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

Longstreet

Expand Messages
  • James Fullmer
    Since Mr. Ehmer wants to discuss Longstreet, I ll give you my personal opinion on him: I think that Longstreet was on the whole a lot like Grant; not, perhaps,
    Message 1 of 18 , Sep 24, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Since Mr. Ehmer wants to discuss Longstreet, I'll give
      you my personal opinion on him: I think that
      Longstreet was on the whole a lot like Grant; not,
      perhaps, the most gifted man in the army, but loyal to
      his country and superiors. In the West, of course,
      Longstreet wasn't at his best, but I think we can
      blame that on the organization problems of the AoT. If
      Bragg had not been in command, perhaps Longstreet
      would have routed Thomas at Chickamauga or saved the
      day at Chattanooga.

      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
      http://im.yahoo.com/
    • James Fullmer
      Since Mr. Ehmer wants to discuss Longstreet, I ll give you my personal opinion on him: I think that Longstreet was on the whole a lot like Grant; not, perhaps,
      Message 2 of 18 , Sep 24, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Since Mr. Ehmer wants to discuss Longstreet, I'll give
        you my personal opinion on him: I think that
        Longstreet was on the whole a lot like Grant; not,
        perhaps, the most gifted man in the army, but loyal to
        his country and superiors. In the West, of course,
        Longstreet wasn't at his best, but I think we can
        blame that on the organization problems of the AoT. If
        Bragg had not been in command, perhaps Longstreet
        would have routed Thomas at Chickamauga or saved the
        day at Chattanooga.

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
        http://im.yahoo.com/
      • The Coys
        I admire Longstreet for his performance in the east but I still think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre. Admittedly, his performance on September,
        Message 3 of 18 , Jul 5, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          I admire Longstreet for his performance in the east but I still think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre.  Admittedly, his performance on September, 20 1863 was good, if not great.  I am convinced that his corps' charge would've succeeded on that day whether Wood was there or not.  After September 20 I find his performance lackluster. He was given command of half of the AoT the day of his arrival but put himself into the squabbles of the AoT.  He ignored, maybe disobeyed, Bragg's pleas to watch his front at Wauhatchie and, IMHO, allowed the Union army to get there foothold.  He was then ordered to Knoxville, at great peril to the AoT, maybe just to get rid of him.  At Knoxville, again his performance was lackluster, in the face of Ambrose Burnside.  BURNSIDE....whew. 
           
          IMHO, Longstreet in the west didn't do to well.
           
          Kevin S. Coy
        • oneplez
          OK! Don ... think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre. Admittedly, his performance on September, 20 1863 was good, if not great. I am convinced
          Message 4 of 18 , Jul 5, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            OK!

            Don

            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "The Coys" <thecoys@k...> wrote:
            > I admire Longstreet for his performance in the east but I still
            think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre. Admittedly, his
            performance on September, 20 1863 was good, if not great. I am
            convinced that his corps' charge would've succeeded on that day
            whether Wood was there or not. After September 20 I find his
            performance lackluster. He was given command of half of the AoT the
            day of his arrival but put himself into the squabbles of the AoT. He
            ignored, maybe disobeyed, Bragg's pleas to watch his front at
            Wauhatchie and, IMHO, allowed the Union army to get there foothold.
            He was then ordered to Knoxville, at great peril to the AoT, maybe
            just to get rid of him. At Knoxville, again his performance was
            lackluster, in the face of Ambrose Burnside. BURNSIDE....whew.
            >
            > IMHO, Longstreet in the west didn't do to well.
            >
            > Kevin S. Coy
          • The Coys
            Don, I asked Rick and Tom why they thought Longstreet was good in the west. They gave me a courteous reply. I thought I should at least give a reason why I
            Message 5 of 18 , Jul 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Don,
              I asked Rick and Tom why they thought Longstreet was good in the west.
              They gave me a courteous reply. I thought I should at least give a reason
              why I thought he wasn't that good, IMHO. Sorry if it ruffled your feathers.

