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

Fighting Joe Hooker and post out of order

Expand Messages
  • Michael Mason
    I m getting some post out of order,I m getting questions after I answered them. Joe Hooker was a good General,had some bad luck in the East but did good work
    Message 1 of 9 , Mar 6, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm getting some post out of order,I'm getting questions after I answered them.
      Joe Hooker was a good General,had some bad luck in the East
      but did good work East and West.
      A point that has to be made is you can not compare someones
      performance in the top spot with someones performance
      in the chain of command.
      Hooker did good work in the chain of command fell short
      in the top spot
      Burnside was terrible in the top spot,a nightmare,did OK sometimes in the chain of command.
      So Generals who never were in the top spot,we never will no
      how the would have been,when all the load is on them
      like Stonewall ,Pat C, we can only assume how they would be
      The Baron
    • Tim Harrison
      Baron, Did Burnside do a good job at Knoxville? Regards, Tim Harrison www.swcivilwar.com ... From: Michael Mason To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com Sent:
      Message 2 of 9 , Mar 6, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Baron,
         
            Did Burnside do a good job at Knoxville?
         
        Regards,
        Tim Harrison
        www.swcivilwar.com
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:25 PM
        Subject: [civilwarwest] Fighting Joe Hooker and post out of order

        I'm getting some post out of order,I'm getting questions after I answered them.
        Joe Hooker was a good General,had some bad luck in the East
        but did good work East and West.
        A point that has to be made is you can not compare someones
        performance in the top spot with someones performance
        in the chain of command.
        Hooker did good work in the chain of command fell short
        in the top spot
        Burnside was terrible in the top spot,a nightmare,did OK sometimes in the chain of command.
        So Generals who never were in the top spot,we never will no
        how the would have been,when all the load is on them
        like Stonewall ,Pat C, we can only assume how they would be
        The Baron


        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      • aot1952
        Gosh Mr. Harrison- I for one would sure like to hear what people have to say in response to this question. For years I have heard rumors that someone or
        Message 3 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Gosh Mr. Harrison-
          I for one would sure like to hear what people have to say in response
          to this question. For years I have heard rumors that someone or
          another were working on book treatments of the so-called "Knoxville
          Campaign". I for one am not very sure I know exactly what the heck
          happened in the Great Valley of Tennessee in 1863.
          To me this whole story remains one of the truly ignored, no perhaps
          overlooked, yet critical campaigns of the Civil War.
          Regards-
          Wakefield

          -- In civilwarwest@y..., "Tim Harrison" <tharrison@s...> wrote:
          > Baron,
          >
          > Did Burnside do a good job at Knoxville?
          >
          > Regards,
          > Tim Harrison
          > www.swcivilwar.com
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: Michael Mason
          > To: civilwarwest@y...
          > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:25 PM
          > Subject: [civilwarwest] Fighting Joe Hooker and post out of order
          >
          >
          > I'm getting some post out of order,I'm getting questions after I
          answered them.
          > Joe Hooker was a good General,had some bad luck in the East
          > but did good work East and West.
          > A point that has to be made is you can not compare someones
          > performance in the top spot with someones performance
          > in the chain of command.
          > Hooker did good work in the chain of command fell short
          > in the top spot
          > Burnside was terrible in the top spot,a nightmare,did OK
          sometimes in the chain of command.
          > So Generals who never were in the top spot,we never will no
          > how the would have been,when all the load is on them
          > like Stonewall ,Pat C, we can only assume how they would be
          > The Baron
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          > ADVERTISEMENT
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          Service.
        • FLYNSWEDE@AOL.COM
          In a message dated 3/7/2002 8:35:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, ... Steve, Burnside 1 Longstreet 0 Sherman sent the XVth AC to the rescue of
          Message 4 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 3/7/2002 8:35:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, wakefield1952@... writes:


            For years I have heard rumors that someone or
            another were working on book treatments of the so-called "Knoxville
            Campaign". I for one am not very sure I know exactly what the heck
            happened in the Great Valley of Tennessee in 1863.

            Steve,
            Burnside  1   Longstreet  0           Sherman sent the XVth AC to the rescue of Burnside following the battle of Chattanooga,  however Burnside turned Longstreet back before they could get to Knoxville.  I know, I know.  You are well aware of this but still had to put in a plug for ole sideburns.

            Wayne

          • hank9174
            IIRC, Burnside pleaded that he was out-numbered, out-gunned, out of ammunition, about to be out-flanked, out of food and out of forage. Sherman dispitched two
            Message 5 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              IIRC, Burnside pleaded that he was out-numbered, out-gunned, out of
              ammunition, about to be out-flanked, out of food and out of forage.

              Sherman dispitched two divisions of the AotT. They arrived
              hungery, wet, tired with their artillery and baggage left
              behind in the mud to find the 9th Corps in warm secure quarters,
              well-fed and plentifully supplied after just defeating Longstreet...


