... able to ... changed. ... wasn t ... What specific action by [your choice of commander] could have resulted in success for the Confederates on May 16th ifMessage 1 of 45 , Jul 2, 2007View Source--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "James W. Durney" <JWD2044@...>
> --- In email@example.com, "Tony Gunter" <tony_gunter@>
> > You didn't answer his question.
> I said that I agreed with him and don't see Champion Hill or the
> campaign as a slam dunk for Grant. If their had been better
> coorporation between to two CSA armies or if Pemberton had been
> get better coordination on the battlefield things could havechanged.
> Given the level of and different ideas of the CSA's generals, itwasn't
> likely. However, Grant had to plan that they would do a better jobWhat specific action by [your choice of commander] could have
> than they did.
resulted in success for the Confederates on May 16th if Pemberton had
been rendered unfit for duty the night before?
You mention how Sherman and Grant worked together to prevent the movement of troops between theaters, and many have spoken of how great this plan was, but inMessage 45 of 45 , Jul 21, 2007View SourceYou mention how Sherman and Grant worked together to prevent the movement of troops between theaters, and many have spoken of how great this plan was, but in reality it did not matter that much. Think about it, the ONLY major battle of the entire war which was influenced by the movement of troops from one major army to another was Chickamauga! Even then most of Longstreets men were late to the party!With only one viable route for the transportation of troops between the two armies, and it was almost worn out by this time, I don't see how any major movement of troops between the two armies was possible, so the "Cooperation" between Grant and Sherman really did not effect the outcome of the conflict.Steve Hall - Commander
Lt. Col. William Luffman Camp #938
Sons of Confederate Veterans
Chatsworth, Georgia----- Original Message -----From: David WallCc: bonnikorn@...Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2007 8:41 PMSubject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Champion Hill;
I am not sure what you mean by Cohesion on the east side of the river.
Grant's army certainly acted in concert, except for McClernand at Champion
Hill. But even he did O.K.
Now by east side of the river, you mean the entire area from the Mississippi
to the East Coast, I just don't know enough to comment.
But Grant's movement down the Louisiana border to Bruinsberg to Jackson to
Vicksburg was like a "Ballet for Three Division's". Wow, I've got to use
that phrase again!
Same goes for Sherman on his way from Chattanoga to Atlanta. Except he
conducted a "Ballet for Three Army's". Grant and Sherman actually
co-ordinated their activities so that the Confederates could not transfer
troops from one theater to the other.
edkiniry, who took part in those ballets. No...he did not wear tights. He
shod horses and shot
>Reply-To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
>To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
>Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Champion Hill;
>Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:34:02 EDT
>Nothing particularly unusual about the lack of cohesion Trans-Mississippi.
>It was barely evident on the east side of the river. In both armies.
>*********** ********* ********* ********* Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL
>http://discover. aol.com/memed/ aolcom30tour