Re: Sherman's Insubordination at Chattanooga
- I've been here more than a few months and have seen
some pretty good members quit because they get tired of the nonstop bashing of some and the never ending cheerleading of Thomas,thats just what ruined the old Army of the Cumberland group,and the same thing is happening to this group,
enough is enough,it gets old reading the same okd manur over ad ver.
- In civilwarwest@y..., "jackehmer" <ohio11thcavalry@a...> wrote:
> Anyone who has been here more than a couple of months, knows what
> game is being played. My suggestion is to just ignore that
> individual's posts. Any attempt to hold a discussion on one of these
> topics just takes away from more interesting and fruitful areas of
> --- In civilwarwest@y..., "melchizedek22" <richthofen@b...> wrote:
> > This whole thread is silly,so far there seems to be only one who
> > Sherman was insubordinate,and that one has proved over,and over,and
> over that he hates Grant and Sherman,leaving him with zip
> creditability as a historian!
> > The Baron
- In a message dated 8/8/02 4:25:02 PM, josepharose@... writes:
<< Now, which of the two men, Wood or Grant, had been bending the truth
(if not breaking it)? I think that the evidence heavily points to
Grant. Because I think that he did so, I question his integrity,
here and elsewhere. >>
It appears to me that you cherry pick data to support your presumption that
Grant was a worthless fool. Grant's contemporaries - even enemies - praised
his integrity to the max. So how come that by standing in the dim hindsight
of 150 years you are able to see what they did not see?
Finally please explain why Thomas is incapable of standing on his own merit
and can only be praised by faulting Grant?