- In a message dated 12/5/01 7:10:42 AM Central Standard Time, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:Message 1 of 57 , Dec 5, 2001View SourceIn a message dated 12/5/01 7:10:42 AM Central Standard Time,
<< One was his love of the Confederacy, while the other was
his reputation. It's just a shame that at times, the latter was more
important than the former. >>
Craig L. Symonds, a Johnston biographer, makes a strong case supporting your
conclusion. Symonds argues that Johnston and Davis were far apart in
strategic thinking especially in where and how to concentrate Confederate
efforts and armies. Johnston's problem, however, was that he decided to
fight Davis head-on rather than work with him. Johnston was unable to
recognize that right or wrong, Davis was the civilian authority and the man
A democratic form of government is dependent on the military being submissive
to the civilian authority. In this case it was incumbent on Johnston to
adjust both his actions and point of view, as Lee did, to Davis. After all
success was the goal, not flexing his prerogatives or gaining solace for his
McClellan also refused to communicate effectively with his
commander-in-chief. He allowed the glitter of his own fame and inflated ego
to blind him to the reality of who was in charge. Neither Johnston nor
McClellan grasped what Lee and Grant did -- the president was calling the
shots. For that reason both made poor generals in a democracy and neutralized
their own talent on the field because of it. Douglas MacArthur was another
who could not sublimate his military ego to the civilian authority.
- One of the functions of cavalry is gathering intelligence on the position of the enemy. McCook must have accomplished this at least. Did this not put theMessage 57 of 57 , Dec 6, 2001View SourceOne of the functions of cavalry is gathering intelligence on the
position of the enemy. McCook must have accomplished this at least.
Did this not put the attack in jeoparday? (I'm asking, I don't know)
PS: ngeorgia.com doesnt seem to have much on Cassville, and unless I
am greatly mistaken you are a contributor there. Of course, it was the
battle that never happened. Am I missing what they have on it?
--- In civilwarwest@y..., FLYNSWEDE@A... wrote:
> That cavalry force that was approaching <there has been some
> McCook's boys were not even aware of Hood being so close> was a
> and if Hood dispatched a small portion of his Corp's to either deal
> to lead them away from his planned theater of battle, there is
> probable cause that JEJ's plan of battle would have been successful.
> think that Hood got rattled too much when told of a cavalry force
> approaching. Since when was cavalry going to get the best of
> Ed Bearrs and others have the same thought as above. At least that
> impression when we discussed this at a seminar in January 1999,
> McMurray <who took up for Hood>, Wiley Sword, and other notables.