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

Re: Bragg Vs Forrest

Expand Messages
  • pvtjessett
    Harry Compliments , I can believe Jack s old man the Rum Runner blowing up a boat maybe? Probably crossing the Detroit River not in the Pacific. Paul ... the
    Message 1 of 115 , Apr 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Harry Compliments ,

      I can believe "Jack's" old man the Rum Runner blowing up a boat
      maybe? Probably crossing the Detroit River not in the Pacific.

      Paul

      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > You see, that's the problem. It's one, uncorroborated source for
      the story,
      > and there are quite a few mitigating factors that make this far
      from a done
      > deal.
      >
      > You know, in 1960 my old man took me to see John Kennedy speak in
      > McKeesport, PA. I distinctly heard Jack say he and his men blew
      up PT 109
      > during a drunken party involving the explosion of a 50 gallon drum
      of hooch.
      >
      > I was with him when he said this. You will find no writings of
      members if
      > his crew denying this occurred. Done deal?
      >
      > Harry
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of pvtjessett
      > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 11:24 PM
      > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Bragg Vs Forrest
      >
      > Harry, Compliments, once again,
      >
      > Truth comes from many sources but adds up to the same, B.S. comes
      > from many sources and is B.S. The sources seem to be the
      > key.J.B.Cowan was with him and said so- Done Deal.
      >
      > Paul
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > > Ummm, they do all describe it the same. That makes sense, since
      > they are
      > > all getting the story from the same place.
      > >
      > > Given where everyone was supposed to be when this conversation
      > took place
      > > (fairly well summarized by Dave), the writings of others who
      would
      > have
      > > known of the incident, and what little I know of Braggs
      character,
      > this all
      > > adds up to a very unlikely possibility.
      > >
      > > Harry
      > >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > Behalf Of pvtjessett
      > > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 10:16 PM
      > > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > > Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Bragg Vs Forrest
      > >
      > > Harry, Compliments again , Sir,
      > >
      > > I fight the other side of your suggestion. Hurst, Pryor, and
      Whyeth
      > > (whom rode with the man) ALL describe the exchange as very much
      > the
      > > same. After reading many manuscripts other than these classics
      it
      > is
      > > excatly as he would of acted,and responded to a useless use of
      his
      > > troops. This is a guy whom had little use for "mapped" battles,
      he
      > > would come upon a situation and "make his "move" as the checker
      > > player he was. I see real merit in this situation and the reason
      > for
      > > him (Forrest) to be upgraded and moved on, (again w/o the troops
      > he
      > > raised and trained).
      > >
      > > Paul
      > >
      > > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@>
      > > wrote:
      > > >
      > > > All "others" seem to source the same "conversation" between
      > Cowan
      > > and Wyeth.
      > > > Therein lays the problem. And Dave Powell has already pointed
      > out
      > > that the
      > > > mere logistics of this conversation occurring as described are
      > > problematic.
      > > >
      > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > > [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > Behalf Of pvtjessett
      > > > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 7:50 PM
      > > > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > > > Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Bragg Vs Forrest
      > > >
      > > > Harry, Compliments Sir,
      > > >
      > > > I very well may be hashing old comments but here goes,
      > > > Accompanied by J.B.Cowan he went to Bragg's Missionary Ridge
      HQ.
      > > > above Chattanooga. Forrest's tirade went on for quite a bit,
      > which
      > > > if requested I will denote all of it, but let it suffuce it to
      > say
      > > > he was a touch upset, "You have threaten to arrest me for not
      > > > obeying your orders promply. I Dare you to do it, and I say to
      > you
      > > > if you ever again try to interfere with me or cross my path it
      > > will
      > > > be at the peril of your life". This is only part of the
      > > recollection
      > > > of Mr. Cowan. This piece comes out of Jack Hurst's(Pg140) work
      > but
      > > > is well cronicled in others.
      > > > Forrest had a problem with serving under anyone but very much
      so
      > > > under someone who didn't have a clue other than graduating
      > > from "THE
      > > > POINT"
      > > > I apoligize for the out burst but...
      > > > Paul
      > > >
      > > > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@>
      > > > wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > Good stuff, Lee. Keep it coming, and posterity may have to
      > > > consider Forrest
      > > > > as something almost approaching human (though surely a
      demigod
      > > of
      > > > some
      > > > > sort)!
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Harry
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > > From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > > > [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On
      > > > > Behalf Of LWhite64@
      > > > > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 4:23 PM
      > > > > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > Subject: [civilwarwest] Bragg Vs Forrest
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Came across a little article that Cowan wrote in
      Confederate
      > > > Veteran in
      > > > > 1896.
      > > > >
      > > > > Stonewall Jackson and Forrest.
      > > > >
      > > > > The growth of military fame in the great struggle of
      the
      > > > Confederacy
      > > > > for independence gives renewed prominence, continually, to
      > > > Stonewall Jackson
      > > > > and to Nathan Bedford Forrest. It is now prophesied by the
      > > > Veteran, that
      > > > > some artist will blend their likenesses and that they will
      be
      > > > classed in
      > > > > history as the two most wonderful commanders of men in
      battle
      > > that
      > > > is of
      > > > > record to this time. Their achievements become more and
