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

Re: [civilwarwest] Re: help for Rosecrans from other departments

Expand Messages
  • Michael Mason
    Joe could you cut me a little slack here!Halleck took the better part of a month to make a two day march.I think he just might have been a little over
    Message 1 of 85 , Aug 1 10:16 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Joe could you cut me a little slack here!Halleck took the better part of a month to make a two day march.I think he just might have been a little over cautious And its not like he had a small troop of men.He had 100000 men. And after the empty victory at Corinth ,did he keep going to lets say Vicksburg.No he broke the Army into pieces and blew the chance of winning the War in the West much sooner.Probably the biggest lost opportunity of the War. The Baron i
      PS But lets be fair he was a good General at a desk!



      On 01-Aug-01, hartshje@... wrote:
      <html><body>
      <tt>
      Hank,<BR>
      <BR>
      Your points are well taken.� I might add that with point #1, this <BR>
      applied equally to the Southern commanders, although Beauregard (with <BR>
      all his faults) DID look at the big strategic picture almost right <BR>
      from the start.� He was constantly submitting grand designs to <BR>
      Richmond to try to bring the war to a rapid, successful conclusion <BR>
      for the South, but many of his ideas were rejected as too fantastic.<BR>
      They may have been, but I suspect a lot of the rejection had to do <BR>
      with Davis' policy of trying to defend ALL points at ALL times.<BR>
      <BR>
      On point #2, what is meant by "fieldworks"?� I do know that Halleck, <BR>
      during the offensive against Corinth in 1862, had his entire force <BR>
      entrench up to their eyeballs every day when their march ended.� He <BR>
      had no intention of being caught unprepared like Grant was at Shiloh.<BR>
      McClellan handled his advance up the Penninsula in similar fashion.<BR>
      Also, there were a number of defensive examples (Chancellorsville,<BR>
      Fredricksburg, Seven Pines, Culp's Hill at Gettysburg, and Chicka-<BR>
      mauga).� None of these reached the magnitude of the works constructed<BR>
      later in the war during the 1864 advances on Richmond and Atlanta,<BR>
      but I would classify them as, at minimum, breastworks.<BR>
      <BR>
      Sincerely,<BR>
      Joe H.<BR>
      <BR>
      --- In civilwarwest@y..., clarkc@m... wrote:<BR>
      > <BR>
      > I'd raise a couple of points:<BR>
      > <BR>
      > 1) A major problem, if not THE major problem, with the USA war<BR>
      > effort was that the military commanders could not see beyond their <BR>
      > immediate military objectives. Grant and Sherman grew into this <BR>
      > ability. (For goodness sake, even Thomas was ready to go into <BR>
      > winter quarters in December 1864 when the end was in sight...)<BR>
      > <BR>
      > 2) Field works were STILL not in vogue in September 1863! <BR>
      > Commanders would rather lose men than a perceived lack of offensive <BR>
      > vigor. If Rosecrans had ordered them thrown up at Chickamauga he'd <BR>
      > have been the first army commander to order field works erected. <BR>
      > (I'm not sure Rosey was the first at anything). I'd like to find <BR>
      > the earliest order of a corps or army commander to erect field <BR>
      > works, especially if he was on the offensive...<BR>
      > <BR>
      > Cheers,<BR>
      > HankC<BR>
      > <BR>
      <BR>
      <BR>
      </tt>

      <br>

      <!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

      <table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
      <tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
      <td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor</b></font></td>
      </tr>
      <tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
      <td width=470><a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/M=210156.1528659.3092253.1456767/D=egroupweb/S=1705020536:HM/A=734384/R=0/*https://www.joinhistorybookclub.com/mybookclub/history/bookclubs/hbc/JoinFast/c2/c2_coupon.htm/?src=015_02_hf_273_487_2687"><img src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/bo/bookspan/his_map_468x60.gif" width="468" height= "60" border= "0"></a></td>
      </tr>
      <tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1 src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=210156.1528659.3092253.1456767/D=egroupmail/S=1705020536:HM/A=734384/rand=214658213"></td></tr>
      </table>

      <!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->



      <br>
      <tt>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.</tt>
      </br>

      </body></html>
    • Bob Huddleston
      Well, there s Robert E. Lee, who was always volunteering to not only send troops, but even send himself out west...... Take care, Bob Judy and Bob Huddleston
      Message 85 of 85 , Aug 4 10:54 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Well, there's Robert E. Lee, who was always volunteering to not only
        send troops, but even send himself out west......

        Take care,

        Bob

        Judy and Bob Huddleston
        10643 Sperry Street
        Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
        303.451.6276 Adco@...


        --- In civilwarwest@y..., josepharose@y... wrote:
        > I was just asking whether, with Grant's large force, Rosecrans
        could
        > have been helped by pinning down Johnston's force or through
        Grant's
        > 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.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.