[Cleburne]

No, Durning the Atlanta Campaign Forrest was engaged in defending Mississippi from several waves of Northern invasions. Began with Sooy Smith in Febuary, then Sturgis (I believe-at Brices Cross Roads), then two invasions by A. Smith, the first which ended at Tupelo, the second when Forrest raided Memphis and nearly caught General Hurlbut (don't you envy his last name?), which drew the large invasion force out of Mississippi and back to Tennessee. Atlanta fell on September 2, 1864, after the Battle of Jonesboro. Forrest did not embark on his raid into North Alabama until September 16, and by then it was to late to save Atlanta. As far as the debacle in Tennessee with Hood: as wild as it seems when you consider the odds, Hood had a fine chance to destroy the Union forces at Spring Hill. Cleburne's Division alongside Brown made great headway into the Union lines, and had not the chain of command been fouled up (I blame Hood as he was in the end the comanding general), Cleburne and Brown's Division would have cut Schofield's army in two and commenced to destroy it, as Schofield could not have been accused of much good sense. He disobeyed orders from Thomas (a fine genreral-from Virginia!), and nearly saw his army disapear. But Hood bungled things even worse, with help of course, and would destroy his army, both materially and in morale, the next day at Franklin.

[exmarine]

as wild as it seems when you consider the odds, Hood had a fine chance to destroy the Union forces at Spring Hill.

This is a stretch. Almost all historians are unanimous that Hood was a good division commander but a terrible army commander. He was reckless and rash. Storming those defenses in Tennessee was stupid and it got Cleburne killed! Notice that Forrest was not stupid enough to charge them. Didn't this guy learn anything about frontal assaults in all of his experience?