Started By
Message

re: Ulysses S Grant is the Undisputed GOAT US General

Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:06 pm to
Posted by Crimson K
Tuscaloosa
Member since Dec 2018
7468 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:06 pm to
quote:

Ulysses S Grant is the Undisputed GOAT US General


I’d definitely say that this statement could be disputed.
Posted by Burt Reynolds
Monterey, CA
Member since Jul 2008
24555 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:10 pm to
Sherman did more for LSU than the confederate traitors ever did and a lot of people don’t appreciate that. We should be called the fighting shermans instead of the fighting tigers.
Posted by vl100butch
Ridgeland, MS
Member since Sep 2005
37069 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:20 pm to
quote:

Sherman did more for LSU than the confederate traitors ever did and a lot of people don’t appreciate that. We should be called the fighting shermans instead of the fighting tigers


There are a group of us on the lookout for a Sherman tank to bring to campus as the Sherman Memorial Tank as the woke leadership with their south will rise again allies will never allow the ROTC building to be named for Sherman...
Posted by PiscesTiger
Concrete, WA
Member since Feb 2004
53696 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:21 pm to
Lol. He had the easy gig. He didn’t have to make the big decisions years 1-3.
Posted by IceTiger
Really hot place
Member since Oct 2007
26584 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:33 pm to
quote:

revolutionized modern warfare with total warfare


They were doing this shite in ancient times
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
37488 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:36 pm to
Don't forget his use of Naval on the MS River. He had gunboats and the confederacy really did not. It's his barrage from naval guns at Shiloh which stopped the Confederates cold.

He gets a bad rap because of Wilderness and Cold Harbor which were slaughters. But both sides suffered pretty high casualty rates at both. In the west he inflicted much more pain than he suffered.
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
39818 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:46 pm to
quote:

Don't forget his use of Naval on the MS River. He had gunboats and the confederacy really did not. It's his barrage from naval guns at Shiloh which stopped the Confederates cold.



He also performed several clever maneuvers to even get into place to lay siege upon Vicksburg. It was very underrated work in terms of the popular imagination, as the difficulty of laying siege to the area is hard to convey.

quote:

He gets a bad rap because of Wilderness and Cold Harbor which were slaughters. But both sides suffered pretty high casualty rates at both. In the west he inflicted much more pain than he suffered.



The casualty rate for Wilderness was around 17%, which was among his highest of the war, but he also inflicted an 18% casualty rate on Lee. He had around a 11% casualty rate at Cold Harbor, but he also regretted the final assault which was of little gain.
This post was edited on 5/19/21 at 2:48 pm
Posted by Bass Tiger
Member since Oct 2014
55729 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 2:56 pm to
quote:

When you have a massive numbers advantage with unlimited supplies and DGAF about casualties you tend to win. I suppose you think Sark is the greatest Offensive Coordinator in history.

Oh, and Grant isn't even a shadow of the brilliance of George Washington who beat the most powerful military in world history at the time at the height of its power.



There was some Divine intervention that allowed the US to defeat England. A lot of very unlikely events occurred during the Revolutionary War that lead to the defeat of the Brits.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
63279 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:01 pm to
quote:

Grant revolutionized modern warfare with total warfare, naval collaboration, modern siege and entrenchments. He was an early practitioner of amphibious warfare and promoted extensive collaboration with Farragut/Porter in the navy while in the West. Grant had a plan to put out the Confederacy, a strategic one, the only Union general up to that point to apply pressure to the Confederacy in the East and make that theater collapse. His victories at Fort Henry and Fort Donelson set the stage for the new age of amphibious warfare. His coordination with Admiral Foote’s naval flotilla led to the surrender of Fort Henry before Grant could even attack and later Fort Donelson through continuous bombardment into submission. He was the most stoic of all US generals, there is a story about Grant posing for a picture in Mathew Brady’s studio. An assistant accidently broke a skylight above his head and glass came raining down in shards that could have killed him. Grant supposedly looked up at the window and then back to the camera. That was it. It didn’t even jar him. Later in the war, there was a massive explosion on a steamship docked nearby caused by a group of confederate terrorists. Everyone hit the deck but Grant. He ran towards it..

