|View single post by pender|
|Posted: Sat Oct 22nd, 2011 02:36 pm||
|I think McClellan would be a logical choice for Lee. The battles that McClellan were in should speak for their selves. I would argue that McClellan took a bad rap from the radical republicans that had took control of the northern government. Certainly the Lincoln government could not take any responsibility in the union army not trouncing that band of rag a muffins( Lincoln after Chancellorsville ) down south. Such as the pursuit of Lee's army after Antietam, just not fast enough for them politicians. Should of throwed his entire army against Lee that second day, 12,410 union causalties did not meet their quota for the first day. Take George G. Meade, who IMO is the best union General for the union during the entire war, his pursuit after Gettysburg was not fast enough. To criticize Meade after Gettysburg does make me wonder if McClellan was not right about Lincoln when he said Lincoln" was nothing more than a well-meaning baboon."
McClellan's Battle's : Seven Pines, men 42,000 faced Joesph Johnston, men42,000 union causalties 5,031 confederate 6,134
Seven Days : men 91,000 faced Lee, men 95,000, union causalties 15,849 confederate 20,614
South Mountain : men 28,000 faced Lee, men 18,000, union causalties 1,813 confederate 2,685
Antietam : men 75,000 faced Lee, men 52,000, union causalties 12,410 confederate 13,724
After seeing McClellan's battles we can see the casualty rate is in the union's favor. I also know that inflicting the most causalties does not mean you win the battle, such as the Seven Days. But compared to some of the other battle's we can clearly see the difference. Also note the total force of both sides. Here is a few examples.
Chancellorsville, Hooker in command. men 105,000 faced Lee, men 57,000, union causalties 16,792 confederate 12,764
Fredericksburg, Burnside in command. men 114,000 faced Lee, men 72,000, union causalties 12,653 confederate 5,309
Cold Harbor, Grant in command. men 108,000 faced Lee, men 62,000, union causalties 12,000 confederate 2,500
This is not to show this should of been done or that. McClellan was not a great General as Lee or Meade. But all in all I think he was alot better than history gives him. As I said before his battle records should speak for themselves. It is easy to say he should of done this or that from our living rooms. Even from the white house, Lincoln could criticize him for not doing what he should of done. But Lee did say McClellan was he's toughest opponent and Lee did have the advantage, he was there we were not.