Re: Forrest in general (no pun intended)
- Mr. Dave, Compliments Sir,
Yes 100% correct on the Dover (Ft. Donelson) Mission, thanks.
Forrest's reasoning if I may be so bold was Why In Gods Name Take A
Place You Can Niether Really Hold nor Defend????. Wheeler gave the
order he (Forrest) executed it.
As far as giving him the whole western part of that time the
Cofederacy so to speak was probably more than he could chew , you
are correct. Had the powers that be not already taken two of his
hand picked and trained units (Darn near division sized) already and
asked him to build from scratch again he might of had a better
chance. Although he did darn well for the supplies and equipage
supplied which was nada. Ask Col. Strieght.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, DPowell334@... wrote:
> In a message dated 3/25/2006 4:07:33 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> pw541301@... writes:
> Ah yes Paducah, One of the very few times Forrest was under
> and direction of another in command over him. You are correct I
> amend my statement to say that , when under his own command he
> never defeated until Selma, one other time he got his fanny
> was when under the control of Gen. Wheeler. I'm gonna have to
> it up, the battle I mean, but afterward he told Wheeler he "would
> in his grave before he would ever serve under him again". Weird
> thing is they actually were friends---Go Figure.
> That was Dover, Tenn, Feb 63.
> Frankly, Forrest had his down days, and arguably, placing him in
charge of a
> cavalry corps in august, 1863, was a grave mistake. (at least, I
> Dave Powell