Grant was tenacious, aggressive, and unrelenting. Once he set his sights on a target, Grant relentlessly pursued his objectives to the very end, often much further than his opponents were willing (or able) to go. But, contrary to what many neo-Confederates would say, I would argue that Grant was not a butcher, or one dimensional. Rather, Grant was dedicated, and would not turn back as did McClellan, Hooker, and Burnside. Further, Grant's battles like Shiloh, Vicksburg, and Chattanooga prove that he was able to use maneuver to destroy his enemies. In Vicksburg he was pitted not only against the confederate army but also General McClernand who was also vying for a promotion. Grant landed his troops on the other side of the Mississippi with no supply line and no communications back to Halleck. The only wagons he brought with him were heavily loaded with munitions. Everything else was found by foraging and living off the land. When Grant landed his troops, he was quickly opposed by the armies of Pemberton and Johnston (Pemberton manned the garrison, while Johnston fought a dynamic defense). Johnstons forces began engaging Grant almost immediately. The Confederates sought a repeat of the 1862 campaign, where Grants rear areas were ravaged and he was forced to retreat. But Grant had cut his supply line to the Mississippi river, and so there was nothing to be ravaged that wasnt protected by a large army. Johnston lost a tremendous amount of time and energy by trying to cut Grants line of communication, and all the while Grant pushed forward towards Jackson, MS, defeating Confederate details as he went. The Confederates were pushed into Jackson and Johnston's army was smashed. Grant then turned on Pemberton, who had based himself out of Vicksburg and had harassed Grants flank the whole time. Grant hemmed Pemberton into the city, and laid a classic siege envelopment of the town which led it to fall on July 4 1863. Not only did Grant win a major series of battles and destroy two Confederate armies, but the capture of Vicksburg was a major strategic victory for the Federals. It closed all trans-Mississippi trade for the Confederacy, and freed up Union troops to push even deeper into the South. And it was done thanks to US Grant, who won a truly Napoleonic victory. In Chattanooga he was faced similar or worse odds than Rosecranz at Chickamauga. With union forces trapped/starved in Chattanooga surrounded by Braxton Bragg, he hurriedly assembled an assault force with Sherman, Thomas and Hooker working together. His concerted attack up the middle with Thomas to take Missionary Ridge and utterly shatter Bragg’s line was kind of similar to Pickett’s charge except actually well-calculated and successful.

For my money, Vicksburg is undeniable proof that Grant was a master of maneuver warfare, better than the level of Lee. But then there is the whole sticky business of the Overland Campaign, and the massive casualties sustained. But I would argue that the Overland Campaign was a whole different beast, a new and shockingly modern system of warfare which would be more comfortable in 1914, than in 1864. In this new system, both sides will suffer (and the Union will suffer more, it cannot be denied), but I will suggest that it was necessary, it was the best approach to the situation, it conceals an artful campaign of maneuver, and it has inspired American Military thinkers ever since. “Grant the butcher” actually lost less men than Lee, the real butcher. Throughout the Civil War Grant's armies incurred approximately 154,000 casualties, while having inflicted 191,000 casualties on his opposing Confederate armies. Compare that to Lee who had 209K casualties. After the retreat from Gettysburg, the Confederate army occupied positions on the south side of the Rappahannock River, while the Union camped on the North side with Meade unwilling to cross and attack the army of the Potomac head on. After several sideshows in the west , US Grant became only the 3rd general in US history to be given the rank of US army Lieutenant general (the other two being George Washington and Winnfield Scott). Now given overall command of Union forces. He took over the Army of the Potomac, and only May 4, 1864 he began crossing the Rappahannock and Rapidan River. Lee had set up his base of operations on the other side of the Wilderness, a dense area of forest on the south side of the Rappahannock River. When Lee learned of Grant's movements, he immediately ordered an attack into the Wilderness. After several days of confused fighting, Lee was in definite possession of all the major avenues out of the Wilderness towards headed directly towards Richmond. Most Union Generals, once in this position, quickly abandoned the campaign and returned North in defeat (and it should be remembered that the Battle of Chancellorsville was fought on exactly the same ground). But Grant, while defeated tactically, did not accept the traditional strategic implications of that defeat. Where almost every other general would have called himself checked, Grant simply tried a new strategy. Instead of fighting on Lee's terms, Grant would simply continue applying pressure on Lee's exposed flanks. As such, Grant did something that no other Union general had ever done. He turned Lee's flank.

