View single post by James Longstreet
 Posted: Fri Aug 11th, 2006 12:02 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
James Longstreet
Member


Joined: Thu Aug 3rd, 2006
Location: Arkansas USA
Posts: 89
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I have been to Shiloh, and read Shelby Foote's book about the battle.  That's how I was led to believe what I posted earlier.  Maybe I was wrong, but I earnestly was not aware that there was a different opinion of the battle's course.  As for Mr. White's statements, I didn't think Fort Donelson, though important, was not a HUGE battle of the Civil War.  And I disagree with the statement that none of Lee's victories were decisive.  And if we're talking decisive, where does Ft. Stedman and Mule Shoe come in?  He kept the war going for as long as it did, and cost the Union thousands of lives.  And Grant WAS a butcher--around 90,000 Yankee boys down from the Wilderness to Petersburg compared to around 40,000 rebels.  So I will continue to rant.  Feel free to correct my math if necessary.  You're right, Grant was determined; he was determined to destroy the Rebels at Cold Harbor and repeatedly flung doomed assaults at Lee's well entrenched men, resulting in 12,000 Union casulties and 1,500 Confederate.  Sound like Burnside at Fredricksburg to anyone?  Anyway, what I'm saying is, he repeated the basic prinicpal, hurling men at Lee's thin lines, at Spotsylvania Courthouse--only it worked that time.  Grant exercised a very simple strategy:  A war of attrition.  He couldn't beat Lee tactically, so he just pinned him against the wall and gradually wore him down.  Grant had troops to waste; Lee did not.  It worked, but Grant paid dearly.

By the way, thanks for the suggestions, Tom.

--Casey

Last edited on Fri Aug 11th, 2006 12:07 am by James Longstreet

 Close Window