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

RE: [civilwarwest] That " Devil" Forest

Expand Messages
  • huddleston.r@comcast.net
    No, Tom, it is not well stated: you make unsupported statements about NBF s postwar career, and then blandly comment that the topic is off limits. A good way
    Message 1 of 13 , Mar 5 1:06 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      No, Tom, it is not "well stated: you make unsupported statements about NBF's postwar career, and then blandly comment that the topic is off limits. A good way to start an argument, while waiting for the moderators to step in.

      Take care,

      Bob

      Judy and Bob Huddleston
      10643 Sperry Street
      Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
      303.451.6376 Huddleston.r@...

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ricky Washburn [mailto:rwwiv@...]
      Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 6:19 PM
      To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] That " Devil" Forest
      Thank you Tom, Very well stated!

      --- Tom Mix <tmix@...> wrote:

      > That is a very controversial topic but from what I know Forrest had
      > the upper hand in the battle. He controlled the high ground looking
      > into the "fort". The fort was really some earth works created with in
      > the original previously built by Confederates. The inhabitants were
      > not just Black soldiers but also white Union supporters from Western
      > Tennessee.
      > The fort had an open rear inviting envelopment.
      > Forrest was in position
      > to over run the fort and did what he always did; inform the Union
      > commander that if he did not surrender the inhabitants would be put to
      > the sword. He meant the Union soldiers in general not just the Black
      > Union soldiers. In the past that had been enough for a quick surrender
      > but this time his terms were rejected. This surprised Forrest but he
      > ordered the attack. It ended up being a shooting gallery. They quickly
      > over ran the earth works and fired down upon the Union troops. It was
      > virtually impossible to not kill their targets. The Union commander
      > died early leaving the Union command structure in a mess.
      > No one really
      > assumed command. The US troops were like fish in barrel. Forrest and
      > his officers rode down to the battle and ordered the firing to cease.
      > Eventually the firing stopped but it was too late. A horrible and
      > inaccurate legend had been born.
      > Grant ordered Sherman to investigate the fight after the war. Sherman
      > exonerated Forrest. The troops had simply got out of control.
      > Confusion reigned until Forrest arrived personally to put a stop to it
      > which he did.
      >
      > After the war Forrest worked to increase the rights of the newly freed
      > slaves. He especially worked hard in the area of elections. The pre
      > and post war Forrest's were two different men all together.
      >
      > We won't discuss the Klan here but suffice it to note that he resigned
      > when they became a hate group. No more should be said on this forum
      > regarding it per our rules which I respect and agree with.
    • Tom Mix
      Bob, I know the rules of how this moderated and plan to follow them. How you view them is up to you. I m not about to begin foot noting my comments, so deal
      Message 2 of 13 , Mar 5 2:36 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Bob,
        I know the rules of how this moderated and plan to follow them. How you
        view them is up to you.
        I'm not about to begin foot noting my comments, so deal with it.
        tom

        -----Original Message-----
        From: huddleston.r@... [mailto:huddleston.r@...]
        Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 3:07 PM
        To: Civil War West
        Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] That " Devil" Forest


        No, Tom, it is not "well stated: you make unsupported statements about
        NBF's postwar career, and then blandly comment that the topic is off
        limits. A good way to start an argument, while waiting for the
        moderators to step in.

        Take care,

        Bob

        Judy and Bob Huddleston
        10643 Sperry Street
        Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
        303.451.6376 Huddleston.r@...

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Ricky Washburn [mailto:rwwiv@...]
        Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 6:19 PM
        To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] That " Devil" Forest
        Thank you Tom, Very well stated!

        --- Tom Mix <tmix@...> wrote:

        > That is a very controversial topic but from what I know Forrest had
        > the upper hand in the battle. He controlled the high ground looking
        > into the "fort". The fort was really some earth works created with in
        > the original previously built by Confederates. The inhabitants were
        > not just Black soldiers but also white Union supporters from Western
        > Tennessee.
        > The fort had an open rear inviting envelopment.
        > Forrest was in position
        > to over run the fort and did what he always did; inform the Union
        > commander that if he did not surrender the inhabitants would be put to

        > the sword. He meant the Union soldiers in general not just the Black
        > Union soldiers. In the past that had been enough for a quick surrender

        > but this time his terms were rejected. This surprised Forrest but he
        > ordered the attack. It ended up being a shooting gallery. They quickly

        > over ran the earth works and fired down upon the Union troops. It was
        > virtually impossible to not kill their targets. The Union commander
        > died early leaving the Union command structure in a mess.
        > No one really
        > assumed command. The US troops were like fish in barrel. Forrest and
        > his officers rode down to the battle and ordered the firing to cease.
        > Eventually the firing stopped but it was too late. A horrible and
        > inaccurate legend had been born.
        > Grant ordered Sherman to investigate the fight after the war. Sherman
        > exonerated Forrest. The troops had simply got out of control.
        > Confusion reigned until Forrest arrived personally to put a stop to it

        > which he did.
        >
        > After the war Forrest worked to increase the rights of the newly freed

        > slaves. He especially worked hard in the area of elections. The pre
        > and post war Forrest's were two different men all together.
        >
        > We won't discuss the Klan here but suffice it to note that he resigned

        > when they became a hate group. No more should be said on this forum
        > regarding it per our rules which I respect and agree with.




        Yahoo! Groups Links
      • Dick Weeks
        Well, the moderator just stepped in. Take this beauty to private email. Now. I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
        Message 3 of 13 , Mar 5 4:22 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Well, the moderator just stepped in. Take this beauty to private email.
          Now.

