View single post by Kentucky_Orphan
 Posted: Sat Jul 26th, 2008 06:07 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 

Joined: Wed Dec 20th, 2006
Posts: 125

  back to top

Entirely based on the circumstances facing me, the overall situation, and my position, it would vary and without said info it is very difficult to pick which commander I would least care to square off against.

If I was, say, a cavalry commander of a large force attached to one of the larger armies, and my principal duty was too screen that army and gather information, I would not mind in the least to go up against the likes of Sheridan (especially his first few months as commander of cavalry in AoP) and Forrest. Forrest becuase of his limited time in performing such a task, Sheridan because of his woeful lack of understanding of this role in the Overland campaign. I would not like to fight  against either in a pitched battle, however.

If I was in command of an infantry division, I would not care to face off against any number of opposites including Hood, either Hill in ANV, Hooker,  (is it just me or do confederate division commanders recieve more credit than their Federal counterparts), Ewell etc. Notice that those I listed that rose above division command performed unspectacuarly at the highest rank, whether corps or Army, that they achieved.

As an Army commander, major or minor, I would hate to face Lee or Grant regardless of circumstances.

The poster who mentioned Forrest as being over-rated? No offense, but I believe that to be Bull mularky. Forrest faced smaller names because he commanded a smaller force in a smaller theater against smaller forces. To imply that he faced weak competition is absurd. The men he faced off against, in pitched fighting, as often as not had excellent qualifications for their postings.Only after they got their you know what handed to them by a commander with an inferior, numerically and materialy, force can someone  look back and say "Oh, he must have been  facing really bad commanders".

 Close Window