Re: Thomas: Overrated or Underrated?
- It appears to me that you're implying a third element, Will.
Would you amend your comment to be "In my opinion it is clearly for
being slow to launch an "ordered" attack"?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "William H Keene"
> --- In email@example.com, "Dave Smith" <dmsmith001@y...>interested
> > ...
> > > > Did Grant find fault with Thomas for being slow in attacking,
> > > > for not attacking when ordered?
> > ...
> > I don't think it's at all common usage for this situation. They
> > two distinctly different things.
> > We probably will have to agree to disagree, though I am
> > the opinions of other posters.
> > Dave
> In my opinion it is clearly for being slow to launch an attack.
- In a message dated 8/1/2003 7:13:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rtaubman@... writes:
to attack regardless of the circumstances, Grant's perception of Thomas,
and Thomas's refusal frustrated Grant. I believe Grant was completely
within his right as CIC to make such an order, I certainly won't/can't argue
I agree with this Bob, but if Thomas had attacked when Grant kept on ordering him, it is a good possibility that the attack would have failed. According to reports, the ground was so icy after an ice storm, that even the horses could not stand up, let alone a soldier trying to march. Grant was not aware of these severe weather conditions and IIRC the ice storm also knocked out the telegraph lines so Thomas was not able to notify Grant of the conditions. Once the weather cleared and conditions improved, Thomas did attack and was successful.