|View single post by 5fish|
|Posted: Sun Aug 31st, 2008 01:58 pm||
|The Iron Duke wrote:
Are you trying to have a serious discussion or trying to stir the waters a bit.
I am serious and have I not been serious in my other posts. Why ask such question because i question conformity go against spoon fed history.
Lee may have want initiative within his officer but he did not develop it.
Like I mention it before, if historians tell us Lee wanted his officers to take initiative then would not the officers under his command know this as well. We do not see it in any of Lee's subordinates except Jackson and Stuart.
Longstreet and the other do not display much if any. So why is this the case?
Historians tell us one thing but something else is happening as you read about battles not mush initiative taking. All I am saying.
I figure Lee may wanted initiative but it obvious he did not have a system to bring initiative out of his men. I figure it goes back to his personalty. He was a neat and control freak.
I no Lee is perfect but he still human and historians seem to forget it.
I am looking what I see does not match what I am told so why?
Last edited on Sun Aug 31st, 2008 02:51 pm by 5fish