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

Longstreet

Expand Messages
  • Hattie
    The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause
    Message 1 of 18 , May 30, 2010
      The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
      Gary
    • keeno2@aol.com
      In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@cinci.rr.com writes: Am I alone in this? comment please You are not alone. There are
      Message 2 of 18 , May 30, 2010
        In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@... writes:
        Am I alone in this? comment please
        You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an interesting discussion though.
         
        Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
         
        Ole
      • Bob Huddleston
        Well, since this is CW West, Ol Peter had a minor impact on Chickamauga. : ) And he tangled with Braxton -- not a rarity. Take care, Bob Judy and Bob
        Message 3 of 18 , May 30, 2010
          Well, since this is CW West, Ol' Peter had a minor impact on Chickamauga. :>) And he tangled with Braxton -- not a rarity.
          Take care,
          
          Bob
          
          Judy and Bob Huddleston
          10643 Sperry Street
          Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
          Huddleston.r@...
          
          I am A thousand times meaner A hundred times Harder and A damed sight wors Looking than I Ever was so you can form some sort of an idea what sort of A Looking man you have now for A Husband if this kind of Buisness wont make men hard I should like to know what will it is Everyone for himself and dam the one that pulls the hind tit
          
          Henry Clemons of Company K, 23rd Wisconsin Infantry Regiment, to his wife Anna in Sauk City, Wis, January 15, 1863
          


          keeno2@... wrote:
           

          In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@cinci. rr.com writes:
          Am I alone in this? comment please
          You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an interesting discussion though.
           
          Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
           
          Ole
        • Hattie
          I don t think that his actions in the west were any better than those in the east, seems like to me he could not work in a group effort. and unless it was his
          Message 4 of 18 , May 31, 2010
            I don't think that his actions in the west were any better than those in the east, seems like to me he could not work in a group effort. and unless it was his idea, he would pardon the expression Stonewall and with hold any aid that he could give
            God Bless
            Gary
            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, keeno2@... wrote:
            >
            >
            > In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
            > ggeisler@... writes:
            >
            > Am I alone in this? comment please
            >
            >
            > You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are
            > those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an
            > interesting discussion though.
            >
            > Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was
            > serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
            >
            > Ole
            >
          • Gary R. Geisler
            I m sorry, I forgot where I m at But I ll still keep my thoughts about Longstreet either West or East he was less than stellar. God Bless Gary ... From:
            Message 5 of 18 , May 31, 2010
               I'm sorry, I forgot where I'm at' But I'll still keep my thoughts about Longstreet either West or East he was less than stellar.
              God Bless
              Gary
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 9:24 PM
              Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Longstreet

               

              In a message dated 5/30/2010 4:18:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, ggeisler@cinci. rr.com writes:
              Am I alone in this? comment please
              You are not alone. There are those who think he was sainted and there are those who think he didn't earn much of a place in the USCW. Makes an interesting discussion though.
               
              Oh. Wait. This is Civil War West. Unless you're talking the time he was serving in the west, Longstreet is off-topic.
               
              Ole

            • hank9174
              Actually Old Pete s actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders. The doctrine of strategic
              Message 6 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                Actually Old Pete's actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders.

                The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...


                HankC


                --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Hattie" <ggeisler@...> wrote:
                >
                > The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                > Gary
                >
              • Ron
                ... Quote, in part, The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives... ... Given the military
                Message 7 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                  "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
                  >
                  Quote, in part, The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                  >
                  Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of "Strategic Defense" would lead to a slow steady stranglation of the south. It would be like waiting for the other shoe to drop.

                  Ron
                • hank9174
                  Isn t that what actually happened? I suppose the question(s) may be phrased as : 1) what could the USA have done to *shorten* the war with the same results,
                  Message 8 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                    Isn't that what actually happened?

                    I suppose the question(s) may be phrased as :
                    1) what could the USA have done to *shorten* the war with the same results, or,

                    2) what could the CSA have done to *lengthen* the war and win via northern war weariness?


                    HankC

                    --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Ron" <rblack0981@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > "hank9174" <clarkc@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > Quote, in part, The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                    > >
                    > Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of "Strategic Defense" would lead to a slow steady stranglation of the south. It would be like waiting for the other shoe to drop.
                    >
                    > Ron
                    >
                  • jlawrence@kc.rr.com
                    Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of Strategic Defense would lead to a slow steady
                    Message 9 of 18 , Jun 1, 2010
                      Given the military resources of the Northern forces compared to that of the southern military, the strategy of "Strategic Defense" would lead to a slow steady stranglation of the south. It would be like waiting for the other shoe to drop.
                      >
                      > Ron

                      Hello.
                      The overwhelming superiority in resources and manpower certainly insured that, if marshalled, a Union victory. (Overwhelming may be an understatement-while fighting the costliest war in our history, the transcontinental raillroad was building on schedule (In the South, according to the Army War College-Levenworth Campus they were not even making rails-let alone laying new track).
                      What gaurnteed victory though was not men or material superiority-it was the will to wield them and force the issue through to the end-the will perseevere at any cost.
                      It was Lincoln that won the war. He had the resources and he was of a mind to wield them.
                      Absent Lincoln, you don' have victory.
                      You have the negotiated peace that I think most in the CSA thought they were going to get when the whole thing started.
                      In my opinion anyway

                      Regards,
                      Jack
                      Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
                    • carlw4514
                      Hey Hank I agree, note that where Longstreet looked not so good was at Knoxville where he was asked to do something against this line of thinking. It probably
                      Message 10 of 18 , Jun 4, 2010
                        Hey Hank

                        I agree, note that where Longstreet looked not so good was at Knoxville where he was asked to do something against this line of thinking. It probably was reinforced at Chickamauga, since just about the best that could be hoped for offensively accomplished little from a total Campaign view, yet cost plenty of blood.

                        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Actually Old Pete's actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders.
                        >
                        > The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                        >
                        >
                        > HankC
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Hattie" <ggeisler@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                        > > Gary
                        > >
                        >
                      • rbaquero@netzero.net
                        Hi ! Do you know if ...... President Jefferson Davis had something to do with Longstreet and Johnston ? - Raul ... From: carlw4514 To:
                        Message 11 of 18 , Jun 6, 2010

                           Hi !  Do you know if ...... President Jefferson Davis had something to do with Longstreet and Johnston ?

                          - Raul



                          ---------- Original Message ----------
                          From: "carlw4514" <carlw4514@...>
                          To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Longstreet
                          Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 22:22:48 -0000

                           

                          Hey Hank

                          I agree, note that where Longstreet looked not so good was at Knoxville where he was asked to do something against this line of thinking. It probably was reinforced at Chickamauga, since just about the best that could be hoped for offensively accomplished little from a total Campaign view, yet cost plenty of blood.

                          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "hank9174" <clarkc@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Actually Old Pete's actions were probably better aligned with Southern aspirations than other, more exalted, Confederate leaders.
                          >
                          > The doctrine of strategic defense espoused by Longstreet and Johnston would have saved both territory and lives...
                          >
                          >
                          > HankC
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Hattie" <ggeisler@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > The more that I study and read of this conflict, the less that General Longstreet impresses me seems like a lot os what he did was not beneficial to the cause of the South. Am I alone in this? comment please thanks and God Bless
                          > > Gary
                          > >
                          >



                          ____________________________________________________________
                          Penny Stock Jumping 2000%
                          Sign up to the #1 voted penny stock newsletter for free today!
                          AwesomePennyStocks.com
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.