Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Lee sucks! I think someones been smoking loco weed. Longstreet better than Lee? Look what Longstreet did at Knoxville. The very thing your saying Lee did. Even after the scouts told Longstreet that there was a trench around the fort he sent them in with out ladders. They never had a chance. In my opinion Longstreet drug his feet the whole war second guessing Lee. He had a big head. He screwed up in the seven day battle by taking the wrong road and he knew he was on the wrong road. By blocking the road that he was on the other command had to wait till he cleared the road.
8thvacav
__________________ "I want to bury myself in a den of books. I want to saturate myself with the elements of which they are made and breathe their atmosphere until I am of it."
--Lew Wallace, 1885
Everyone has their opinion. Don't take it so personal.
Quote:
Longstreet better than Lee? Look what Longstreet did at Knoxville. The very thing your saying Lee did. Even after the scouts told Longstreet that there was a trench around the fort he sent them in with out ladders.
As if Lee wasn't reckless with his men at Malvern Hill and Gettysburg.
Longstreet clobbered whoever he ran into and didn't possess Lee's tunnel vison.
Quote:
In my opinion Longstreet drug his feet the whole war second guessing Lee.
Lee's strategies failed in winning the war so why shouldn't others second guess him?
Quote:
He had a big head. He screwed up in the seven day battle by taking the wrong road and he knew he was on the wrong road. By blocking the road that he was on the other command had to wait till he cleared the road.
I believe you are referring to Seven Pines which is not a Seven Days battle.
Jackson was the one who screwed up during the Seven Days.
No! It was durring the 7 days near Richmond! In my opinion Longstreet always wanted to run the whole show in every battle. He was arguing with Lee all the time. That why Lee liked Jackson so well. He would lay out what he wanted done and Jackson would do it. If the corps leaders had followed Lee's plans at Gettysburg and Malvern Hill things may have turned out different. I know Lee wasn't perfect but he wasn't as bad as you two are saying. He was the best loved General in the war by both sides. There was people coming to see him from all over the world after the war.
8thvacav
__________________ "I want to bury myself in a den of books. I want to saturate myself with the elements of which they are made and breathe their atmosphere until I am of it."
--Lew Wallace, 1885
8thvacav,
If thats the case, why would Lee fondly refer to Longstreet as "My old warhorse" and what else would prompt Early et all from attacking Longstreet only after Lee was dead. As for Knoxville, that was another blockheaded mistake by Bragg. His ordering Longstreet's men their served no purpose. Lee was a Raglan with better judgement,at times. Longstreet was a defensive minded general. Place the ANV on good ground where it must be attacked. it worked in the past extremely well by armies outnumbered 4-1. For this I refer to Edward III at Crecy(1346) and Henry V at Agincourt(1415) during the Hundred Years War. In both cases the Longbow fire would be as destructive to the French knights as the Federal Cannon at Malvern Hill and Gettysburg were to the ANV.
Longstreet took the wrong road during Seven Pines and then forced Huger to get out of the way. Seven Pines is not one of the Seven Days fights.
Jackson took the wrong road during Gaines Mill.
Quote:
He was arguing with Lee all the time.
Not accurate.
Quote:
That why Lee liked Jackson so well. He would lay out what he wanted done and Jackson would do it.
When did Longstreet ever not follow Lee's orders? If he were so insubordinate as some make him out to be then Lee would have gotten rid of him just like he got rid of so many other generals.
When on the march Lee always traveled with Longstreet because he preferred his presence over Jack's. Lee submitted Longstreet's name for lieutenant general before Jackson's; if Lee were to become incapacitated Longstreet would be in charge. That shows Lee's confidence in the man.
The Lee/Jackson team is a myth.
Quote:
If the corps leaders had followed Lee's plans at Gettysburg and Malvern Hill things may have turned out different.
They did follow his plans and both turned out to be disasters. Lee is responsible for both those mistakes.
Harvey Hill told Lee not to attack Malvern Hill; Lee attacked anyway and was slaughtered. Longstreet told Lee not to attack at Gettysburg and got whipped there too. The Federal artillery dominated the field and Pickett's Charge had no chance of success; Lee incorrectly thought he could pull off another Gaines Mill.
Quote:
he wasn't as bad as you two are saying.
I never said Lee was the confederacy's worst general. That was milhistbuff.
As if Lee wasn't reckless with his men at Malvern Hill and Gettysburg.
Gettysburg, perhaps reckless would be accurate. But not at Malvern Hill. The frontal assault was only part of Lee's plan. Remember that Lee wanted attacks on both flanks, with the frontal attack to be carried out after the artillery crossfire had silenced the Union guns. Each of those pieces to the plan fell away.
Longstreet clobbered whoever he ran into and didn't possess Lee's tunnel vison.
I'm not sure what you mean by tunnel vision. But saying that Longstreet was better in offensive attacks than Lee just doesn't make much sense. You can't compare and army and corps commander. And although I understand his constraints, your statement is false regarding Longstreet. Ft. Sanders and Bean's Station come to mind. Not to mention Seven Pines.
Lee's strategies failed in winning the war so why shouldn't others second guess him?
Longstreet was well within his rights to criticize Lee, but remember, like most generals, his criticisms were self serving.
Respectfully
__________________ Up men, and to your post! And let no man forget today that you are from old Virginia!
Lee sucks! I think someones been smoking loco weed. Longstreet better than Lee? Look what Longstreet did at Knoxville. The very thing your saying Lee did. Even after the scouts told Longstreet that there was a trench around the fort he sent them in with out ladders. They never had a chance. In my opinion Longstreet drug his feet the whole war second guessing Lee. He had a big head. He screwed up in the seven day battle by taking the wrong road and he knew he was on the wrong road. By blocking the road that he was on the other command had to wait till he cleared the road.
