Re: help for Rosecrans from other departments
- I'd raise a couple of points:
1) A major problem, if not THE major problem, with the USA war effort
was that the military commanders could not see beyond their immediate
military objectives. Grant and Sherman grew into this ability. (For
goodness sake, even Thomas was ready to go into winter quarters in
December 1864 when the end was in sight...)
2) Field works were STILL not in vogue in September 1863! Commanders
would rather lose men than a perceived lack of offensive vigor. If
Rosecrans had ordered them thrown up at Chickamauga he'd have been the
first army commander to order field works erected. (I'm not sure Rosey
was the first at anything). I'd like to find the earliest order of a
corps or army commander to erect field works, especially if he was on
--- In civilwarwest@y..., glblank@t... wrote:
> --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:
> > --- In civilwarwest@y..., josepharose@y... wrote:
> > Second, as you should also know, it was up to Halleck to effect
> > transfers, not Grant. Halleck was more interested in a movement
> > Louisiana and Texas at the moment than Grant's proposed Mobile
> > operation.
> Which pretty much gets right to the heart of the matter. For all
> good I may think of Rosecrans, it's hard to ignore that bit of
> McClellan in him that did not endear him to..., well, anybody to be
> honest. For all the good that Rosecrans accomplished he just didn't
> seem to understand exactly what his strengths were and instead went
> about exploiting his own weaknesses to his own demise. I do not
> think that Rosecrans will ever go dowen in history as a great
> battlefield commander. To my knowledge, he never addressed why he
> did not continue to carry his battle to Bragg, meaning maneuver,
> flank and gain the enemy's rear as in Tullahoma and Chattanooga,
> instead of letting a reinforced Bragg take the battle to him.
> Perhaps he had convinced himself that Stones River was a resounding
> victory? The other issue was that if there is one trait that
> Rosecrans had that could be viewed as his most positive, that trait
> would be his skill as an engineer, not as a battlefield commander.
> Tullahoma and Chattanooga proved as much. Why did he not throw up
> field works at Chickamauga and dare Bragg to assault those works?
> Bragg had more to lose for not attacking than Rosecrans. That and
> was in Bragg's nature to pull back once he determined that he could
> not strike an effective blow. Rosecrans still held a better hand
> than Bragg and could afford to force Bragg to make a decision
> to attack fortified lines or retreat. Either way, the odds would
> been in Rosey's favor. But that is just my 2 bits.
- Well, there's Robert E. Lee, who was always volunteering to not only
send troops, but even send himself out west......
Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
--- In civilwarwest@y..., josepharose@y... wrote:
> I was just asking whether, with Grant's large force, Rosecrans
> have been helped by pinning down Johnston's force or through
> offering of his excess troops.
Although I've already address the supposed "excess troops" issue
elsewhere, I'd like to ask Mr. Rose to offer three examples where
Civil War generals offered to send their forces elsewhere for someone
else to command (as opposed to being ordered to do so).
After all, if his request is so reasonable, we should be able to cite
other examples quite readily.