- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Ultimate Civil War Debate: Ulysses S. Grant or Robert E. Lee?
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:37 pm to Jim Rockford
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:37 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
How much of that was Grant and how much was Sherman?
Virtually all of it was Grant. Sherman was opposed to Grant's Vicksburg strategy because he thought it too risky.
0
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:38 pm to RollTide1987
Grant was not known for being a great tactician, but he understood attrition. Opinions on him varied from 'The Butcher' to 'Unconditional Surrender'
quote:
‘Our noble army of the Mississippi is being wasted by the foolish, drunken, stupid Grant, He cannot organize or control or fight an army. I have no personal feeling about it; but I know he is an arse.'
quote:
"He is a butcher and is not fit to be at the head of an army." Mrs. Lincoln
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:41 pm to TigerintheNO
quote:
Grant was not known for being a great tactician
As I said previously, his Vicksburg and Chattanooga campaigns completely dispel those myths. The man had a firm grasp on tactics and strategy. Most of the criticism of him comes from the first day at Shiloh and the first month of his campaign against Lee.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:43 pm to RollTide1987
Another "Who was the best General in the Civil War?" thread?
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:45 pm to TigerTalker16
quote:
People had to be made an example of.
I think John Brown used the same reasoning.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:48 pm to theGarnetWay
quote:
I think John Brown used the same reasoning.
And John Brown was regarded as a hero by many in the North.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:50 pm to Peazey
quote:
Who won?
Not the best metric. The Union had yuuuuge advantages in manpower and industrial capacity. They should have won.
But Lee also botched Gettysburg with Pickett's Charge. That has to be held against him considering the stakes.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:53 pm to RollTide1987
scoreboard
Posted on 4/23/17 at 1:59 pm to RollTide1987
A lot like in football in which the teams with the better Jimmy and Joes usually beat X's and O's, the same can be said(first by gthog) here. Only a fricking idiot could have lost with the Union's resources, soldiers, and other advantages. We'll never know how good Grant was because of the huge advantages he had. He sure as hell wasn't a good president.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:01 pm to RollTide1987
Lee because he was able to do more with less resources. Meaning that if the roles were reversed, this isn't even a debate
This post was edited on 4/23/17 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:01 pm to asurob1
quote:
scoreboard
1-0. Halftime.
:rimshot:
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:02 pm to msudawg1200
quote:Proving you can be a half-decent general, a poor storekeeper, and a very average president, and STILL get your picture on the $50 bill!
We'll never know how good Grant was because of the huge advantages he had. He sure as hell wasn't a good president.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:06 pm to Bourre
quote:
Meaning that if the roles were reversed, this isn't even a debate
Let's say that Lee accepts command of the Union army in 1861. You do realize that no one had ever commanded a force greater than 12,000 men in the history of the U.S. military? McDowell had 35,000 men under his command at Bull Run and he was a major before the outbreak of armed conflict. His plan was tactically sound but his troops and officers were way too green/incompetent to pull it off. Had the roles ben reversed, Lee would have suffered the same fate as McDowell. Lee started off shaky at the beginning of the war himself. He lost a few small-scale battles to McClellan in West Virginia.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:08 pm to RollTide1987
Lee was the superior commander but there was no scenario in which the South would have ultimately prevailed even had Jackson not been accidentally shot by his own men. The North had too many advantages with regards to resources.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:08 pm to RollTide1987
Grant's side won so I guess there's that
This post was edited on 4/23/17 at 2:09 pm
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:13 pm to RollTide1987
Patrick Cleburne
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:21 pm to samson73103
quote:
Lee was the superior commander but there was no scenario in which the South would have ultimately prevailed even had Jackson not been accidentally shot by his own men. The North had too many advantages with regards to resources.
Wasn't the prevailing thought that either France or England would have backed the South if they won Gettysburg? Given the resources of either one, the South could have at least forced a cease fire/compromise. This is another reason we were indebted to France, because if they wanted they could have brought our country to it's end if they had joined in..
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:32 pm to oldcharlie8
quote:
stonewall Jackson
quote:This is fact. Anybody that says otherwise is a neophite or delusional regarding the Civil War. Not saying I wish the South had won.
the south wins easily
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:33 pm to RollTide1987
Doesn't matter who was better...in 10 years Lee will be considered a racist traitor and all of his statutes wil be torn down.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 2:35 pm to RollTide1987
Give Lee the resources Grant had and see what the outcome would be.
/thread
/thread
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News