back to top
|Forget the specifics about what type of command you would have. Just write about who you would not want to face and why.
Personally, I would not want to go up against Forrest or Jackson. I think Forrest is self-explanatory. For Jackson, I realize many people question his tactical abilities and feel that his eccentricities hurt him rather than helped him in battle. Yet he was always thinking offensively; no matter how badly outnumbered he was or outgunned, he was always thinking attack. When soldiers headed towards the back because they were out of ammunition he would tell them to charge the batteries with their bayonets. This kind of automatic, almost inhuman like thought process (kind of like a stonewall), could no doubt be advantageous to the defender who just sat back and picked off the oncoming attackers; but Jackson was relentless and and would fight until the end. Also the chance that he would come at you only one way was unlikely. Most of the generals he faced during the war were unsure about his location up until the very point of battle and even if he didn't attack one of your flanks with a surprise manuever, the psychological fear that he would could often times be just as great. As for Forrest, I don't feel I really have to explain why I wouldn't want to face him; he was a violent, omnipotent cyclone; a 19th century mongol warrior.