- 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: Where does Robert E Lee rank as a military tactician
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:28 pm to RollTide1987
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:28 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
RollTide1987
So you’re probably the most knowledgeable person on the civil war on TD, judging from the sheer amount of info and detail you put in your post (unless you’re a copypasta baw).
You have to be a history professor or museum curator or some shite right?
Always enjoy your xxx years ago today threads
This post was edited on 1/20/20 at 3:29 pm
1
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:32 pm to mattloc
Nathan Bedford Forrest was a better tactician than Lee. I consider him tGOAT in American history.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:44 pm to RollTide1987
Washington had the Atlantic.
The South only had the Rapidan.
The South only had the Rapidan.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:45 pm to RollTide1987
He should have lead the Union deeper into Virginia further down the Shennandoah . I would have made the union chase me into the mountains and I would have tried to emerge in Kentucky and move quickly towards the mouth of the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers.
Instead Lee goes about showing off between DC and Richmond or about 100 miles total.Everytime he steps out of that zone he gets beat back....Antietam and then Gettysburg.
Instead Lee goes about showing off between DC and Richmond or about 100 miles total.Everytime he steps out of that zone he gets beat back....Antietam and then Gettysburg.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:50 pm to OBReb6
Day 3 at Gettysburg never should have happened. Of course we have the advantage of hindsight.
Lee should have gone with Longstreet on Day 2 and maybe he lets Hood flank Little Round Top. Would it have mattered? Perhaps. It was just so simple for the Union to move reinforcements, given the position that they held, but maybe had Hood gotten in their rear it would have started a panic.
Maybe Longstreet Mc Laws and Anderson can roll up that flank...maybe.
Lee should have gone with Longstreet on Day 2 and maybe he lets Hood flank Little Round Top. Would it have mattered? Perhaps. It was just so simple for the Union to move reinforcements, given the position that they held, but maybe had Hood gotten in their rear it would have started a panic.
Maybe Longstreet Mc Laws and Anderson can roll up that flank...maybe.
This post was edited on 1/20/20 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:53 pm to OBReb6
Forrest was in Grant's theater. Grant had Memphis. Grant won at Shiloh, Grant won at Vicksburg. Grant moved freely throughout Mississippi the into Northern Alabama and the Chattanooga. Who owned who????
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:53 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
One need not be much of a tactician, when one can overwhelm with numbers and materièl.
Was it Stalin that said "Quantity has a quality all its own... "
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:59 pm to klrstix
I'll take Nathan Bedford Forrest any day.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 3:59 pm to KiwiHead
Richmond was key. It was the Confederate Capital and the Capital of Virginia a center of manufacturing a rail and road hub and Lee was basically tied down to it. He could not abandon it unfortunately.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:11 pm to goatmilker
quote:
The South only had the Rapidan.
And the Rappahannock, and the Chickahominy, and the James, and the Appomattox, and any other number of rivers found in Virginia.
Public opinion in the North was a fickle thing. All he had to do was effect it and he could have won.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:12 pm to beerJeep
quote:
You have to be a history professor or museum curator or some shite right?
I wish. It's just a hobby right now but maybe one day it'll be a money maker for me.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:19 pm to Nono
quote:
war of Northern Aggression.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:21 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
And the Rappahannock, and the Chickahominy, and the James, and the Appomattox, and any other number of rivers found in Virginia.
Rivers vs the Atlantic ocean was the point.
As to swaying public opinion in the north this was tried on many levels by the Davis administration with written propaganda sent north, military and para military actions(see the copperhead war) and foreign diplomacy. It wasn't just Lee's responsibility or fault in swaying public opinion.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:23 pm to RollTide1987
He did affect it, or someone did, there were riots in the North over the draft. That were put down. Abe Lincoln, as long as he held power, would never have wavered. No price was too high, as the casualty counts will attest to.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:23 pm to SirWinston
quote:
A damn sight better than those butchers US Grant and Sherman.
You're a sore loser.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:26 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Had he been more conservative, he might have not only lengthened the war...he might have also won it.
Lee had no chance. Eventually, Sherman would've been sent to take care of him.
The most positive thing to say about Lee is that his incompetence as a military leader shortened the war and saved American lives.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:28 pm to RollTide1987
I think Lee understood the confederacy was already largely defeated at the strategic level in terms of resources and logistics when the Union's anaconda plan (iirc) went into effect.
Lee identified the Union's COG as their willingness to fight a prolonged war against the south and changed the plan to dissuade the union from wanting to fight any further. The entire point of the Gettysburg campaign was to land a massive punch on the union that would shake them to the core. His unwillingness to abandon this plan at the operational level is a completely different story but as a strategist, Lee wasn't bad by any means.
As a tactician, other generals such as Jackson were immaculate.
Lee identified the Union's COG as their willingness to fight a prolonged war against the south and changed the plan to dissuade the union from wanting to fight any further. The entire point of the Gettysburg campaign was to land a massive punch on the union that would shake them to the core. His unwillingness to abandon this plan at the operational level is a completely different story but as a strategist, Lee wasn't bad by any means.
As a tactician, other generals such as Jackson were immaculate.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:29 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
They were butchers. So was Lincoln. They weighed what was at stake vs lives, and they traded lives for it.
The entire war was a tragedy that never should have happened, and the hotheads on both sides should have been hanged and the differences worked out.
Slavery was nearing its end anyway, and anyone with foresight could see it.
The entire war was a tragedy that never should have happened, and the hotheads on both sides should have been hanged and the differences worked out.
Slavery was nearing its end anyway, and anyone with foresight could see it.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:32 pm to teke184
quote:
Someone did a set of analytics on a number of generals and claimed Lee was below replacement level in quality.
That was a great thread. But the ranking system produced some weird results based on how factors were weighed. Like Alexander was not highly ranked bc he didn’t fight enough battles.
Posted on 1/20/20 at 4:37 pm to OBReb6
quote:
Nathan Bedford Forrest was a better tactician than Lee. I consider him tGOAT in American history.
Shelby Foote (who spent 20 years writing his 3 Volume tome) but also embellished (never used footnotes and was a novelist before a historian) claimed that the Civil War produced "two authentic geniuses...Abraham Lincoln and Nathan Bedford Forrest."
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News