quote:
Lee was just a good enough general to cause a blood bath every time. Lee had as little success outside Virginia as various federal generals had within it. He is vastly overrated. After he wrecked his own army for offensive operations, he operated primarily on the defensive in an era when defensive technologies were dominant.

There were few good maps available for the field commanders. Fighting in northern Virgiina favored Lee. Fighting on the defensive favored Lee. He really wasn't that good.

Just as Rommel looked good fighting a succession of mediocre Brit generals, so did Lee look good fighting Pope, Hooker and Burnside.

Grant drove Lee's army to complete destruction in less than a year.

The consensus at the time was the war would last a few months. I'm not saying Lee was flawless, most people who read up on the war don't believe he was. It was a combination of Lee and other good generals as I've stated that made the war last way longer than it should have. If you look at what the north had compared to the south, the war never should have lasted that long.

People, especially in the south, believe the average confederate soldier was vastly superior to the average northern soldier, and in general, that is incorrect. The U.S had a strong military prior to the war, they were already well trained. The south had some people from the regular army leave and fight for the south, but also had many stay with the north.

I think in today's time Lee is still regarded highly b/c he and other Confederate generals actually turned an army that had inferior weapons, medical care, # of soldiers, food, etc, and they lasted 4 years in a war that was a blood bath for both sides. It's unfortunate the war happened. I'm glad it ended, and I'm glad the north won. I'm not arguing the rights and wrongs of slavery or anything. I'm just stating that Lee was highly regarded at the time, even after defeat, by both Lincoln and Grant. He made alot happen from not much to work with.