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

Re: Grant, His Canal and Clausewitz

Expand Messages
  • William H Keene
    ... Which shows what? That Grant thought the canal impractical but worked on it anyway; which is the point appearently made by the author of the article. ...
    Message 1 of 7 , Oct 27 5:06 PM
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "josepharose" <josepharose@y...> wrote:
      > ...
      > Even if Grant stated on 2/4 that "I lost all faith in its ever
      > leading to any practical results," he was still working on the canal
      > on March 27th. "All work, excepting repairing the crevasse in the
      > canal levee, has been suspended for several days, the enemy having
      > driven the dredgers entirely out. The canal may be useful in passing
      > boats through at night, to be used below, but nothing further."

      Which shows what? That Grant thought the canal impractical but worked on it anyway;
      which is the point appearently made by the author of the article.


      > It wasn't just to keep the men occupied, as he brought in dredges
      > and Black laborers to do the work. As he had four other schemes
      > which could use dredges, laborers, and engineers, it would be pretty
      > ridiculous for him to waste them on an impractical canal.

      I don't think reallocation of these resources would have changed the results at any of the
      other efforts. Do you?


      > Grant tried to excuse all of these failed attempts as mere makework,

      When did he do so?


      > but his ORs show the exact opposite. People seem surprised that a
      > general would make excuses for his failures.

      Which people?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.