Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: r9etb; wardaddy
Exactly Sherman was the master of strategy Forrest was the master of tactics. Sherman would deploy his army group( thats what "The Grand Army of the West" was) in such a way that it would be irrelevant if the portion of it tying down the Confederates in battle won or not. That being said Forrest the master of tactics was the only man Sherman feared.
116 posted on 05/23/2002 2:05:38 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]


To: weikel; wardaddy
That being said Forrest the master of tactics was the only man Sherman feared.

OTOH, Forrest's tactics on a large scale may well have looked rather like Sherman's strategy. Forrest properly understood it as a war of motion, and probably would have relied on lots of movement and destruction of Sherman's logistics.

The big question is whether Forrest would have been able to make the transition from a guy in the thick of things (cf. his 3 dozen kills), to a guy who thought weeks and months into the future.

That's a tough call, but I have to come down on the "no" side -- he was too involved, and probably wouldn't have tried to micromanage his division commanders.

122 posted on 05/23/2002 2:15:53 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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