.
Then you end up in the position of elevating Custer into the man who singlehandedly saved the Union.
the peerLESS LEE couldn't believe that grant would be "foolish enough to attack on this ground".
grant was PROBABLY "juiced to the gills" that day. he also reportedly was taking HEROIN & ASPIRIN for a "bad tooth". (i do NOT know that to be a FACT! i read it some years ago in a memoir by one of the unionist officers. UNlike the DY coven members, i do NOT intentionally post FICTION and or KNOWING lies.)
free dixie,sw
Uh, I spoke of the siege at Vicksburg and showed how Grant achieved a victory in the greatest siege of the century in order to refute your silly LIE that he was nothing but a butcher.
And no Cold Harbor was not an event more disastrous than Pickett's Charge.
Not true, apparently. Gordon Rhea, author of four books on the Spring of 1864 campaign, has studied the battle at Cold Harbor in great detail. His detailed study of the Union casualty lists has reduced the Union casualty count to between 3500 and 4000 dead for the morning charges, and a total of 6,000 casualties for the day. Compare that to Lee's almost 10,000 casualties at Antietam, roughly the same number from Pickett's Charge, 5300 at Malvern's Hill, and it's clear that the butcher in this picture was ol' Marse Robert.