Speaking of Lee and generals who are prone to over aggressiveness, why did Lee launch the attack on Fort Stedman in March of 65? I haven t been able to seeMessage 1 of 127 , Jun 1, 2001View SourceSpeaking of Lee and generals who are prone to over
aggressiveness, why did Lee launch the attack on Fort
Stedman in March of 65? I haven't been able to see
any sense in it. Sorry, forgot that this is supposed
to be about the civil war in the west.
--- Bob Huddleston <adco1@...> wrote:
> Grant lost fewer men from Belmont through__________________________________________________
> Chattanooga than Lee did at
> Gettysburg alone. And forced two armies to surrender
> unconditionally in
> the process.
> So what does that make Lee?
> My problem with the "Butcher" nonsense is the double
> standard: Grant
> fights Lee and takes --and inflicts -- tremendous
> casualties and
> destroys the ability of the ANV to conduct offensive
> operations, tying
> them into the Petersburg trenches, where, as Lee
> himself put it, it
> became only a matter of time. So Grant is a Butcher.
> But the casualties that Lee inflicted on his own
> side during two years
> of War, much greater than any, either as a
> percentage or in absolute
> numbers, than Grant ever suffered, and accomplished
> nothing except for
> the continued survival of the Confederacy, is held
> up as a model
> Christian and Soldier.
> When Lee took over the ANV (139 years ago today),
> the Federals were in
> sight of Richmond's steeples. He forced them back
> twenty miles down the
> Peninsula but from there on, Lee always ended up on
> the Rappahannock
> Line, which was the US-CS Virginia Boundary from
> Johnston's retreat
> there in early 1862 until Grant neatly turned Lee
> out of the position in
> May 1864.
> And from there all road led only to Appomattox.
> Whose the Butcher?
> Take care,
> Judy and Bob Huddleston
> 10643 Sperry Street
> Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> 303.451.6276 Adco@...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kamills [mailto:kamills@...]
> Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 10:45 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: The Anaconda Myth
> If I may. In three years of fighting, about 200,000
> In 11 months of fighting, 100,000 casualties. By no
> definition, that would make a butcher. I am not
> arguing in favor
> or against calling Grant a butcher. All I am doing
> is the math.
> If you look at the numbers, it makes him a butcher.
> I will agree with you in this: Without Grant, the
> AOP would have
> retreated after the Wilderness. Other than
> Fredericksburg, the
> Wilderness was the most lopsided victory in term of
> casulaties (in
> major battles). Only Grant (and Maybe Sherman)
> would have pushed
> Thank you
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
I would second Carl. Grandpa s knee is a wonderful place to learn to love history but often a terrible place to learn accurate history. I do not recall anyMessage 127 of 127 , Jul 7, 2001View SourceI would second Carl. Grandpa's knee is a wonderful place to learn to
love history but often a terrible place to learn accurate history.
I do not recall any mention of anyone telling Scott how to run a war.
And he was an experienced general -- I doubt that anyone needed to give
him ideas about how to run a war.
There were similar claims for a Marylander named Anna Carroll (? I may
have the name wrong) who claimed that she gave Lincoln the idea for the
But some things are so obvious -- John Sherman recalled going to visit
his brother early in the war and finding Cump and Thomas crawling around
on the floor on a huge map of the United States, "talking shop" about
how *they* would defeat the Rebels. As the senator remembered the story,
his brother and Thomas basically outlined the way the war turned out.
The secret was not in figuring out the strategy, but in finding the man
or men who would be able to carry out the plan. It took a while but
Grant, Sherman, Thomas, Sheridan and a few others, Lincoln finally found
the men who imposed their will on the armies.
Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
Hello addison, please do share that. I'll caution you, tho', that
family traditions are a bit touchy, you know, everyone in the family
cherishes them and all; but sometimes they are a bit hard to confirm.
Carl aka Unre, etc
--- In civilwarwest@y..., jaaah@t... wrote:
> Well, if this isn't too late, I want too add something.
> Family history records that we are related to the Scotts, and that
my Great Great Grandmother was the one to actually give General Scott
the idea for the 'Anaconda Plan'. My Grandfather has the full
details, but from what I remember, she was at a dinner party with
him, and he was telling her about the plans for the war against the
Confederacy. She then asked "well why don't you just cut them off
from everything?" When he asked what she meant, she gave him the
basic idea for what became the 'Anaconda Plan.' If you want the full
details, my Grandfather has them all!
> A. Hart
> > ** Original Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] The Anaconda Myth