Started By
Message

re: Better Confederate General: Jackson or Longstreet?

Posted on 12/25/14 at 3:55 pm to
Posted by AU86
Member since Aug 2009
22560 posts
Posted on 12/25/14 at 3:55 pm to
I agree basicly with what you said about the Vickburg campaign. But without Jackson's performance in the Valley and later reinforcing Lee outside of Richmond the Confederacy would have ended there. Grant was also enabled by Joe Johnston's failure and Pemberton's incompetence at Vicksburg. IMO Uncle Joe was loved by his troops but he was a failure as a Confederate general. All one needs to do is research Joe Johnston's campaigns during the war.
Posted by RollTide1987
Augusta, GA
Member since Nov 2009
65147 posts
Posted on 12/25/14 at 4:50 pm to
quote:

But without Jackson's performance in the Valley and later reinforcing Lee outside of Richmond the Confederacy would have ended there.


The war should have ended even with Jackson's reinforcing of Lee before the Seven Days Campaign. Lee's attacks against McClellan's lines were tactical failures that cost Lee twice the casualties that he inflicted. It was McClellan's generalship (or lack thereof) that caused the Union army to lose the campaign.

quote:

Grant was also enabled by Joe Johnston's failure and Pemberton's incompetence at Vicksburg. IMO Uncle Joe was loved by his troops but he was a failure as a Confederate general. All one needs to do is research Joe Johnston's campaigns during the war.
.

Nathaniel Banks, John C. Fremont, Robert Schenck and James Shields (the commanders Jackson faced in the Valley) weren't exactly military geniuses either.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram