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

Re: [civilwarwest] What if Johnston had replaced Pemberton at vicksburg?

Expand Messages
  • jwolf
    Steve, I m not convinced that Johnston would have surrendered, rather that he would abandoned Vicksburg to keep the army intact, and joined with other forces
    Message 1 of 4 , Apr 5, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Steve,

      I'm not convinced that Johnston would have surrendered, rather that he would
      abandoned Vicksburg to keep the army intact, and joined with other forces in
      the area. That was what he wanted Pemberton to do, as he decided(probably
      rightfully) that he could not rescue him...

      Regards,
      Breck
    • jwolf
      Steve, I m not convinced that Johnston would have surrendered, rather that he would abandoned Vicksburg to keep the army intact, and joined with other forces
      Message 2 of 4 , Apr 5, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Steve,

        I'm not convinced that Johnston would have surrendered, rather that he would
        abandoned Vicksburg to keep the army intact, and joined with other forces in
        the area. That was what he wanted Pemberton to do, as he decided(probably
        rightfully) that he could not rescue him...

        Regards,
        Breck
      • Don Plezia
        You must read some considered opinions of the battle before you make statements such as you did. See Govan and Livingwoods, A Different Kind of Valor ,
        Message 3 of 4 , Apr 5, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          You must read some considered opinions of the battle before you make
          statements such as you did. See Govan and Livingwoods, "A Different
          Kind of Valor", pp198-222.

          Pembertons efforts were wrongly to disperse his troops. When ordered by
          Johnston to make an effort to break out, he disobeyed his superior and
          the majority of his subordinates and stayed in Vicksburg.

          I find your statement that 'Johnston would have surrendered sooner'
          inexplicable. Since Johnston had ordered Pemberton several times to
          leave Vicksburg and save the Army, my conclusions are that he (Johnston)
          would have got the hell out of that trap ASAP and not have waited for
          Grant to surround him.

          As to Vicksburg being the turning point of the war; we must remember
          that it (the war) went on vigorously for another two years. Turning
          points imply to me that the end is in sight. That was not the case at
          Vicksburg! Lee had invaded the north for the second time and the Army
          of the Tennessee was still a major force. Also, Neither Halleck,
          Lincoln or Stanton was seeing any light at the end of the tunnel. Grant
          was still to face Lee in Virginia and loose more troops (in a couple
          months) than Lee had in his Army. Grant also had to try to figure out
          how to beat Lee, spent a year trying and never did figure it out.

          One other thing, in April, 1865, when Lee surrendered at Appomatox,
          there were still 174,000 confederate troops under arms ("Battles and
          Leaders", V 4, p 768) and as of 1/1/1865, over 400,000 (not including
          militia and naval forces) present and absent.

          Don Plezia

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: <tsalagibra@...>
          To: <civilwarwest@egroups.com>
          Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 3:58 PM
          Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] What if Johnston had replaced Pemberton at
          vicksburg?


          > In my opinion, Pemberton did the absolute best job he could with
          the
          > resources at hand. I agree that Johnston would have surrendered a lot
          > sooner. Pemberton, a native of Pennsylvania, tried a couple of times
          to link
          > up with Johnston's army for a two pronged attack against the Federals.
          > Around the area of Black River(?) but Johnston never showed up.
          > And as we know, that was the turning point in the war....not
          Gettysburg.
          >
          > Steve
          >
          > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
          --
          > Kodak Advantix Camera w/ Bag and 2 Rolls of Film, 60% off with
          > FREE Shipping and a 30 Day Money-Back Guarantee at
          > screaminghotdeals.com
          > http://click.egroups.com/1/2714/2/_/14182/_/954964689/
          > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
          --
          >
          >
          >
        • Don Plezia
          You must read some considered opinions of the battle before you make statements such as you did. See Govan and Livingwoods, A Different Kind of Valor ,
          Message 4 of 4 , Apr 5, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            You must read some considered opinions of the battle before you make
            statements such as you did. See Govan and Livingwoods, "A Different
            Kind of Valor", pp198-222.

            Pembertons efforts were wrongly to disperse his troops. When ordered by
            Johnston to make an effort to break out, he disobeyed his superior and
            the majority of his subordinates and stayed in Vicksburg.

            I find your statement that 'Johnston would have surrendered sooner'
            inexplicable. Since Johnston had ordered Pemberton several times to
            leave Vicksburg and save the Army, my conclusions are that he (Johnston)
            would have got the hell out of that trap ASAP and not have waited for
            Grant to surround him.

            As to Vicksburg being the turning point of the war; we must remember
            that it (the war) went on vigorously for another two years. Turning
            points imply to me that the end is in sight. That was not the case at
            Vicksburg! Lee had invaded the north for the second time and the Army
            of the Tennessee was still a major force. Also, Neither Halleck,
            Lincoln or Stanton was seeing any light at the end of the tunnel. Grant
            was still to face Lee in Virginia and loose more troops (in a couple
            months) than Lee had in his Army. Grant also had to try to figure out
            how to beat Lee, spent a year trying and never did figure it out.

            One other thing, in April, 1865, when Lee surrendered at Appomatox,
            there were still 174,000 confederate troops under arms ("Battles and
            Leaders", V 4, p 768) and as of 1/1/1865, over 400,000 (not including
            militia and naval forces) present and absent.

            Don Plezia

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: <tsalagibra@...>
            To: <civilwarwest@egroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 3:58 PM
            Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] What if Johnston had replaced Pemberton at
            vicksburg?


            > In my opinion, Pemberton did the absolute best job he could with
            the
            > resources at hand. I agree that Johnston would have surrendered a lot
            > sooner. Pemberton, a native of Pennsylvania, tried a couple of times
            to link
            > up with Johnston's army for a two pronged attack against the Federals.
            > Around the area of Black River(?) but Johnston never showed up.
            > And as we know, that was the turning point in the war....not
            Gettysburg.
            >
            > Steve
            >
            > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
            --
            > Kodak Advantix Camera w/ Bag and 2 Rolls of Film, 60% off with
            > FREE Shipping and a 30 Day Money-Back Guarantee at
            > screaminghotdeals.com
            > http://click.egroups.com/1/2714/2/_/14182/_/954964689/
            > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
            --
            >
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.