- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: History Debate: Ulysses S. Grant vs. Robert E. Lee
Posted on 3/30/14 at 10:35 am to Sleeping Tiger
Posted on 3/30/14 at 10:35 am to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
It wasn't Grant's talent that won the war. He may have been a fine general but there were other things that had significant impact on the Unions victory.
That is every General in the History of man. You are dealt a hand of cards and you either play it right or wrong. Grant unquestionably played his hand well.
1
Posted on 3/30/14 at 10:45 am to Tackle74
quote:
Grant unquestionably played his hand well.
This.
And it's almost as if some higher power specifically ordained him for the American Civil War. Because before the war Grant was a failure. He graduated 21st in a class of 39 from West Point in 1843, served with distinction in the Mexican-American War, and failed miserably in the post-war army. He was forced to resign his commission in 1854 due to drunkenness, a fact which haunted him for the rest of his life, and proceeded to fail in every business venture he ever undertook as a private citizen.
When the Civil War broke out in April 1861, he was working as a clerk at his father's tannery in Galena, Illinois. Nothing before the onslaught of the Civil War could have predicted how much success he would have during the conflict. Absolutely nothing. The man was just ordained by fate.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News