- 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
Was Ulysses S. Grant really a butcher?
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:15 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:15 pm
Historian Gordon S. Rhea analyzed Grant's losses during his campaign against Robert E. Lee:
Historian Bruce Catton reinforced this view:
Although the Overland Campaign did not result in the surrender of Richmond or Lee's army, Grant succeeded in bottling up the bulk of Lee's troops in Richmond and Petersburg - a situation that Lee himself had said would be fatal - and in seriously damaging Lee's army. Lee's premonition of a siege being the death of his army would prove true nine months later, when Grant finally broke through Lee's lines, chased Lee to Appomattox, and forced his surrender on April 9, 1865.
quote:
Did Grant pay too great a human cost in waging his Overland Campaign? Critics emphasized that he lost approximately 55,000 soldiers in forty days, nearly as many men as Lee had in his army at the beginning of the campaign. Lee, however, lost about 33,000 troops in that same period. While Grant's subtractions were numerically greater than Lee's, his percentage of loss was smaller. Grant's losses amounted to about 45 percent of the force he took across the Rapidan; Lee's reached slightly over 50 percent. And while Grant could draw upon a deep manpower pool for reinforcements, Lee's potential was limited. In the game of numbers, Grant was coming out ahead. He was losing soldiers at a lower percentage than his adversary, and he possessed greater capacity to replace his losses.
Historian Bruce Catton reinforced this view:
quote:
Yet it was not actually just a campaign of attrition. The significant thing is that Lee was deprived of the opportunity to maneuver, to seize the openings created by his opponent's mistakes, to make full uses of the dazzling ability to combine swift movements and hard blows which had served him well in former campaigns. Against Grant, Lee was not able to do the things he had done before. He had to fight the sort of fight he could not win.
Although the Overland Campaign did not result in the surrender of Richmond or Lee's army, Grant succeeded in bottling up the bulk of Lee's troops in Richmond and Petersburg - a situation that Lee himself had said would be fatal - and in seriously damaging Lee's army. Lee's premonition of a siege being the death of his army would prove true nine months later, when Grant finally broke through Lee's lines, chased Lee to Appomattox, and forced his surrender on April 9, 1865.
8
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:16 pm to RollTide1987
He was the last one with any frickin balls.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:19 pm to RollTide1987
Cold Harbor
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:24 pm to RollTide1987
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/11/16 at 8:48 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:31 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Cold Harbor
Lee suffered just as heavily at Gettysburg eleven months earlier with his assault on Cemetery Ridge on the battle's final day. He also lost a similar amount of men during his ill-fated assault on Malvern Hill twelve months prior to Gettysburg.
Bottom line, you can't hold Cold Harbor over Grant if you aren't going to hold Pickett's Charge or Malvern Hill over Lee.
This post was edited on 2/14/15 at 9:33 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:31 pm to RollTide1987
I'd like to have had a drink or two with him and listen to some stories. Regardless of who he fought for.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:32 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Was Ulysses S. Grant really a butcher?
dick
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:33 pm to S
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:33 pm to SEClint
Grant's drink of choice
Posted on 2/14/15 at 9:35 pm to Jim Rockford
As we speak, mine is Buffalo Trace.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 10:31 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 2/14/15 at 10:35 pm to soccerfüt
Grant was smart for what he realized. Head to head the South would lose in a battle of attrition. And he turned the war into that. Did a lot of good men die?
Yes. He did what he had to do. If Lee had cast his lot with the Union, which he came close to doing, he would have adopted the same strategy, only sooner.
War is not pleasant or nice. Grant paid the butcher's bill to win that war.
Yes. He did what he had to do. If Lee had cast his lot with the Union, which he came close to doing, he would have adopted the same strategy, only sooner.
War is not pleasant or nice. Grant paid the butcher's bill to win that war.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 10:40 pm to Arksulli
He was as good a president as BHO and BHO is as good a cnc as Grant was a general.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:02 pm to RollTide1987
As it occurred so often during the war, The Confederate Army squandered major opportunities to either seriously damage if not defeat a Union Army in The Wilderness campaign in early May of 64. This due to mis-communication between Corp and Divisional command at crucial times. Lee's Army had a golden opportunity to completely envelop Sedgewicks Corp on the Union right flank on May 6th but again, as so many times before, squandered the opportunity due to confusion in orders. In this case, Gordon(on the ANVs left flank) saw a weakness in Sedgewicks right flank early on May 6th. He told Early to scout the weakness and he confirmed Gordon's suspicion. Gordon told Early to attack but he thought it to risky. Crucial hours passed before Gordon could get Sewell to issue the order to attack Sedgewicks right flank. It was almost dark when the attack commenced. Gordon made substantial gains in a short amount of time before they ran out of light. Through the evening, Sedgewicks flank was re-enforced and the opportunity was lost. Had the attack commenced earlier, when Gordon suggested, the entire Union right flank would have been turned and the AOP would have been cut off from the Rapidan a River and their communication and supply lines.
Just one example of many(on both sides) during the war of how mis-communication or gross neglect in following orders from Corp level command to a Divisional command level to Brigade command level affected outcomes. I am astonished to see how affective Stonewall Jackson was in spite of jealous malcontents like D.H. Hill and a couple others who often hindered his plans simply due to jealous rivalry.
Just one example of many(on both sides) during the war of how mis-communication or gross neglect in following orders from Corp level command to a Divisional command level to Brigade command level affected outcomes. I am astonished to see how affective Stonewall Jackson was in spite of jealous malcontents like D.H. Hill and a couple others who often hindered his plans simply due to jealous rivalry.
This post was edited on 2/14/15 at 11:04 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:18 pm to RollTide1987
He won the war on behalf of our USA against the treasonous CSA.
America won when the traitors Lee and Davis lost.
They should have been hung after the war.
America won when the traitors Lee and Davis lost.
They should have been hung after the war.
This post was edited on 2/14/15 at 11:21 pm
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:24 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Lee suffered just as heavily at Gettysburg eleven months earlier with his assault on Cemetery Ridge on the battle's final day
Because of his blind faith in J.E.B.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:24 pm to soccerfüt
quote:
The Crater
The Crater was Ambrose Burnside's plan not Grant's, and Grant relieved him of his duty because of it.
As for the losses Grant sustained, it sounds brutal but I think Grant realized the Confederates just couldn't survive a war of constant assault. The Confederacy just didn't have the numbers to keep up with a war like that and The Union was.
Call him a butcher but he knew how the war could be won and that's what he did
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:25 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Cold Harbor
Right? A bloodbath.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:39 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
The Crater was Ambrose Burnside's plan not Grant's, and Grant relieved him of his duty because of it.
In Burnside's defense, the plan might have worked had they not taken the troops trained to attack the crater out of the first wave at the last minute. Those troops happened to be black and the higher ups were worried that a failure might result in the slaughter of thousands of black soldiers. It was an election year after all.
Burnside's screw up started right after that when he had his other division commanders draw straws for the "honor" of leading the assault. The man with the shortest straw just happened to be one of the worst division commanders in the entire army. He spent the duration of the Battle of the Crater in a nearby house, getting drunk as a skunk. Burnside froze up as well and got his arse relieved because of it.
Posted on 2/14/15 at 11:45 pm to RollTide1987
All of that and the Crater had no way out and they didn't bring ladders...
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News