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

Re: [civilwarwest] Re: New member; thoughts on General Grant

Expand Messages
  • keeno2@aol.com
    In a message dated 1/28/2008 2:14:24 P.M. Central Standard Time, GnrlJEJohnston@aol.com writes: As for How the Union won the war, Grant at the time was the
    Message 1 of 66 , Jan 28, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 1/28/2008 2:14:24 P.M. Central Standard Time, GnrlJEJohnston@... writes:
      As for How the Union won the war, Grant at the time was the top dog, so the credit goes to him.  But in reality, it was the companies, regiments, brigades, divisions, and corps; it was the men and their leaders; and most important, the ability to replace those that were lost in battle.  That is who really won the war.
      Synergism, General. All parts together are greater than the sum of all parts separately. One would be hard put to come up with a single factor in the Union victory. It wasn't Grant alone. It wasn't the grunt alone. It wasn't that Sam had some amazingly cooperative and able lieutenants. It wasn't the logistics or the overwhelming ability to make and replace equipment. Nor just the population advantage. It was all of that plus a resolve among the citizenry and a Commander-in Chief that managed to bring the effort of a half-nation together; to focus; and to chew and choke.
       
      Strike out a couple or more of these, and you have the reasons the Confederacy lost.
       
      ken




      Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year.
    • hank9174
      I am interested as well. Those purporting to be civilians exiting the city would have to be interned and provided for as long as the siege lasts. This prevents
      Message 66 of 66 , Feb 4, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        I am interested as well.

        Those purporting to be civilians exiting the city would have to be
        interned and provided for as long as the siege lasts. This prevents
        them from transmitting any intelligence they glean. This could become
        quite burdensome and weighed against the potential of civilan
        casualties.


        HankC


        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Williams" <carlw4514@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > I was hoping some one could shed some light on this; someone is right
        > and someone is wrong. Either Grant allowed civilians to come out or he
        > made them stay in and shelled them.
        >
        > > Civilians were not allowed passage out of Vicksburg by Grant -
        their
        > > misery and starvation was a tool in the process of wearing down the
        > > army.
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.