      more
      > > > thrilling to
      > > > > the student of military annals.
      > > > >
      > > > > Loyally obedient to their superiors in rank, ordinarily-
      > > when
      > > > in the
      > > > > midst of battle, each acted as if Supreme Commander and it
      > seems
      > > > that each
      > > > > had the sagacity to discern the motions even of the opposing
      > > > Commanders.
      > > > >
      > > > > Jackson would spend much of the night in prayer and in
      > > > reconnoitering,
      > > > > so that in the morning of battle, plans were already
      perfected
      > > and
      > > > > "Forward," or "By Flank," were the orders without hesitation.
      > > > >
      > > > > Forrest, with perhaps less study of the situation,
      > > determined
      > > > to "get
      > > > > there first"-and to kill or capture the enemy. Forrest was
      > not
      > > as
      > > > > considerate of a Higher Power as Jackson during the war
      > period.
      > > > He was not
      > > > > a West Pointer, but he possessed that innate gallantry which
      > was
      > > > ever
      > > > > conspicuous in consideration for women and children. When
      the
      > > > great was was
      > > > > over and all of his black hair had silvered, his heart, too,
      > was
      > > > subdued;
      > > > > and he was diligent in behalf of that higher order of
      manhood
      > > > toward the
      > > > > Unseen Cause that had spared him through so many battles
      > wherein
      > > > horses,
      > > > > almost by the score, were killed under him, and many of his
      > > fellow
      > > > men
      > > > > deaths in his presence.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > It is very interesting to note the line, "Loyally obedient
      to
      > > their
      > > > > superiors..."
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Lee
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > -----Original Message-----
      > > > > From: Philip Callen <p3callen@>
      > > > > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > Sent: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 23:02:07 -0000
      > > > > Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Question about Bragg
      > > > >
      > > > > Dave,
      > > > >
      > > > > You know, I am not one to embrace a forlorn hope, and when
      the
      > > > >
      > > > > entire sentiment of the list is against me, I am willing to
      > bow
      > > to
      > > > >
      > > > > the superior knowlege and wisdom of the group. But, I can't
      > > help
      > > > >
      > > > > thinking that there are two standards of evidence being used
      > > > here.
      > > > >
      > > > > It was not long ago that you and I and others were declaring
      > > that
      > > > >
      > > > > because there was no evidence to support the notion that
      Hood
      > > was
      > > > >
      > > > > using opiates to relieve pain that it was too great a leap
      of
      > > > faith
      > > > >
      > > > > to suppose that he was. It did not matter that many in this
      > > group
      > > > >
      > > > > put forward good reasons to suggest why that conclusion was
      > > > >
      > > > > reasonable. From where I sit, I find it just as
      unreasonable
      > > for
      > > > >
      > > > > you to suggest that someone is a fabricator and a liar of
      the
      > > > worst
      > > > >
      > > > > sort without any proof other than that you could find no
      > > evidence
      > > > of
      > > > >
      > > > > it. You have a fancier way of saying it, but to me you have
      > > taken
      > > > a
      > > > >
      > > > > leap of faith as great as those who were saying that Hood
      had
      > to
      > > > be
      > > > >
      > > > > relieving his pain some way. And I don't buy the blanket
      > > > statement
      > > > >
      > > > > that Bragg was no coward to cover all possible challenges to
      > his
      > > > >
      > > > > manhood. I believe that a person could stand unperturbed on
      a
      > > > >
      > > > > battlefield when bullets are whizzing past his head and
      still
      > > > >
      > > > > hesitate when faced with a fuming Forrest. I'll go further,
      I
      > > > >
      > > > > believe that a person could have walked into ten duels in
      his
      > > > >
      > > > > lifetime with aplomb and still quaver when faced with the
      > > > likelihood
      > > > >
      > > > > of certain death at the hands of someone you consider to be
      > far
      > > > >
      > > > > superior in dueling. We look at history through a 140 year
      > old
      > > > >
      > > > > prism, and we don't really understand their ways. I still
      > think
      > > > >
      > > > > that it is plausible (though not likely) that the meeting
      took
      > > > >
      > > > > place. It may have happened as stated. It may have been
      > > changed
      > > > in
      > > > >
      > > > > important ways by the teller. It may not have happened at
      > all.
      > > > But
      > > > >
      > > > > I don't see that you have given me any proof that eliminates
      > > those
      > > > >
      > > > > other possibilities. In matters of honor, men were educated
      > > from
      > > > a
      > > > >
      > > > > very early time to keep things hushed up. In this instance
      it
      > > > still
      > > > >
      > > > > seems possible to me that your lock picks into the vaults of
      > > time
      > > > >
      > > > > were unsuccessful at uncovering the truth, and may never.
      > > > >
      > > > > Philip
      > > > >
      > > > > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com <mailto:civilwarwest%
      > > > 40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > > , DPowell334@ wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > In a message dated 3/29/2006 5:21:37 P.M. Central Standard
      > > > Time,
      > > > >
      > > > > > SDE80@ writes:
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > You deem the lack of information to disprove an incident a
      > > slim
      > > > >
      > > > > thread,
      > > > >
      > > > > > Lee's point is that the account of the incident is a slim
      > > > thread.
      > > > >
      > > > > I agree with
      > > > >
      > > > > > Lee. Braxton Bragg feared no one. And since Bragg's
      > chief
      > > of
      > > > >
      > > > > staff was an
      > > > >
      > > > > > inveterate gossip to his wife, I tend to think that if it
      > > > >
      > > > > actually happened,
      > > > >
      > > > > > he would have written of it. Not much went undiscussed
      in
      > > the
      > > > >
      > > > > Army of
      > > > >