          I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
          Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
          http://www.civilwarhome.com

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: <huddleston.r@...>
          To: "Civil War West" <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 1:06 PM
          Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] That " Devil" Forest


          > No, Tom, it is not "well stated: you make unsupported statements about
          NBF's postwar career, and then blandly comment that the topic is off limits.
          A good way to start an argument, while waiting for the moderators to step
          in.
          >
          > Take care,
          >
          > Bob
          >
          > Judy and Bob Huddleston
          > 10643 Sperry Street
          > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
          > 303.451.6376 Huddleston.r@...
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: Ricky Washburn [mailto:rwwiv@...]
          > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 6:19 PM
          > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] That " Devil" Forest
          > Thank you Tom, Very well stated!
          >
          > --- Tom Mix <tmix@...> wrote:
          >
          > > That is a very controversial topic but from what I know Forrest had
          > > the upper hand in the battle. He controlled the high ground looking
          > > into the "fort". The fort was really some earth works created with in
          > > the original previously built by Confederates. The inhabitants were
          > > not just Black soldiers but also white Union supporters from Western
          > > Tennessee.
          > > The fort had an open rear inviting envelopment.
          > > Forrest was in position
          > > to over run the fort and did what he always did; inform the Union
          > > commander that if he did not surrender the inhabitants would be put to
          > > the sword. He meant the Union soldiers in general not just the Black
          > > Union soldiers. In the past that had been enough for a quick surrender
          > > but this time his terms were rejected. This surprised Forrest but he
          > > ordered the attack. It ended up being a shooting gallery. They quickly
          > > over ran the earth works and fired down upon the Union troops. It was
          > > virtually impossible to not kill their targets. The Union commander
          > > died early leaving the Union command structure in a mess.
          > > No one really
          > > assumed command. The US troops were like fish in barrel. Forrest and
          > > his officers rode down to the battle and ordered the firing to cease.
          > > Eventually the firing stopped but it was too late. A horrible and
          > > inaccurate legend had been born.
          > > Grant ordered Sherman to investigate the fight after the war. Sherman
          > > exonerated Forrest. The troops had simply got out of control.
          > > Confusion reigned until Forrest arrived personally to put a stop to it
          > > which he did.
          > >
          > > After the war Forrest worked to increase the rights of the newly freed
          > > slaves. He especially worked hard in the area of elections. The pre
          > > and post war Forrest's were two different men all together.
          > >
          > > We won't discuss the Klan here but suffice it to note that he resigned
          > > when they became a hate group. No more should be said on this forum
          > > regarding it per our rules which I respect and agree with.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • James2044
          ... had the ... into the ... not just ... Tennessee. ... position ... put to ... Black ... surrender ... he ... quickly ... was ... commander died ... and his
          Message 4 of 13 , Mar 5 6:38 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Mix" <tmix@i...> wrote:
            > That is a very controversial topic but from what I know Forrest
            had the
            > upper hand in the battle. He controlled the high ground looking
            into the
            > "fort". The fort was really some earth works created with in the
            > original previously built by Confederates. The inhabitants were
            not just
            > Black soldiers but also white Union supporters from Western
            Tennessee.
            > The fort had an open rear inviting envelopment. Forrest was in
            position
            > to over run the fort and did what he always did; inform the Union
            > commander that if he did not surrender the inhabitants would be
            put to
            > the sword. He meant the Union soldiers in general not just the
            Black
            > Union soldiers. In the past that had been enough for a quick
            surrender
            > but this time his terms were rejected. This surprised Forrest but
            he
            > ordered the attack. It ended up being a shooting gallery. They
            quickly
            > over ran the earth works and fired down upon the Union troops. It
            was
            > virtually impossible to not kill their targets. The Union
            commander died
            > early leaving the Union command structure in a mess. No one really
            > assumed command. The US troops were like fish in barrel. Forrest
            and his
            > officers rode down to the battle and ordered the firing to cease.
            > Eventually the firing stopped but it was too late. A horrible and
            > inaccurate legend had been born.
            > Grant ordered Sherman to investigate the fight after the war.
            Sherman
            > exonerated Forrest. The troops had simply got out of control.
            Confusion
            > reigned until Forrest arrived personally to put a stop to it which
            he
            > did.
            >
            > After the war Forrest worked to increase the rights of the newly
            freed
            > slaves. He especially worked hard in the area of elections. The
            pre and
            > post war Forrest's were two different men all together.
            >
            > We won't discuss the Klan here but suffice it to note that he
            resigned
            > when they became a hate group. No more should be said on this forum
            > regarding it per our rules which I respect and agree with.
            >
            *******************************************************************

            Tom has presented a very good overall description of the "battle".
            I would like to add that the loss of command & control on the Union
            side made a general surrender impossible. More than once, Union
            troops fired on men accepting a surrender of other Union troops.
            Regional & racial hate did play into the problems but the loss of
            C&C was the major reason.

            For an excellent discussion of the surrender process during battle,
            see John Keegan's "The Face of Battle".

            James2044
          • James2044
            ... the ... That is a legal action in either case. They should be considered a target. James2044
            Message 5 of 13 , Mar 5 6:40 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "brainbent" <brainbent@y...>
              wrote:
              >
              > Almost every battle account has troops of either side firing into
              the
              > back of those retreating, whether orderly or fleeing in panic.
              >

              That is a legal action in either case. They should be considered a
              target.

              James2044
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.