Why It Makes Sense... (2 Viewers)

[Louis Badolato]

Folks,

I've gone back a few pages and cleaned up (or tried to) some of the posts that got a little personal.

A good rule of thumb for when things get personal is the use of the word "you." When you start to use that, it's probably getting personal. It kind reminds me of when a player/manager gets in an argument with an umpire. Umpires allow arguments but when someone uses the word "you," he's usually ejected. We should try to follow the same rules here.

Brad,

I think that's because in arguments with umpires, the word "you" is generally followed by the phrase "blind son of a . . ."

 

[Capitolron]

Hey - Interesting fact on General Kirby Smith :

He was born in my home State of Florida (St. Augustine) and was honored by the Florida Legislature in 1922 when they placed a Statue of him in the US Capitol to be one of the two statues allowed to be placed in the Capitol from the State of Florida.

There is a special Collection of his papers that are available to be viewed in St. Augustine and I think his home - were he retired in St. Augustine is a museum.

The John Wayne & Rock Hudson movie - "The Undefeated" - which was based on the novel of the same name - was in part / or inspired - by the actions of General Kirby Smith - CSA.

All really interesting stuff

 

[Capitolron]

I meant to put these pics in the last post.

 

[UKReb]

It would seem that Lee was the heart and sole of the Confederate Army so without his leadership and inspiration it was truly a lost cause.

You are indeed quite correct about the formal surrender of the CSA but then how does one accept the surrender of something that it maintained could not legally exist?

Bill
Am assuming you mean heart and SOUL rather than sole Mind you sole of the boots/shoes the Rebs didn't have could be just as applicable I suppose.

But you are exactly right Bobby Lee was the heart of the rebellion as far as the Confederate soldier was concerned and Grant knew that-The quote in my dio when Grant dis-engaged from the Wilderness-re "Lee is the rebellion-destroy Lee gentlemen and believe me this war is over" was taken from an actual quote he made at the time.

Ron thanks for The Undefeated pic/info and it could well be in part based on Kirby Smith however, Hollywood turned that into Confederate families looking for solace in Mexico. Kirby Smith had other ideas and the film Rio Conchos with Richard Boone/Stuart Whitman and Edmund O'Brien playing the Kirby Smith character was definitely inspired by the old Reb warrior and more accurate on what he hoped to achieve which was a new Confederacy based in Mexico.

Reb

 

[Mister Dave]

You know what guys, here in 2009, Im really not fond of this North vs. South stuff. To debate the war, the causes, and what not, well thats one thing and Im all for it. In the process of that discussion both "sides" have accidentally let slip some comments that we really shouldnt have. OK whatever, get over it. Its a computer guys. No one would really try to insult you over a computer on these forums. Id like to think were all mature enough to agree on that one.

My opinion, if someone has a personal problem with posts by another member, please dont fight about it on the thread that I started. I want this to be a thread to discuss that period of American History, not our personal problems with each other. Maybe its out of line for me to request that. If it is, Im sure Brad will let me know and I will totally understand and back off this point of view.

To summarize: please keep this to a discussion of history. We will all enjoy it much more.

I suspect you will never realistically get a dispassionate debate or discussion about the WBTS (or whatever we are calling it now) on a public forum. I think this thread proves the point.

MD

 

[Spitfrnd]

I suspect you will never realistically get a dispassionate debate or discussion about the WBTS (or whatever we are calling it now) on a public forum. I think this thread proves the point.

MD

I don't think it does actually. The only emotion was the product of some sloppy language and perceived personal afronts between may 2 or 3 of the total respondents. If you call that passionate, you should see some of the other forums around. Honestly I generally remain impressed at the level of rational exchange here. Yes there are exceptions but it has little to do with North/South and more to do with personalities.

Yes Bob, I did mean SOUL; although you are perfectly right that the average CSA soldier needed much of both at that time. Imagine if the spelling of our words were revealed as we spoke.

 

[Mister Dave]

I don't think it does actually. The only emotion was the product of some sloppy language and perceived personal afronts between may 2 or 3 of the total respondents. If you call that passionate, you should see some of the other forums around. Honestly I generally remain impressed at the level of rational exchange here. Yes there are exceptions but it has little to do with North/South and more to do with personalities.

Yes Bob, I did mean SOUL; although you are perfectly right that the average CSA soldier needed much of both at that time. Imagine if the spelling of our words were revealed as we spoke.

I wish I was as optimistic as you....I have never seen anything to convince me otherwise.

 

[Rutledge]

Hey - Interesting fact on General Kirby Smith :

He was born in my home State of Florida (St. Augustine) and was honored by the Florida Legislature in 1922 when they placed a Statue of him in the US Capitol to be one of the two statues allowed to be placed in the Capitol from the State of Florida.

There is a special Collection of his papers that are available to be viewed in St. Augustine and I think his home - were he retired in St. Augustine is a museum.

The John Wayne & Rock Hudson movie - "The Undefeated" - which was based on the novel of the same name - was in part / or inspired - by the actions of General Kirby Smith - CSA.

All really interesting stuff

Interesting indeed. But perhaps not so much as this:

"After the war, he was from 1866 to 1868 president of the Atlantic and Pacific Telegraph company, from 1868 to 1876 president of the Western Military Academy, from 1870 to 1875 chancellor of the university of Nashville, and from 1875 to his death professor of mathematics at the university of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee. He died at Sewanee on the 28th of March 1893"

Im a "Sewanee" alum. There is a Kirby Smith monument on the campus.

 

[VanguardFC007]

Interesting indeed. But perhaps not so much as this:

"After the war, he was from 1866 to 1868 president of the Atlantic and Pacific Telegraph company, from 1868 to 1876 president of the Western Military Academy, from 1870 to 1875 chancellor of the university of Nashville, and from 1875 to his death professor of mathematics at the university of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee. He died at Sewanee on the 28th of March 1893"

Im a "Sewanee" alum. There is a Kirby Smith monument on the campus.

General Smith sure seemed to get around,

 

[VanguardFC007]

Ok so heres a topic to get us going on tactics and leaders. Which side was more hampered by their president?

I believe early in the war it was Lincoln who hampered his forces more than Davis did his. By not being well educated in military affairs Lincoln seemed to have the wrong goals early on. Though probably correct, Lincoln placed to much emphasis on holding Washington and keeping troops away from the front to that purpose. Lincoln also had a tendency early in the war to want to micromanage his commanders. However that might be seen as a good thing because who knows if McClellan would have ever moved if Lincoln hadnt been on his case. Later in the war, Lincoln seemed to back off the micromanaging position and let his generals do their jobs. This seems especially the case after Grant and Lincoln forged their team.

Davis on the other hand seemed to do ok early in the war. He seemed quite able to let his generals do their thing. Early on he was able to manage the various commanders in Virginia and keep them from fighting each other. Eventually one of Davis' tragic flaws got the better of him. Being very sensitive to personal attacks he often hurt himself and the Confederacy by blowing situations way out of proportion i.e. his relationship with Joe Johnston. As the war progressed and turned worse, Davis did what Lincoln had done early on and began to micromanage; the Western theater specifically.


Opinions gentlemen?

 

[Louis Badolato]

I think both Lincoln and Davis were a huge problem for their respective sides millitarily, and both for the same reason: they both appointed generals based on their personal or political relationships with the appointees, not on merit.

Neither was a good judge of millitary leaders, and both hampered their respective causes by putting the wrong men in command positions much of the time. Both occasionally got it right (Lee and Grant being examples) but made bad appointments far more often.

 

[lancer]

I find most interesting Davis's unwavering support for Braxton Bragg who was IMO the worst army commander the CSA had. As well as supporting Bragg, Davis also consistently meddled in Western Theatre command appointments on lower levels. Certain competent officers never had the chance to move into corp or army command positions (think Cleburne) and this badly hurt the CSA. -- lancer

 

[jazzeum]

I won't comment on Davis since I'm not as knowledgeable there and I agree with the second half of Harris' statement about Lincoln but not the first.

Lincoln is considered by many historians to be our greatest war president. T. Harry Williams, who taught at LSU, and has written a very good book called "Lincoln and His Generals," has called him the greatest war president in our country's history and a great natural strategist, better than any of his generals. He was in fact as well as in title commander in chief who did more than Grant to win the war.

I agree that when the war first started he was militarily ignorant (despite his service in the Blackhawk War). However, Lincoln was a very through learner. When confronted with a problem in his law practice, he, as he put it, would study a problem north, south, east and west (until he knew it inside and out). His learning of military theory/strategy was no different. After the war started, he surrounded himself with military texts until he knew military matters better than most of his commanders. As was also said (by his law partner William Herndon I believe), anyone who underestimated him would find himself with his back in the ditch.

Did he stay with McClellan too long? Yes, but he really had no one else to turn to at the time and kept trying to find the right combination until he found the commander he wanted: Grant, who would practice the "hard" war Lincoln wanted fought (to which McClellan was adverse).

 

[VanguardFC007]

I think the plainest way to see Lincolns early war micromanaging is to look at Jackson's Valley Campaign. Lincoln did just about everything but go to the battlefield and point troops in the direction he wanted them to go. But I will agree that Lincoln was good at learning from his mistakes and by the end of the war was more than able to handle the job of Commander-In-Chief.

 

[Capitolron]

Well - the War in the West was a complete failure due to Davis' invovlement and Johnson's stupidity.

This was never really considered as an important theater as it should have been. Too much focus on the Washington & Richmond fight.

Jefferson Davis - was not a great Commander in Chief - by a long shot.

 

[lancer]

Forgive my ignorance for the following question, but I have done no reading on this. Did McClellan pose a credible threat to Lincoln in the 64 election? -- lancer

 

[lancer]

Good point Ron. The CSA lost the war in the west and thus the conflict as a whole. It was the crucial theater, regardless of the location of the capital, which could have moved as neccesary just like during the AWI. -- lancer

 

[jazzeum]

Al,

I don't know so much that it was McClellan but just any candidate as the war was going badly for the Union at that time, so bad in fact, that Lincoln in August 1864 put together a "Memorandum on Probable Failure of Re-election," which he distributed to the Cabinet, saying:

"This morning, as for some days past, it seems exceedingly probable that this Administration will not be re-elected. Then it will be my duty to so co-operate with the President-elect, as to save the Union between the election and the inauguration; as he will have secured his election on such ground that he can not possibly save it afterward."

It was only Sheridan's victory and Sherman's capture of Atlanta that guaranteed his re-election.

 

[Deitz]

I agree with most of the comments on Lincoln. However, I do believe that at the start of the war, Washington was the key for the North and Lincoln understood that Washington could not fall to the South, if the war was to continue. If Washington ever fell to the South and the South could hold it, I believe that war would have ended.

 

[lancer]

Thanks Brad. So the threat was the election itself, not the individual. Things do not change much, do they? -- Al