              Kevin S. Coy
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "oneplez" <oneplez@...>
              To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:06 AM
              Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Longstreet


              > OK!
              >
              > Don
              >
              > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "The Coys" <thecoys@k...> wrote:
              >> I admire Longstreet for his performance in the east but I still
              > think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre. Admittedly, his
              > performance on September, 20 1863 was good, if not great. I am
              > convinced that his corps' charge would've succeeded on that day
              > whether Wood was there or not. After September 20 I find his
              > performance lackluster. He was given command of half of the AoT the
              > day of his arrival but put himself into the squabbles of the AoT. He
              > ignored, maybe disobeyed, Bragg's pleas to watch his front at
              > Wauhatchie and, IMHO, allowed the Union army to get there foothold.
              > He was then ordered to Knoxville, at great peril to the AoT, maybe
              > just to get rid of him. At Knoxville, again his performance was
              > lackluster, in the face of Ambrose Burnside. BURNSIDE....whew.
              >>
              >> IMHO, Longstreet in the west didn't do to well.
              >>
              >> Kevin S. Coy
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • oneplez
              Didn t ruffle my feathers! I didn t understand what you were answering. Some people think this group is for continuing the war on any topic, particularly
              Message 6 of 18 , Jul 5, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Didn't ruffle my feathers! I didn't understand what you were
                answering.

                Some people think this group is for continuing the war on any topic,
                particularly their favorite topic. At times I find myself falling
                into the same trap. But, I really feel that it is a place to get
                info that I didn't have before. I also believe that is what Shotgun
                started it for. I have little regard for opinion. With an opinion
                and $5.00 you can get a Starbucks. Facts though are a different
                story. I've got a folder saved with umpteen KB's of data I've pulled
                from this site, to use in furtherance of my debate. I'm sorry you
                got upset. But as I said before I've the highest regard for
                Rosecrans whom I have come to recognize your fan-boy idol. I think
                he was a better Offensive commander than Thomas.

                Don


                --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "The Coys" <thecoys@k...> wrote:
                > Don,
                > I asked Rick and Tom why they thought Longstreet was good in
                the west.
                > They gave me a courteous reply. I thought I should at least give a
                reason
                > why I thought he wasn't that good, IMHO. Sorry if it ruffled your
                feathers.
                >
                > Kevin S. Coy
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: "oneplez" <oneplez@y...>
                > To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
                > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:06 AM
                > Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Longstreet
                >
                >
                > > OK!
                > >
                > > Don
                > >
                > > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "The Coys" <thecoys@k...>
                wrote:
                > >> I admire Longstreet for his performance in the east but I still
                > > think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre. Admittedly,
                his
                > > performance on September, 20 1863 was good, if not great. I am
                > > convinced that his corps' charge would've succeeded on that day
                > > whether Wood was there or not. After September 20 I find his
                > > performance lackluster. He was given command of half of the AoT
                the
                > > day of his arrival but put himself into the squabbles of the
                AoT. He
                > > ignored, maybe disobeyed, Bragg's pleas to watch his front at
                > > Wauhatchie and, IMHO, allowed the Union army to get there
                foothold.
                > > He was then ordered to Knoxville, at great peril to the AoT, maybe
                > > just to get rid of him. At Knoxville, again his performance was
                > > lackluster, in the face of Ambrose Burnside. BURNSIDE....whew.
                > >>
                > >> IMHO, Longstreet in the west didn't do to well.
                > >>
                > >> Kevin S. Coy
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
              • Tom Mix
                Kevin, No problem here. Tom ... From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of The Coys Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005
                Message 7 of 18 , Jul 5, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Kevin,
                  No problem here.
                  Tom

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com]
                  On Behalf Of The Coys
                  Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:16 AM
                  To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Longstreet

                  Don,
                  I asked Rick and Tom why they thought Longstreet was good in the
                  west.
                  They gave me a courteous reply. I thought I should at least give a
                  reason
                  why I thought he wasn't that good, IMHO. Sorry if it ruffled your
                  feathers.

