re: History Debate: Ulysses S. Grant vs. Robert E. Lee

Southern revisionists history says Lee was the better general because he had fewer troops and had fewer casualties in fighting Grant in 1864 and 1865. That is Southern revisionism.

Grant had better resources and used them correctly, Grant does not get enough credit for fully using his resources to maximize his advantage. Lee was arrogant and was too caught up in maximizing his own glory and prestige and image. Grant just wanted to win, Lee cared more about style and thought War was a game of chess and was caught in his own world of Cavalier honor that never existed.

Grant wanted to destroy Lee and his army and won. Modern warfare began with the Civil War and Grant is the one fought the first modern war who utilized railroad, telegraph and technology and logistics to arm and feed his troops and get them where they needed to be. Grant's Army fought hard and well and took the casualties because they believed that they were going to win. Lee's troops just wanted to survive because Lee didn't fight to win.