Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

1297Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: was burnside at fault for antietam???

Expand Messages
  • richard@rcroker.com
    Mar 29, 2004
      ooooooooohhhhhhhh -- TR -- GOOD POINT! I've never been a big fan a
      fault-finding myself, especailly if little or nothing can be learned from
      it.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <tlivesey@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 10:02 AM
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: was burnside at fault for antietam???


      > Hmmm...seems to me that before one tries to assign 'fault', one
      > must identify failure. Antietam was a huge victory for the North,
      > and a serious blow to the South. Where is the failure in that?
      >
      > Regards,
      > T.R. Livesey
      > tlivesey@...
      >
      > Quoting richard@...:
      >
      > > Alright -- let's put a stop to this. McClallan was at fault at
      Antietam.
      > > For failure to respond quickly to 191 and for failure to follow up
      > > Richardson's breech at the Bloody Lane.
      > >
      > > Period.
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "justin_heinzen10" <justin_heinzen10@...>
      > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 12:37 AM
      > > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: was burnside at fault for antietam???
      > >
      > >
      > > > mcclellan wrote: "..but i think his [burnside] weak mind was
      > > > turned;that he was confused in action; and that subsequently he
      > > > really did not know what had occured."
      > > > mcclellans bias against burnside was also evident after he was
      > > > removed from commander of army of potomac when he stated he gave the
      > > > order for burnside to attack at 8 am instead of 10 am which he had
      > > > previously stated. rodmans presense and walkers march to the middle
      > > > of lee's line makes this a bit of a stretch but it is clear that he
      > > > is trying to shift some of the blame.
      > > > a few political cartoons or army sketches from that time also convey
      > > > burnside as the "bungling blunder" for his actions at antietam.
      > > > it also seems more and more today that mcclellans faulty battle plan
      > > > and misuse of his troops are overlooked and more blame is but on
      > > > burnside. well, you know my views...does that clear my question up?
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ----------------------------------------------------------------
      > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Show all 22 messages in this topic