CivilWarTalk.com - A free and friendly Civil War community.
CivilWarTalk.com
The Dispatch Depot at Civil War Talk  

Go Back   The Dispatch Depot at Civil War Talk > The Backpack - Essential Discussions > Campfire Chat - General Discussions

Campfire Chat - General Discussions This is a forum for posting discussion topics, questions, current events, and anything else you'd like to chat about. Please post serious Civil War History threads in appropriate History Forums.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-31-2007, 02:10 AM
Private (25+ posts)
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 64
Default The Mexican War Was The Training Ground For Grant, Lee et al

Most Americans know nothing of the USA vs Mexico War(called The Mexican War") that was fought in the 1846-48 time frame(approximately). Grant, Beauregard and Lee as Lt's and under General Zach Taylor(future Prez) and Scott actually took over Monterey, Puebla, Vera Cruz and Mexico City and the USA diplomats negotiated the sale of New Mexico and upper California for $15 million with the proviso that Mexico would adopt a hands off TX. The USA did it with only about 9-12,000 troops. Santa Ana was the leader of Mexico at the time. The war began when Santa Ana intruded into TX and started fighting when TX was already a state(1845) of the USA. Now this may not be exactly right but is dang close.
My source: Gen. Grant's memoirs book written late in his life.

Last edited by muzzleloader; 05-31-2007 at 02:18 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-31-2007, 03:06 AM
ole's Avatar
ole ole is offline
Brig. General, Mod
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,572
Default

Many CW officers also got a bit of experience in the Seminole Wars and Western Indian Campaigns. But there were also 12 years of graduating classes at the USMA who had no such experience. And then there were those who missed it -- most notably Sherman who was around but never seemed to get posted where he could get battle experience.
Quote:
The war began when Santa Ana intruded into TX and started fighting when TX was already a state(1845) of the USA. Now this may not be exactly right but is dang close.
There are those who will take exception to this. Many will say that the US provoked the war by intruding into disputed territory. But that's another subject.

Ole
__________________
I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-31-2007, 06:15 AM
ewc ewc is offline
Sergeant (500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 863
Default

This war was started by US President James Polk and was not started by Santa Ana, who was not president of Mexico at the time but came back to power as a result of the American threat and attacks over what the Mexicans considered their border with Texas (Neuces River). This was a pure land grab by the 'Manifest Destiny' Americans at the expense of our Southern neighbor.
__________________
'It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag'

-Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, USMC.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-31-2007, 07:53 AM
Private (25+ posts)
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 64
Default

Wrong - Texas was an annexed State of the USA and how dare those Mexicans invade Texas after we had already whipped them at San Jacinto when TX was a Republic- Tx won that battle, became a State in 1845 and Santa Ana wanted more- well we gave it to him. All the way to Mexico City and they gave up in droves. USA conquered Vera Cruz all the way to Mexico City. The USA would own all of Mexico today had we not been so magnanimous. It was a pitiful fight for the Mexicans in their own city- actaully most just wanted to be Americans not unlike today.

Father read history - Grants memoirs- what are you a rebel revisionist? Or lier? They attacked Texas- what do you know about Texas? On the Rio Grande and the incursions that happened- nothing. They were big time across the border INTO Texas. Santa Ana did attack TX aand his men in the mid 1848-7 time frame- just a figment -right? You poor bastid.

Last edited by muzzleloader; 05-31-2007 at 08:02 AM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-31-2007, 09:22 AM
Cadet
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Columbus, Georgia
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzleloader
Wrong - Texas was an annexed State of the USA and how dare those Mexicans invade Texas after we had already whipped them at San Jacinto when TX was a Republic- Tx won that battle, became a State in 1845 and Santa Ana wanted more- well we gave it to him. All the way to Mexico City and they gave up in droves. USA conquered Vera Cruz all the way to Mexico City. The USA would own all of Mexico today had we not been so magnanimous. It was a pitiful fight for the Mexicans in their own city- actaully most just wanted to be Americans not unlike today.

Father read history - Grants memoirs- what are you a rebel revisionist? Or lier? They attacked Texas- what do you know about Texas? On the Rio Grande and the incursions that happened- nothing. They were big time across the border INTO Texas. Santa Ana did attack TX aand his men in the mid 1848-7 time frame- just a figment -right? You poor bastid.
Muzzleloader: Whether EWC is right or wrong you let your thoughts get out of hand. You went to far. Show a little more respect for other people, Sir.

Paul
__________________
Paul L. Hulse
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-31-2007, 11:14 AM
ole's Avatar
ole ole is offline
Brig. General, Mod
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,572
Default

Thank you, Paul. Gently said. I'll second your response without raising the stakes.

Ole
__________________
I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-31-2007, 04:24 PM
larry_cockerham's Avatar
1st Lt. (3500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Nashville
Posts: 3,939
Default

Even I was a bit startled by that one and y'all know me. Politeness is still a virtue. Even here in the South. Gen. Lee also picked up a few pointers working for the Corps of Engineers trying to keep St. Louis from washing away and then taught school for a while on the Hudson River. N. B. Forrest, who missed all that fancy schoolin' as well as the experience in Mexico (though he spent a good bit of time in Mississippi) seemed to fair pretty well when he went up against the West Pointers and other boys with stars on their blue uniforms. He practically trained James Harrison Wilson, much to Wilson's chagrine and credit for learning!
__________________
Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-31-2007, 05:05 PM
ewc ewc is offline
Sergeant (500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: pittsburgh
Posts: 863
Default

I'm afraid I am right- a little time with a history book should prove enlightening, muzzle loader. I apologize for originally replying too harshly. In my defense I will only say that I wished to set the record straight.

As to the original question, the War with Mexico did truly prove to be a valuable breeding ground for our future Civil War leaders and commanders. These men, West Pointers, regulars, and volunteers who would not too far down the road step to the forefront in the Civil War, experienced drill, campaigning, and active combat under men (Generals Scott and Taylor particularly) on whom they modeled their own style and military thinking and action. The experience, for the Americans, was priceless.

i would point out too that two of our fiercest warriors- Generals Stonewall Jackson and Ulysses Grant developed a deep love of that land to our south that never left them. regards, ed
__________________
'It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag'

-Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, USMC.

Last edited by ewc; 05-31-2007 at 05:08 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-01-2007, 10:06 AM
Private (25+ posts)
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 108
Default Mexican American War

EWC,
Consider this...

The Southern men, fighting the Mexican American War were in fact fighting to end thier own way of life as Polk refused to colonize Mexico, the South's last great hope for expansion.

Texas2nd
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-01-2007, 11:20 AM
ole's Avatar
ole ole is offline
Brig. General, Mod
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,572
Default

Quote:
The Southern men, fighting the Mexican American War were in fact fighting to end thier own way of life as Polk refused to colonize Mexico, the South's last great hope for expansion.
Will go along with that, Texas, to an extent. I don't think the Southern individual was doing more than fighting an "invading" nation. Actually, they were collectively fighting for conquest of new slave territory, although most of them likely didn't realize it.

The war was politically unpopular, which may explain why Polk backpedalled on the conquest idea and settled on fixed borders (and California).

Question: Do you believe Santa Ana started the war by invading Texas? Or Polk, by placing troops in disputed territory?

Ole
__________________
I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
Back to top
Bringing the American Civil War to Life. Copyright © 1999 - 2008, CivilWarTalk.com. Site Version 4.3
The American Civil War | Forum | Resource Center | Image Gallery | Links | Site Map | XML | Donations