quote:
So does that mean we have to discount the exploits of such storied American commanders as Leonard Wood, John Pershing, Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur, George Patton, Chester Nimitz, etc. because they had superior logistics and manpower to their enemies?

No

Just means they werent as brilliant as Washington, Winfield Scott, Jackson, etc.

Winfield Scott in the Mexican War was brilliant and almost nobody has any idea who he is.

3 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by RollTide1987

Augusta, GA

Member since Nov 2009

66061 posts

Posted on 4/27/24 at 11:28 am to Cosmo

quote:
No

Just means they werent as brilliant as Washington, Winfield Scott, Jackson, etc.

Based on what?

0 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by GetCocky11

Calgary, AB

Member since Oct 2012

51970 posts

Posted on 4/27/24 at 3:58 pm to Cosmo

quote:
Just means they werent as brilliant as Washington

Not even the best general in his own war

0 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by RollTide1987

Augusta, GA

Member since Nov 2009

66061 posts

Posted on 4/27/24 at 4:01 pm to Cosmo

quote:
Winfield Scott in the Mexican War

While he commanded a numerically inferior army, they were better trained, better led, better equipped, and better armed than his Mexican counterpart led by Santa Anna. They were also quite apathetic and broke as soon as the American force began to get the better of them in battle. So as brilliant as Winfield Scott is (easily among the Top 5 best in American history) he would be categorized in the same vein as the 20th century generals and Union commanders based on the impossible standards placed on Grant.

This post was edited on 4/27/24 at 4:02 pm

0 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board