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

Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Bias

Expand Messages
  • FLYNSWEDE@AOL.COM
    In a message dated 1/20/2003 10:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... If this be the case, why is it that so many well respected historians, authors, and
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 21, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 1/20/2003 10:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, josepharose@... writes:

      May I ask whether you feel that Buell should be treated fairly, even
      if this comes at the expense of Grant's reputation?


      If this be the case, why is it that so many well respected historians, authors, and afficieandos of the Civil War rate Beull and McClernand low in performance and ability to properly lead.  Is it a case where everyone else is wrong and mislead.  Why is it that historians throughout the years have rated Grant and Lee the two best leaders of the Civil War.  I have never heard of Buell rated as a best leader.

      As for Thomas, he was a great leader and a great general.  But once again, history has rated him number three following Grant and Sherman.  That is no insult to Thomas in any way.   Lets look at the final years, Grant in command of the Army of the Potomac (as overall commander), Sherman commander of the Western Theater, and Thomas, commander of troops that totally destroyed for practical purposes, the Confederate Army of Tennessee.  In looking at the three of them, they worked as a team, and there is no "I" in the word or meaning of team.

      Wayne
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.