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

Re: [civilwarwest] Further replies to David Woodbury

Expand Messages
  • FLYNSWEDE@AOL.COM
    Hello woodbury@stanford.edu, In reference to your comment: è RIght. Nothing saved him but the fact that he could è move fast over a good road, and Sherman
    Message 1 of 37 , Apr 2 6:30 PM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello woodbury@...,

      In reference to your comment:

      è RIght. Nothing saved him but the fact that he could
      è move fast over a  good road, and Sherman could not.

      Yes, a good road that he had the foresight to start building in January.
    • hank9174
      I don t recall the details...but maybe the Snake Creek Gap discussion can move south a bit...We ve been their longer than Sherman and Johnston were ;) HankC
      Message 37 of 37 , Apr 8 8:25 AM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I don't recall the details...but maybe the Snake Creek Gap discussion
        can move south a bit...We've been their longer than Sherman and
        Johnston were ;)


        HankC


        --- In civilwarwest@y..., "carlw4514" <carlw4514@y...> wrote:
        > But I would say that Sherman DID work on the flanks and get Johnston
        > worried about his supply line; he worked Johnston out of his
        positions
        > by manuevering him out IMHO. Kennesaw Mountain seems to be the
        > exception, what got into him there ??
        > carl
        > --- In civilwarwest@y..., "hank9174" <clarkc@m...> wrote:
        > >
        > > unre,
        > >
        > > The occasional counter-punch get be very effective. Sometimes it
        hits
        > > air, sometimes it hits muscle, sometimes it gets through and hits
        the
        > > jaw.
        > >
        > > If you can get the opponent worried about their flanks and their
        > > supply line and their line of rtreat there is not much left to
        > > concentrate on offensive operations. I do not recall that Sherman
        much
        > > concerned himself with any of these (I suppose he considered
        cavalry
        > > raids on the railroad a potential nuisance); all his time was
        devoted
        > > to the offense.
        > >
        > > Johnston seems to have had it in the back of his mind that if a
        golden
        > > opportunity presented itself (a la Seven Pines) he would attack.
        This
        > > assumes his opponent blunders, so again he is waiting on the
        opponent
        > > rather than creating an opportunity himself.
        > >
        > > IIRC, Johnston was 'relieved' by a union bullet at Fair Oaks/Seven
        > > Pines. Personally, whatever we say about these fellows ability
        with
        > > strategy and tactics, most were extremely brave and willing to
        lead by
        > > example.
        > >
        > >
        > > HankC
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In civilwarwest@y..., "carlw4514" <carlw4514@y...> wrote:
        > > > Will, what do you think of Johnston's basic ideas of handling a
        > > > situation like he was handed here? We know the advantages in
        numbers
        > > > and resources went to the enemy, a problem for any general.
        > > Johnston's
        > > > tactics seem to be to make a stand and back up to the next best
        > > > defendable position when flanking pressure eased him out of his
        > > > redoubt. You know the whole situation in this part of the
        Atlanta
        > > > Campaign was damned similar to the Peninsula Campaign and in
        both
        > > > instances Johnston was relieved of command when he allowed the
        enemy
        > > > to eventually get basically to the city limits!
        > > > -So my question is, did Johnston's tactics as you describe them
        > > really
        > > > suffice? Johnston wanted to do battle, if Sherman would attack
        his
        > > > fortified positions, but Sherman wasn't going to play ball that
        way.
        > > > Did Johnston get backed up too easily? I sometimes think so.
        What
        > > > could he have done differently?
        > > > --- In civilwarwest@y..., "wh_keene" <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
        > > > > David said of McClellan and Johnston that "Both of them were
        > > > > reluctant to commit those armies to battle..."
        > > > >
        > > > > I disagree. Between Dalton and Atlanta was Johnston ever
        > > reluctant
        > > > > to battle with Sherman?
        > > > >
        > > > > Johnston's itinerary from early May through early July goes
        > > something
        > > > > like this:
        > > > >
        > > > > He met Sherman's attacks around Dalton.
        > > > > He left only when Sherman moved away instead of fighting some
        > > more.
        > > > >
        > > > > He moved to Resaca in order to battle with Sherman.
        > > > > He left only when Sherman moved away instead of fighting some
        > > more.
        > > > >
        > > > > He moved to Altoona Pass in order to battle with Sherman.
        > > > > He left when Sherman moved away instead of fighting at all.
        > > > >
        > > > > He moved to New Hope Church in order to battle with Sherman.
        > > > > He left only when Sherman moved away instead of fighting some
        > > more.
        > > > >
        > > > > He moved to Kennesaw Mountain in order to battle with Sherman.
        > > > > He left only when Sherman moved away instead of fighting some
        > > more.
        > > > >
        > > > > He moved to Smyrna to battle with Sherman.
        > > > > He left when Sherman moved away instead of fighting at all.
        > > > >
        > > > > He moved to the Chattahoochee to battle with Sherman.
        > > > > He left when Sherman moved away instead of fighting at all.
        > > > >
        > > > > If Sherman had stayed and fought at any of these places,
        Johnston
        > > > > would not have moved. But each time Sherman decided to move
        > > around
        > > > > instead.
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In civilwarwest@y..., David Woodbury <woodbury@s...>
        wrote:
        > > > > > >At 9:30 PM -0500 4/2/02, FLYNSWEDE@A... wrote:
        > > > > > >Yes, a good road that he had the foresight to start
        building in
        > > > > January.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Yes, it really paid off when he had to rapidly retreat after
        > > > > Sherman
        > > > > > fooled him just days into the start of the campaign.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Obviously Johnston worked wonders with the army from
        December to
        > > > > May.
        > > > > > He organized it, bolstered it, increased morale, and so on.
        In
        > > this
        > > > > > respect, he perhaps had some things in common with
        McClellan.
        > > Both
        > > > > of
        > > > > > them were able administrators. Both of them knew how to get
        an
        > > army
        > > > > > ready for active campaigning. Both of them were reluctant to
        > > commit
        > > > > > those armies to battle, however, and both consistently
        inflated
        > > the
        > > > > > enemy's numbers while downplaying their own. Both feuded
        with
        > > their
        > > > > > commanders-in-chief.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > As I said in a previous post, I have long ago softened my
        > > > > criticisms
        > > > > > of Johnston. He was an able general and a worthy opponent.
        Most
        > > of
        > > > > > our arm-chair critiques of historic figures are unrealistic,
        or
        > > > > > skewed -- in many respects, we know too much. In certain
        very
        > > real
        > > > > > respects, for example, we know more about what transpired at
        > > > > > Gettysburg than Lee did on his deathbed. Johnston is not
        > > deserving
        > > > > of
        > > > > > the harshest criticisms leveled at him by McMurry, I don't
        > > think;
        > > > > > likewise Sherman and the scathing indictments leveled at him
        by
        > > > > > Castel. Both generals penned extraordinarily self-serving
        > > memoirs,
        > > > > > but it's hard to find a Civil War general who didn't.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > That said, though I am more generous to Johnston these days,
        > > > > there's
        > > > > > only so far that reason and logic allow me to go. To believe
        > > that
        > > > > > Johnston was not surprised, or caught off guard, by
        McPherson at
        > > > > > Snake Creek Gap is too far.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > David
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.