8thvacav
In Longstreet's defense, he was forced to attack Ft. Sanders by Bragg. That being said, the absence of scaling ladders were a gross oversight on his part, and the over all assault was poorly planned.
I wouldn't say that Longstreet tended to drag his feet. He got to where he needed and hit hard.
But yes, he screwed up at Seven Pines, which is difficult to excuse.
Respectfully
__________________ Up men, and to your post! And let no man forget today that you are from old Virginia!
Admiral Porter,
Perhaps I was not clear in my last post. My understanding of Longstreet is that he favored a "tactical defense" "That is the Confederates should not inititiate an attack but take take up good possitions and await a federal assault." R.E. Lee's Civil War, Bevin Alexander pg 173
Lee himself seemed to realize this since his orders to Ewell pointed out it was
"only necessary to press 'those people' in order to secure posession of those heights"(cemetary hill). (Glenn Tucker quoting W. H. Taylor in High Tide At Gettysburg, 186)
There was no excuse for Ewell not to do exactly that. General John B. Gordon is quoted in W. H. Taylor's General Lee, His Campaigns in Virginia, 1861-1865. " The whole of the portion of the union army to my front was in inextricable confusion and in flight. They were necessarily in flight for my troops were upon the flank and rapidly sweeping down the lines. The firing upon my men had almost ceased. ...in less than half an hour my troops would have swept up and over those hills, the posession of which was of such momentous consequence."
Had the assault gone in while the "union troops driven into town were wedged and jammed in the streets and soon became a disorganized mass. Ambulances and artillery struggling to get through the tangled crowds added to the confusion. Had the fugitives been allowed no pause, and had the confederates followed close on their heels, the very momentum of the flight, to say nothing of the contagion of panic, would have swept aside every support, and the pursuers could have easily rushed the cemetary and the surrounding heights." Glenn Tucker citing CSA 3rd corp arty bn commander Major David Gregg McIntosh's account Review of the Gettysburg campaign pg 52.
If Gordon and the rest of Early's and Rode's divisions had been allowed to continue, Lee would have been able to place them in reserve on july 2nd, manning Cemetary and Culps hill with the fresh divisions of McClaws, Hood, Johnson, and Anderson along with their respective artillery.
At that point, Meade would have few choices, retreat or attack under unfavorable circumstances. Odds are the 2nd, 3rd, and 12th and 5th corp would have been destroyed had Meade attacked with them since the other corp present, 1st and 11th were shattered from day one of the battle.
Respectfully,
Matt
Last edited by milhistbuff1; 11-27-2005 at 04:04 PM.
"only necessary to press 'those people' in order to secure posession of those heights"(cemetary hill). (Glenn Tucker quoting W. H. Taylor in High Tide At Gettysburg, 186)
There was no excuse for Ewell not to do exactly that. General John B. Gordon is quoted in W. H. Taylor's General Lee, His Campaigns in Virginia, 1861-1865. " The whole of the portion of the union army to my front was in inextricable confusion and in flight. They were necessarily in flight for my troops were upon the flank and rapidly sweeping down the lines. The firing upon my men had almost ceased. ...in less than half an hour my troops would have swept up and over those hills, the posession of which was of such momentous consequence."
There were very valid reasons why Ewell did not attack. His men were tired and scattered, and Cemetery Hill was bristling with artillery thanks to the foresight of Howard. Consider the source of your statement: Gordon. Hardly inspiring in its accuracy. The Union line was stabilized on Cemetery/Culp's Hill and Ewell was scattered with darkness fast approaching.
Had the assault gone in while the "union troops driven into town were wedged and jammed in the streets and soon became a disorganized mass. Ambulances and artillery struggling to get through the tangled crowds added to the confusion. Had the fugitives been allowed no pause, and had the confederates followed close on their heels, the very momentum of the flight, to say nothing of the contagion of panic, would have swept aside every support, and the pursuers could have easily rushed the cemetary and the surrounding heights." Glenn Tucker citing CSA 3rd corp arty bn commander Major David Gregg McIntosh's account Review of the Gettysburg campaign pg 52.
There is a time problem here. The Union troops were closely followed through town. But the Rebs were so scattered, by the time an attack could even be considered, the Union line had stabilized on top of the hills thanks to Howard and Hancock.
If Gordon and the rest of Early's and Rode's divisions had been allowed to continue, Lee would have been able to place them in reserve on july 2nd, manning Cemetary and Culps hill with the fresh divisions of McClaws, Hood, Johnson, and Anderson along with their respective artillery. At that point, Meade would have few choices, retreat or attack under unfavorable circumstances. Odds are the 2nd, 3rd, and 12th and 5th corp would have been destroyed had Meade attacked with them since the other corp present, 1st and 11th were shattered from day one of the battle.
First off, it is a very great "if" to suppose that the hill could have been seized just like that. Even assuming it was, you can't just mass division upon division on a small space like Cemetery/ Culp's Hill. And what do you mean "odds are"? That is a very flighty statement to form a hypothesis upon. Even if Meade attacked, he wouldn't have charged blindly forward. If Lee had foolishly massed his men on those hills, Meade could have moved around Lee's flanks in nothing flat, leaving Lee dangling in an awkward position. Consider further that Meade had the numbers advantage.
Even if Meade had retreated, so what? Lee was cut off from his supplies and was already reacting to the prescence of the AOP in his rear by pulling Ewell back from the Susquehanna. Lee would have just gone back south and the war would have ended the same way. Gettysburg is way overrated in its importance.
Respectfully
__________________ Up men, and to your post! And let no man forget today that you are from old Virginia!
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
