View single post by Johnny Huma
 Posted: Thu Mar 27th, 2008 01:04 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Johnny Huma
Johnny Huma

Joined: Sat Oct 7th, 2006
Location: Williamsport, Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 105

  back to top

Reading on this thread I am not sure "Luck" plays a big factor in a Generals attributes. Yes there were times when we can look at a particuliar battle and say that Luck played a role. Then again I am more apt to believe that Great Generals made their own "Luck". The Unlucky Generals of course attributed to their Bad Luck. One example here is Jacksons sweep on the 11th Corps at Chancelersville. Some would consider this Luck as Hooker stayed idle to the movements he knew were in motion assuming it was the Rebs pulling out. Now we can say that Stonewall was Lucky in the fact that Hooker made no attempts at finding out what the move really was. Or we can also say Hooker himself was just unlucky. But in fact it was simply good Generalship against Bad Generalship and luck really played no part in the outcome. Again at Gettysburg was it luck that played a part in Ewell coming in on the Union right flank in time to pulverize it on the first day or was it the foresight of Lee recalling his troops to that area knowing a major conflict was in progress. I think the good Generals made their own luck. So I am not sure how much luck you can attribute to any one General. Being at the wrong place at the wrong time may be considered unlucky but someone had to put the troops in those positions and that was the commanding General. So he may have contributed to the other Generals so called "Luck"..But I think it comes down to Good or Bad decisions by those leaders and luck would have played a very small part of the Generals Makeup...

 Close Window