re: The Top 10 Greatest Generals of All-Time (according to Moneyball math)

quote:

---

Red River Campaign was an epic disaster

---

The Red River Campaign was not on Grant. Nathaniel Banks was originally supposed to go for Mobile under Grant's grand strategy but Banks got his own way as he was a political general from an important state during an election year. Grant didn't want Banks in command to begin with due to the fact that he knew Banks sucked, but Lincoln would not allow such a powerful politician be fired at so critical a juncture.

quote:

---

Valley Campaign was horrid until Sheridan finally learned to general.

---

Sheridan wasn't in command at the start of the Valley Campaign. Franz Sigel, another political general, was. Sigel was popular in the burgeoning immigrant community and Lincoln could not let him be sacked before his election was sewn up.

quote:

---

Wilderness his own campaign is a campaign of attrition which he should have been fired for.

---

Oh, really? Because in just over a month, Grant had fully immobilized Lee (something no Union commander had ever done) and had besieged him at Petersburg south of the James River. Lee himself, before the campaign started, had said that if the war got below the James, the death of the Confederacy became merely a question of time.

quote:

---

The Army of the James efforts in 1864 suck as well.

---

Another political general, Benjamin Butler, was in command of the Army of the James. Unfortunately for Grant, Lincoln could ill afford to let generals like Banks, Sigel, and Butler become enemies at such a vital time. But after the initial failures of these three commands, Grant pivoted and made the right decisions at key moments in the war.

When Banks failed to follow orders and went up the Red River instead of attacking Mobile, Grant coordinated with the navy to take Mobile from the sea. That's where you get the famous battle of Mobile Bay ("Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!"). And then when Sigel failed in his mission to advance down the Shenandoah Valley, Grant released Sheridan from his general staff and commanded him to turn the Valley into a wasteland - something Sheridan proceeded to do within a matter of weeks.

quote:

---

Only Sherman showed brilliance and success.

---

If by brilliance you mean he watched as Johnston slowly withdrew his forces into the defenses around Atlanta without a fight, then you would be right. Sherman actually showed his impatience at this strategy being employed by the Confederates when he recklessly attacked Johnston's lines at Kennesaw Mountain. Fortunately for Sherman, even after winning the battle, Johnston continued to withdraw into the Atlanta entrenchments.

The turning point of the Atlanta campaign was when Johnston was sacked and replaced by John Bell Hood, who proceeded to order his army out of its entrenchments and attacked Sherman's superior numbers in the open field. The results were about what you would expect. Within two months, Hood was forced to abandon the city due to his aggressive tactics depleting his forces. Hood would go on to destroy his own army at the battles of Franklin and Nashville later on in the year.

Grant over Washington and Eisenhower

quote:

---

quote:
07. Ulysses S. Grant, USA


quote:
This is going to trigger so many OTers



Melt Day: 56,195

---

quote:

---

Everyone should read the recent bio of Sherman.

---

His letter of resignation as chancellor of LSU, so he could join the Union Army is on the wall in LSU ROTC building.

quote:

---

Also agree with the posters who said Grant just won with massive advantages in resources and manpower.

---

It's fascinating to watch people flock to the opposite of the truth.

quote:

---

It's fascinating to watch people flock to the opposite of the truth.

---

Especially if you bring up the fact that Lee lost more men than Grant did.


Lee was not a very good strategist. And his abilities seem to be propped up more by his subordinates generalship than Grant's does.

quote:

---

And on paper the South probably should have won.

---

what? i am FAR from a sympathizer of the southern cause, but the south truly had no legitimate shot in that war

the union had a decidedly larger economy, had more than a double advantage in terms of manpower, and the industrial advantage was even larger. thats before we get into the fact that the union was able to isolate the confederacy from potential european allies

the confederacy truly had no legitimate chance to win a war against the union

We shoulda fought Great Britain too tbh

The oss was the original deep state

Totally disagree.

Again, playing the defensive game was the best advantage the south had (outside of having grant and lee). And it was big. I don’t remember that the south had particularly better trained soldiers but maybe so. But who had higher morale after Gettysburg? Not the south for darn sure.

And yes Grant had the most success of the union generals. He also didn’t pussyfoot around like the others. And the numerical and supplies advantages cannot be overstated. The south was quite literally running out of gunpowder by the end. Even coming into Gettysburg one of the highlights was raiding the local shoe factory. Grant had the major advantage on supplies even if he were fighting the away game.

Also, I’m not suggesting he just sent wave on wave at the confederates. Simply, in stalemate fights of “who can outlast who?” grant knew he could and would outlast because he could replace his casualties and the south couldn’t. That’s the biggest factor.

Now, I’m not suggesting that he wasn’t a good general. Clearly he was. He certainly understood how to do what he needed to. I simply suggest it wasn’t just a matter of “Grant was that dang good” as much as “Grant darn sure knew how to use the tools he was working with.”