      > > > > > Tennessee.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > Sam
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > There are a lot of reasons to believe it never happened.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > 1) the date is hard to pin down. the source for the story
      > > claims
      > > > a
      > > > >
      > > > > day in
      > > > >
      > > > > > October, 1863, IIRC, but does not mention a specific date.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > 2) As Sam notes there is NO contemporary evidence of it.
      > The
      > > > >
      > > > > Brent journal
      > > > >
      > > > > > gives us a daily window into Bragg's HQ for more than a
      > year,
      > > > and
      > > > >
      > > > > mentions
      > > > >
      > > > > > the comings and goings of commanders as well as troop
      > > movements,
      > > > >
      > > > > etc. Brent
      > > > >
      > > > > > discusses Davis' arrival and meetings, for example.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > I think Brent only mentions Forrest as having departed and
      > his
      > > > >
      > > > > troops being
      > > > >
      > > > > > assigned to Wheeler. Certainly there is nothing in the
      > journal
      > > > >
      > > > > about any sort
      > > > >
      > > > > > of confrontation.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > 3) No other personal correspondence mentions it. Bragg's
      own
      > > > >
      > > > > letters have
      > > > >
      > > > > > been mentioned, but there are also other sources, like the
      > > > Taylor
      > > > >
      > > > > Beatty
      > > > >
      > > > > > journal. Beatty comments on Forrest - often critically -
      > > during
      > > > >
      > > > > Chickamauga and the
      > > > >
      > > > > > aftermath, but makes no mention of a confrontation.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > 4) As Lee points out, accepting this sort of thing meekly
      is
      > > > >
      > > > > completely out
      > > > >
      > > > > > of character for Braxton Bragg. Polk was vastly more
      > > powerfully
      > > > >
      > > > > connected
      > > > >
      > > > > > within the Confederate elite, (a friend of Jeff) and
      Bragg
      > > > >
      > > > > hesitated not one
      > > > >
      > > > > > second in relieving Polk and charging him with
      dereliction.
      > > Why
      > > > >
      > > > > on earth would
      > > > >
      > > > > > Bragg balk at arresting Forrest, who after all is an
      > obscure
      > > > >
      > > > > Memphis
      > > > >
      > > > > > businessman of unsavory reputation and standing? The idea
      > > that
      > > > >
      > > > > Bragg would be
      > > > >
      > > > > > physically afraid of Forrest is absurd, IMO. Bragg had
      > great
      > > > >
      > > > > personal courage.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > I think it is pure mythology, invented by a Forrest
      admirer
      > > long
      > > > >
      > > > > after the
      > > > >
      > > > > > fact, and accepted as gospel since then. I have searched
      > long
      > > > and
      > > > >
      > > > > hard for some
      > > > >
      > > > > > contemporary evidence, and there is none.
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > > Dave Powell
      > > > >
      > > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > <mailto:civilwarwest-unsubscribe%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > SPONSORED LINKS
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > American
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      > > > t=ms&k=American+civil+war&w1=American+civil+wa
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
      r&w2=Civil+war&w3=United+states&w4=Civil+war+history&w5=Of+the+civil+
      > > > war&w6=
      > > > > United+state+army&c=6&s=126&.sig=PLhSD0RGhooh2tXWQrpA1w>
      > civil
      > > > war
      > > > >
      > > > > Civil
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      > > > t=ms&k=Civil+war&w1=American+civil+war&w2=Civi
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
      l+war&w3=United+states&w4=Civil+war+history&w5=Of+the+civil+war&w6=Un
      > > > ited+st
      > > > > ate+army&c=6&s=126&.sig=rEnWOoAzy2uXEjwEqbvKQw> war
      > > > >
      > > > > United
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      > > > t=ms&k=United+states&w1=American+civil+war&w2=
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
      Civil+war&w3=United+states&w4=Civil+war+history&w5=Of+the+civil+war&w
      > > > 6=Unite
      > > > > d+state+army&c=6&s=126&.sig=iLfklVD4PyvX0P-TPXBdyQ> states
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Civil
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      > > > t=ms&k=Civil+war+history&w1=American+civil+war
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
      &w2=Civil+war&w3=United+states&w4=Civil+war+history&w5=Of+the+civil+w
      > > > ar&w6=U
      > > > > nited+state+army&c=6&s=126&.sig=5ubNl6PEd3y2Dmlp5shYpg> war
      > > > history
      > > > >
      > > > > Of
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      > > > t=ms&k=Of+the+civil+war&w1=American+civil+war&
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
      w2=Civil+war&w3=United+states&w4=Civil+war+history&w5=Of+the+civil+wa
      > > > r&w6=Un
      > > > > ited+state+army&c=6&s=126&.sig=xGDN2KXuQrheRYzvZoUVcQ> the
      > > civil
      > > > war
      > > > >
      > > > > United
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      > > > t=ms&k=United+state+army&w1=American+civil+war
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
      &w2=Civil+war&w3=United+states&w4=Civil+war+history&w5=Of+the+civil+w
      > > > ar&w6=U
      > > > > nited+state+army&c=6&s=126&.sig=yF_kwbpG9O-0SNRFfNB27g>
      state
      > > > army
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > _____
      > > > >
      > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > * Visit your group "civilwarwest
      > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest> " on the web.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > > > civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > <mailto:civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
      > > > subject=Unsubscribe>
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      > > > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > _____
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
    • pvtjessett
      Bob, Compliments Sir, I m sorry for not getting back to you sooner, I just happen to notice your inquiry-I appogize(SP). Although I have a very child like
      Message 115 of 115 , Apr 8, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Bob, Compliments Sir,