Throughout his tenure in the civil war he arguably went undefeated aside from Cold Harbor. Grant was the only general during the civil war who received the surrender of three Confederate armies. Grant and Sherman were one of the greatest one-two punches in the history of warfare and could have certainly defeated or at the least held their own with any other army in the world at that time. There is no other US general that can really match US Grant’s resume. He is truly the GOAT.
No.
Posted by RD Dawg
Atlanta
Member since Sep 2012
28281 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:05 pm to
quote:

You'd have to be absolutely incompetent to lose in a scenario like that


That was kind of the case for the US Generals that proceeded Grant.

Talk about a who's who of idiots.
Posted by aggressor
Austin, TX
Member since Sep 2011
9405 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:17 pm to
quote:

quote:
You'd have to be absolutely incompetent to lose in a scenario like that


That was kind of the case for the US Generals that proceeded Grant.

Talk about a who's who of idiots.


The US Military in 1860 was overwhelmingly Southern in its Officer Corps. The North had to go through quite a few Generals before they could find anyone somewhat competent. It's also not a coincidence that as the war went on and the North's advantage in supplies and troop numbers became overwhelming suddenly their Generals looked a lot smarter.

The key to victory for the South was always to get the North to decide it wasn't worth it and let them go. They were never going to be able to defeat the North completely. They lost that chance after Manassas when they didn't continue down and capture DC and then sue for terms. After that they were in a war of attrition they could not win.
Posted by dwr353
Member since Oct 2007
2173 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:24 pm to
The sad thing to me is the fact that the soldiers of both armies had more respect for their adversaries than all of you self proclaimed experts. The war was a national calamity fought by mostly honorable men who served for many different reasons. The current practice of demonizing mortal men of their time by today's standards is foolish. The fact that no Confederate soldier was prosecuted for treason speaks more of the character of those men than you idiots of today.
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
55248 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:28 pm to
Is this a Political Talk issue?

This belongs on the OT along with the other threads exactly like this one that pops up every two weeks - same thread - every two weeks.

Posted by La Place Mike
West Florida Republic
Member since Jan 2004
31373 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:32 pm to
US Grant was always full of "courage".
Posted by LongueCarabine
Pointe Aux Pins, LA
Member since Jan 2011
8205 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:53 pm to
He is truly the GOAT.

Not hardly.
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
39818 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:56 pm to
quote:

The key to victory for the South was always to get the North to decide it wasn't worth it and let them go.


Arguably, they didn't fight that sort of war at all. Grant, all throughout the war, usually set the terms of the engagement, while the South didn't have a cogent strategy in terms of how they would get the Union to capitulate.
Posted by MeatCleaverWeaver
Member since Oct 2013
22175 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 3:57 pm to
Did not read, but hey, enjoy a downvote anyways.
Posted by CleverUserName
Member since Oct 2016
17441 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 4:39 pm to
TF? You just get out of 10th grade US history and pick up a soy latte?

And your best ever general required superior numbers every battle and would have lost Shiloh with it if not for a delay caused by rain.

Sorry it’s George S. Patron. And it’s not close. His use of tanks and armor is still considered revolutionary today.
Posted by dchog
Pea Ridge
Member since Nov 2012
27143 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 4:41 pm to
The 13 colonies had a lot of help from other European nations but many British citizens were not in favor of the war. It also didn't help that the British government was spent and broke from the French and Indian war.
Posted by Burt Reynolds
Monterey, CA
Member since Jul 2008
24555 posts
Posted on 5/19/21 at 4:45 pm to
Patton wasn’t even MVP of the European theater. That title goes to Zhukov.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 8Next pagelast page

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

FacebookXInstagram