              HankC


              --- In civilwarwest@y..., FLYNSWEDE@A... wrote:
              > In a message dated 3/7/2002 8:35:39 AM Eastern Standard Time,
              > wakefield1952@m... writes:
              >
              >
              > > For years I have heard rumors that someone or
              > > another were working on book treatments of the so-called
              "Knoxville
              > > Campaign". I for one am not very sure I know exactly what the heck
              > > happened in the Great Valley of Tennessee in 1863.
              > >
              > Steve,
              > Burnside 1 Longstreet 0 Sherman sent the XVth AC to
              the rescue
              > of Burnside following the battle of Chattanooga, however Burnside
              turned
              > Longstreet back before they could get to Knoxville. I know, I know.
              You are
              > well aware of this but still had to put in a plug for ole sideburns.
              >
              > Wayne
            • carlw4514
              tim, it looks like we are not waiting for baron s reply but jumping right in. I too would like to see a book on Longstreet vs Burnside at Knoxville. IIRC there
              Message 6 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                tim, it looks like we are not waiting for baron's reply but jumping
                right in. I too would like to see a book on Longstreet vs Burnside at
                Knoxville. IIRC there was something particularly ingenious about the
                way B fortified the area, maybe I can look that up. L fell right into
                the trap of attacking a too-impreganble position, seemingly it was bad
                generalship on the order of failing to do the intelligence work.
                Ultimately, I would expect an expert on the subject [that aint me] to
                say that Knoxville was not a good place to try to defend as it could
                be isolated.
                carl
                --- In civilwarwest@y..., "Tim Harrison" <tharrison@s...> wrote:
                > Baron,
                >
                > Did Burnside do a good job at Knoxville?
                >
                > Regards,
                > Tim Harrison
                > www.swcivilwar.com
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: Michael Mason
                > To: civilwarwest@y...
                > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:25 PM
                > Subject: [civilwarwest] Fighting Joe Hooker and post out of order
                >
                >
                > I'm getting some post out of order,I'm getting questions after I
                answered them.
                > Joe Hooker was a good General,had some bad luck in the East
                > but did good work East and West.
                > A point that has to be made is you can not compare someones
                > performance in the top spot with someones performance
                > in the chain of command.
                > Hooker did good work in the chain of command fell short
                > in the top spot
                > Burnside was terrible in the top spot,a nightmare,did OK sometimes
                in the chain of command.
                > So Generals who never were in the top spot,we never will no
                > how the would have been,when all the load is on them
                > like Stonewall ,Pat C, we can only assume how they would be
                > The Baron
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                > ADVERTISEMENT
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              • Lieberum, Steve
                If I remember correctly, Burnside used the Confederate forts, and the confederate engineer told Longstreet not to attack at the place he did. Steve L ... From:
                Message 7 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  If I remember correctly, Burnside used the Confederate forts, and the
                  confederate engineer told Longstreet not to attack at the place he did.

                  Steve L

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: carlw4514 [mailto:carlw4514@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 12:19 PM
                  To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Fighting Joe Hooker and post out of order


                  tim, it looks like we are not waiting for baron's reply but jumping
                  right in. I too would like to see a book on Longstreet vs Burnside at
                  Knoxville. IIRC there was something particularly ingenious about the
                  way B fortified the area, maybe I can look that up. L fell right into
                  the trap of attacking a too-impreganble position, seemingly it was bad
                  generalship on the order of failing to do the intelligence work.
                  Ultimately, I would expect an expert on the subject [that aint me] to
                  say that Knoxville was not a good place to try to defend as it could
                  be isolated.
                  carl
                • FLYNSWEDE@AOL.COM
                  In a message dated 3/7/2002 11:11:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, ... According to the diary of E. Hart, 40th Illinois, they got within twenty miles of Knoxville
                  Message 8 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 3/7/2002 11:11:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, clarkc@... writes:


                    Sherman dispitched two divisions of the AotT. They arrived
                    hungery, wet, tired with their artillery and baggage left
                    behind in the mud to find the 9th Corps in warm secure quarters,
                    well-fed and plentifully supplied after just defeating Longstreet...



                    According to the diary of E. Hart, 40th Illinois,  they got within twenty miles of Knoxville and since Burnsides was not in any danger,  did an about face and marched back to Chattanooga. 

                    Wayne
                  • melchizedek22
                    I think he did OK,certainly not a Mud March or Fredricksburg The Baron-
                    Message 9 of 9 , Mar 7, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I think he did OK,certainly not a Mud March or Fredricksburg
                      The Baron-


                      -- In civilwarwest@y..., "Tim Harrison" <tharrison@s...> wrote:
                      > Baron,
                      >
                      > Did Burnside do a good job at Knoxville?
                      >
                      > Regards,
                      > Tim Harrison
                      > www.swcivilwar.com
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: Michael Mason
                      > To: civilwarwest@y...
                      > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:25 PM
                      > Subject: [civilwarwest] Fighting Joe Hooker and post out of order
                      >
                      >
                      > I'm getting some post out of order,I'm getting questions after I answered them.
                      > Joe Hooker was a good General,had some bad luck in the East
                      > but did good work East and West.
                      > A point that has to be made is you can not compare someones
                      > performance in the top spot with someones performance
                      > in the chain of command.
                      > Hooker did good work in the chain of command fell short
                      > in the top spot
                      > Burnside was terrible in the top spot,a nightmare,did OK sometimes in the chain of command.
                      > So Generals who never were in the top spot,we never will no
                      > how the would have been,when all the load is on them
                      > like Stonewall ,Pat C, we can only assume how they would be
                      > The Baron
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                      > ADVERTISEMENT
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.