                  Kevin S. Coy
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "oneplez" <oneplez@...>
                  To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:06 AM
                  Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Longstreet


                  > OK!
                  >
                  > Don
                  >
                  > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "The Coys" <thecoys@k...> wrote:
                  >> I admire Longstreet for his performance in the east but I still
                  > think what he did in the west was somewhat mediocre. Admittedly, his
                  > performance on September, 20 1863 was good, if not great. I am
                  > convinced that his corps' charge would've succeeded on that day
                  > whether Wood was there or not. After September 20 I find his
                  > performance lackluster. He was given command of half of the AoT the
                  > day of his arrival but put himself into the squabbles of the AoT. He
                  > ignored, maybe disobeyed, Bragg's pleas to watch his front at
                  > Wauhatchie and, IMHO, allowed the Union army to get there foothold.
                  > He was then ordered to Knoxville, at great peril to the AoT, maybe
                  > just to get rid of him. At Knoxville, again his performance was
                  > lackluster, in the face of Ambrose Burnside. BURNSIDE....whew.
                  >>
                  >> IMHO, Longstreet in the west didn't do to well.
                  >>
                  >> Kevin S. Coy
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >





                  Yahoo! Groups Links
                • Hattie
                  The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause
                  Message 8 of 18 , May 30 2:18 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                    Gary
                  • keeno2@aol.com
                    In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@cinci.rr.com writes: Am I alone in this? comment please You are not alone. There are
                    Message 9 of 18 , May 30 6:24 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@... writes:
                      Am I alone in this? comment please
                      You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an interesting discussion though.
                       
                      Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
                       
                      Ole
                    • Bob Huddleston
                      Well, since this is CW West, Ol Peter had a minor impact on Chickamauga. : ) And he tangled with Braxton -- not a rarity. Take care, Bob Judy and Bob
                      Message 10 of 18 , May 30 7:56 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Well, since this is CW West, Ol' Peter had a minor impact on Chickamauga. :>) And he tangled with Braxton -- not a rarity.
                        Take care,
                        
                        Bob
                        
                        Judy and Bob Huddleston
                        10643 Sperry Street
                        Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
                        Huddleston.r@...
                        
                        I am A thousand times meaner A hundred times Harder and A damed sight wors Looking than I Ever was so you can form some sort of an idea what sort of A Looking man you have now for A Husband if this kind of Buisness wont make men hard I should like to know what will it is Everyone for himself and dam the one that pulls the hind tit
                        
                        Henry Clemons of Company K, 23rd Wisconsin Infantry Regiment, to his wife Anna in Sauk City, Wis, January 15, 1863
                        


                        keeno2@... wrote:
                         

                        In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@cinci. rr.com writes:
                        Am I alone in this? comment please
                        You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an interesting discussion though.
                         
                        Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
                         
                        Ole
                      • Hattie
                        I don t think that his actions in the west were any better than those in the east, seems like to me he could not work in a group effort. and unless it was his
                        Message 11 of 18 , May 31 1:01 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I don't think that his actions in the west were any better than those in the east, seems like to me he could not work in a group effort. and unless it was his idea, he would pardon the expression Stonewall and with hold any aid that he could give
                          God Bless
                          Gary
                          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, keeno2@... wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
                          > ggeisler@... writes:
                          >
                          > Am I alone in this? comment please
                          >
                          >
                          > You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are
                          > those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an
                          > interesting discussion though.
                          >
                          > Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was
                          > serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
                          >
                          > Ole
                          >
                        • Gary R. Geisler
                          I m sorry, I forgot where I m at But I ll still keep my thoughts about Longstreet either West or East he was less than stellar. God Bless Gary ... From:
                          Message 12 of 18 , May 31 1:31 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                             I'm sorry, I forgot where I'm at' But I'll still keep my thoughts about Longstreet either West or East he was less than stellar.
                            God Bless
                            Gary
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 9:24 PM
                            Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Longstreet

                             

                            In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@cinci. rr.com writes:
                            Am I alone in this? comment please
                            You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an interesting discussion though.
                             
