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

Re: Was Pemberton Wrong, Bad, Incompetent (Vicksburg Campaign)

Expand Messages
  • Tony
    ... There s the problem, the great lesson to be learned from Vicksburg is not tenaciousness. The really great lesson to be learned from Vicksburg is humility.
    Message 1 of 52 , Jan 9, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Lawrence wrote:
      >
      > No one is faulting Grant.
      > It is obvious that his strength was his tenaciousness.
      > Not sure where you got that from my posts.
      > Grant was the "Great Captain" that Jefferson and Jackson thought would always arise from a citizen army.
      > Regards,
      > Jack

      There's the problem, the great lesson to be learned from Vicksburg is not tenaciousness.

      The really great lesson to be learned from Vicksburg is humility. Grant was halfway to Vicksburg when rumors began to arrive that Lincoln was sending an independent commander into Grant's turf with orders to steal half Grant's army and take them down the river for a direct assault. McClellan would have had an aneurism. And a conniption. Maybe even a connipteurism. Grant deferred and sent half his army down the river without complaint. When the plan failed, Grant didn't point fingers at Lincoln. And when Lincoln's spies showed up to evaluate Grant for dismissal, Grant accepted them into his inner circle.

      Tenaciousness denotes a slow plodding, a resignation to trial and error as a means to success. But Grant's operational planning was not trial and error: his initial stated goal of moving south of the city and cutting Vicksburg off from the rear was achieved. Adaptability would be a better word. Depth of planning? Seizing the initiative?

      All these seem more apropos to the Vicksburg Campaign.
    • Ned Baldwin
      ... He did receive direction from Halleck; Halleck did not remain Mute. ... Baseless. ... Would there have been a disaster at Holly Springs without the
      Message 52 of 52 , Jan 10, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Tony" wrote:
        > Starting in early October IIRC, Grant asked repeatedly for direction. What am I to do? What is my objective? How should I proceed. Receiving absolutely no direction from Halleck, Grant outlined a plan: consolidate his force against Holly Springs, drive Pemberton south rebuilding the railroad as he went, take Vicksburg from the interior. Still, Halleck remained mute about Grant's objectives, despite the fact that Halleck was aware that McClernand had bent Lincoln's ear towards a riverine campaign.
        >
        >

        He did receive direction from Halleck; Halleck did not remain Mute.



        > So we have Lincoln stabbing Grant in the back, and Halleck feeding him lies.
        >

        Baseless.


        >
        Would there have been a disaster at Holly Springs without the riverine expedition?
        >

        Absolutely.



        > As far as inventing my own history, go bugger yourself in the earhole.
        >

        Truth hurts huh.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.