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

Re: Nathaniel Banks [east vs west]

Expand Messages
  • carlw4514
    Will, you always do your homework and make good points. Certainly I didn t know that the Red River Campaign was over Banks objections. Lincoln needed Banks,
    Message 1 of 8 , Sep 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Will, you always do your homework and make good points. Certainly I
      didn't know that the Red River Campaign was over Banks' objections.
      Lincoln needed Banks, it seems, as you point out he wasn't the worst
      general he ever had, although I clearly believe he was more "in the
      running" for that spot than you do. And I guess he was very much
      needed for raising troops [and for political reasons in general];
      seems like it was too bad such high profile assignments needed to be
      given him, though.
    • David Kowalski
      Suddenly the key point from the Jackson Valley campaign as it transfers to the Red River snaps into focus: Taylor was a brigadier general at Winchester. He
      Message 2 of 8 , Sep 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Suddenly the key point from the Jackson Valley
        campaign as it transfers to the Red River snaps into
        focus: Taylor was a brigadier general at Winchester.
        He charged Banks' line, got good resistance but
        suddenly Banks' forces melted. I suspose Taylor's
        notion was that if pressure were applied to Banks, his
        army would eventually fold.

        True or not, I suspect that Taylor's taste of glory as
        a Brigadier played a part in the mental game played
        out in the Red River campaign.

        --- carlw4514 <carlw4514@...> wrote:
        > Will, you always do your homework and make good
        > points. Certainly I
        > didn't know that the Red River Campaign was over
        > Banks' objections.
        > Lincoln needed Banks, it seems, as you point out he
        > wasn't the worst
        > general he ever had, although I clearly believe he
        > was more "in the
        > running" for that spot than you do. And I guess he
        > was very much
        > needed for raising troops [and for political reasons
        > in general];
        > seems like it was too bad such high profile
        > assignments needed to be
        > given him, though.
        >
        >
        >


        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
        http://finance.yahoo.com
      • carlw4514
        I suspect you may be right. I am certain that the loss of the availability of troops from the most populous part of Louisiana was sorely felt in 1864; the very
        Message 3 of 8 , Sep 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          I suspect you may be right.
          I am certain that the loss of the availability of troops from the most
          populous part of Louisiana was sorely felt in 1864; the very troops
          Taylor was commanding in VA had basically come from there IIRC.
          --- In civilwarwest@y..., David Kowalski <kywddavid@y...> wrote:
          > Suddenly the key point from the Jackson Valley
          > campaign as it transfers to the Red River snaps into
          > focus: Taylor was a brigadier general at Winchester.
          > He charged Banks' line, got good resistance but
          > suddenly Banks' forces melted. I suspose Taylor's
          > notion was that if pressure were applied to Banks, his
          > army would eventually fold.
          >
          > True or not, I suspect that Taylor's taste of glory as
          > a Brigadier played a part in the mental game played
          > out in the Red River campaign.
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.