        I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner, I just happen to
        notice your inquiry-I appogize(SP).
        Although I have a very "child like mind" I rarely make quotes that I
        can't back up and if my bluff is called I either acknowledge my
        screw up or own up to it.
        The actual quote which reads as follows:"A man I have never
        seen,Sir. His name is Forrest"
        I have seen this same qutoe in several publications but will give
        you the easiest one to document, if this does not suffice please let
        me know and I will give further documentation.
        Title: "May I qoute you General Lee" Randall Bedwell, Gramecy Books,
        Nashville, ISBN 0-517-21992-1, Pg.#54

        Your Humble Servant,
        Paul

        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, huddleston.r@... wrote:
        >
        > I do not think so. I would like to see a source for that quotation.
        >
        > --
        > Take care,
        >
        > Bob
        >
        > Judy and Bob Huddleston
        > 10643 Sperry Street
        > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
        > huddleston.r@...
        >
        > -------------- Original message --------------
        > From: "pvtjessett" <pw541301@...>
        > BOB,
        >
        > General Lee when asked after the war by a reporter who his best
        Gen.
        > was answered " A man I have never met named Forrest", A
        > competent "Gen. Officer", well someone thought so
        >
        > Paul
        >
        > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, huddleston.r@ wrote:
        > >
        > > At the bottom of this argument is that what the Forrest
        supporters
        > are arguing is that Forrest is not competent to be a General
        Officer.
        > >
        > > Paragraph One of the Army Regulations, both US and CS:
        > >
        > > “1. ALL inferiors are required to obey strictly, and to
        > execute with alacrity and good faith, the lawful orders of the
        > superiors appointed over them.”
        > >
        > > --
        > > Take care,
        > >
        > > Bob
        > >
        > > Judy and Bob Huddleston
        > > 10643 Sperry Street
        > > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
        > > huddleston.r@
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >
        > Visit your group "civilwarwest" on the web.
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        Service.
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.