                            Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
                             
                            Ole

                          • hank9174
                            Actually Old Pete s actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders. The doctrine of strategic
                            Message 13 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Actually Old Pete's actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders.

                              The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...


                              HankC


                              --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Hattie" <ggeisler@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                              > Gary
                              >
                            • Ron
                              ... Quote, in part, The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives... ... Given the military
                              Message 14 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                              • 0 Attachment
                                "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
                                >
                                Quote, in part, The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                                >
                                Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of "Strategic Defense" would lead to a slow steady stranglation of the south. It would be like waiting for the other shoe to drop.

                                Ron
                              • hank9174
                                Isn t that what actually happened? I suppose the question(s) may be phrased as : 1) what could the USA have done to *shorten* the war with the same results,
                                Message 15 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Isn't that what actually happened?

                                  I suppose the question(s) may be phrased as :
                                  1) what could the USA have done to *shorten* the war with the same results, or,

                                  2) what could the CSA have done to *lengthen* the war and win via northern war weariness?


                                  HankC

                                  --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <rblack0981@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > "hank9174" <clarkc@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > Quote, in part, The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                                  > >
                                  > Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of "Strategic Defense" would lead to a slow steady stranglation of the south. It would be like waiting for the other shoe to drop.
                                  >
                                  > Ron
                                  >
                                • jlawrence@kc.rr.com
                                  Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of Strategic Defense would lead to a slow steady
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of "Strategic Defense" would lead to a slow steady stranglation of the south. It would be like waiting for the other shoe to drop.
                                    >
                                    > Ron

                                    Hello.
                                    The overwhelming superiority in resources and manpower certainly insured that, if marshalled, a Union victory. (Overwhelming may be an understatement-while fighting the costliest war in our history, the transcontinental raillroad was building on schedule (In the South, according to the Army War College-Levenworth Campus they were not even making rails-let alone laying new track).
                                    What gaurnteed victory though was not men or material superiority-it was the will to wield them and force the issue through to the end-the will perseevere at any cost.
                                    It was Lincoln that won the war. He had the resources and he was of a mind to wield them.
                                    Absent Lincoln, you don' have victory.
                                    You have the negotiated peace that I think most in the CSA thought they were going to get when the whole thing started.
                                    In my opinion anyway

                                    Regards,
                                    Jack
                                    Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
                                  • carlw4514
                                    Hey Hank I agree, note that where Longstreet looked not so good was at Knoxville where he was asked to do something against this line of thinking. It probably
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Jun 4, 2010
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Hey Hank

                                      I agree, note that where Longstreet looked not so good was at Knoxville where he was asked to do something against this line of thinking. It probably was reinforced at Chickamauga, since just about the best that could be hoped for offensively accomplished little from a total Campaign view, yet cost plenty of blood.

                                      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Actually Old Pete's actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders.
                                      >
                                      > The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > HankC
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Hattie" <ggeisler@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                                      > > Gary
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • rbaquero@netzero.net
                                      Hi ! Do you know if ...... President Jefferson Davis had something to do with Longstreet and Johnston ? - Raul ... From: carlw4514 To:
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Jun 6, 2010
                                      • 0 Attachment

                                         Hi !  Do you know if ...... President Jefferson Davis had something to do with Longstreet and Johnston ?

                                        - Raul



                                        ---------- Original Message ----------
                                        From: "carlw4514" <carlw4514@...>
                                        To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                                        Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Longstreet
                                        Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 22:22:48 -0000

                                         

                                        Hey Hank

                                        I agree, note that where Longstreet looked not so good was at Knoxville where he was asked to do something against this line of thinking. It probably was reinforced at Chickamauga, since just about the best that could be hoped for offensively accomplished little from a total Campaign view, yet cost plenty of blood.

                                        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Actually Old Pete's actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders.
                                        >
                                        > The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > HankC
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Hattie" <ggeisler@> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                                        > > Gary
                                        > >
                                        >



                                        ____________________________________________________________
                                        Penny Stock Jumping 2000%
                                        Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
                                        AwesomePennyStocks.com
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.