|View single post by indy19th|
|Posted: Mon Aug 14th, 2006 09:24 pm||
|James Longstreet wrote:
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.
Ft. Stedman? Mule Shoe? Ft. Stedman was simply the last assault Lee really made and although a temporary "victory", it didn't last. How is that decisive?
While we're discussing "flinging doomed assaults," what about Lee at both Malvern Hill and Pickett's Charge? (Or do you blame your namesake, Longstreet, for the failure at Gettysburg?)
What would you call the ever moving lines from east to west at Petersburg, that eventually culminated in Five Forks? If you're going to point out Grant's failed assaults at Cold Harbor, why would you fault him for simply wearing Lee down at Petersburg and NOT making wasteful assaults? If you're going to criticize Grant, at least be consistent.
If numbers of men were all it took, why did McClellan, Burnside, Hooker, and other Union generals fail?
It sounds like you basically started this thread just to share with us your opinions of both Lee's greatness and Grant's faults.
Last edited on Mon Aug 14th, 2006 09:33 pm by