Grant vs. Lee: Who was Better?

#52
#52
Vol_4_Life said:
You better hurry. Most of that battlefield is shopping malls and subdivisions now. What's left, besides the small national park, will probably be gone in a few years.
Click to expand...

That's what the Fredricksburg portion of that park is, some monuments and a bunch of condo's surrounding. Gettysburg and Antietam are great because they are well preserved.
 
#56
#56
Vol_4_Life said:
Nathan Bedford Forrest was a brilliant cavalry commander, but he didn't work well with superiors.
Click to expand...

Well, he worked for Bragg. But he was never efficient as a "Cavalry" force, as an Army's screen. Perhaps with better command he'd have excelled, but never did.
 
#57
#57
JTrainDavis said:
That's what the Fredricksburg portion of that park is, some monuments and a bunch of condo's surrounding. Gettysburg and Antietam are great because they are well preserved.
Click to expand...


Shiloh is an excellently preserved battlefield, if you ever get the chance to visit it.
 
#61
#61
BigPapaVol said:
Why? In the Civil War, the guy on the defensive had an enormous advantage. Grant overcame that with a total war approach, which was the strategy he sold to Lincoln. He was the only commander to have any success on the offensive. It's hard for me to believe that people forgive the Gettysburg disaster.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Lee never went to battle without being outnumbered, and defeated an army twice his own army's size, at Chancellorville. I just don't see Grant being able to do that. If Grant and Lee had traded sides, I dont see Grant being nearly as effective as Lee would be in his place.
 
#64
#64
oklavol said:
Lee never went to battle without being outnumbered, and defeated an army twice his own army's size, at Chancellorville. I just don't see Grant being able to do that. If Grant and Lee had traded sides, I dont see Grant being nearly as effective as Lee would be in his place.
Click to expand...


To be sure, Lee inflicted as many casualties on Grant's army from the Wilderness through Cold Harbor as Lee had in his army (60,000 men).
 
#65
#65
JTrainDavis said:
Gates took the laurels for Saratoga, and went to take command of the southern army, and Washington had to send Nat Greene south to clean up the mess and save the Revolution.
Click to expand...

I grew up in Saratoga. The battlefield is a cool place to visit.
 
#66
#66
Vol_4_Life said:
Wade Hampton was did pretty well as Stuart's successor.
Click to expand...

It was all done at that point. He was also frying fish with G.E. Pickett when Hill was fighting impossibly, and dying in the process.

Wade Hampton is the Jon Crompton of the Army of Northern Virginia, everybody remembers the good times at the end, not the body of work.
 
#68
#68
oklavol said:
Lee never went to battle without being outnumbered, and defeated an army twice his own army's size, at Chancellorville. I just don't see Grant being able to do that. If Grant and Lee had traded sides, I dont see Grant being nearly as effective as Lee would be in his place.
Click to expand...
Chancellorsville was a Joe Hooker abortion.

After Gettysburg, all Lee really did is use the defensive advantage and maneuver to prolong what he knew to be the inevitable.

Grant didnt see the land as Lee did and couldn't have done some of the things Lee did, but Lee's penchant for chivalry and sportsmanship would never have allowed him to take the fight to the countryside as Grant did. In fact, his foray in Penn should have been littered with burned villages, but it wasn't his way. Total war is total war and this required that mentality.

FTR, am a Lee fan and have written several papers about him and Longstreet being light years ahead of their time regarding the advantage of the defense.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#69
#69
Vol_4_Life said:
To be sure, Lee inflicted as many casualties on Grant's army from the Wilderness through Cold Harbor as Lee had in his army (60,000 men).
Click to expand...
You know the ratios that drive offensive vs defensive warfare?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#70
#70
If a shell didnt land just about on Hooker's head at Chancellorsville, he'd likely have destroyed that ANVa there....he had the fight in hand and was willing to bring it.
 
#73
#73
JTrainDavis said:
If a shell didnt land just about on Hooker's head at Chancellorsville, he'd likely have destroyed that ANVa there....he had the fight in hand and was willing to bring it.
Click to expand...

Don't know. Jackson's march through the wilderness was ridiculous and unmanageable from his side.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top