Top Three Corp Commanders?

Opinion and overheated emotional rhetoric--just exactly what I said was NOT an appropriate response. Facts, please.
Excuse me but I gave you facts you are the one who refuses to recognize them. Forrest no better or effective then Mosby - that's a hoot. I guess Brices Cross Roads was a skirmish.
 
Excuse me but I gave you facts you are the one who refuses to recognize them. Forrest no better or effective then Mosby - that's a hoot. I guess Brices Cross Roads was a skirmish.

Brice's Crossroads was more than a skirmish, but in the big scheme of things, it meant little. And, I might add, it's not difficult to run up a gaudy record against the likes of Sam Sturgis and the rest of the junior varsity that your idol went up against for most of the war. Funny--how did he do when he ran up against the first team at Selma?

Pray tell: precisely what did Forrest accomplish other than to capture Streight's command and to defeat a third-rate officer like Sturgis? This is a serious question, and I expect a serious answer, not more overheated hysterical emotional response.
 
That's a great team! But, as much as I like Forrest, I think I'd put Wilder in as cavalry corp commander. (He was just about the only guy could break even with Forrest and even beat him a time or two!)

Other than the fact he surrendered at the Battle of Munfordville and was made a prisoner of war.
 
Excuse me but I gave you facts you are the one who refuses to recognize them. Forrest no better or effective then Mosby - that's a hoot. I guess Brices Cross Roads was a skirmish.


Yeah, that's why the Battle of Brice Crossroads was studied by Erwin Rommel. And why when General Grant was asked who he thought was the best General in the war, he replied "I never met Forrest". And why General Sherman called him that Devil Forrest and said There will never be peace in Tennessee until Forrest is stopped. He needed to be killed if it cost 10,000 lives and broke the US treasury.
 
Brice's Crossroads was more than a skirmish, but in the big scheme of things, it meant little. And, I might add, it's not difficult to run up a gaudy record against the likes of Sam Sturgis and the rest of the junior varsity that your idol went up against for most of the war. Funny--how did he do when he ran up against the first team at Selma?

Pray tell: precisely what did Forrest accomplish other than to capture Streight's command and to defeat a third-rate officer like Sturgis? This is a serious question, and I expect a serious answer, not more overheated hysterical emotional response.

Eric,

In the context of this thread, would you use Forrest as a separate cavalry corps/division commander with orders to operate on his own? We've got our army on the move with either Buford or Stuart in command of the Army's cavalry (my choices) and it's use in a traditional role. Would you give Forrest 2,000 men or more and orders to go cause whatever mischief he can while the main army goes about it's business? Just as a distraction against our hypothetical enemy? That seems to be what he would be suited for and give him his head as long as he followed the general campaign. No screening, very little reporting. Just wreaking havoc in the rear areas.
 
Brice's Crossroads was more than a skirmish, but in the big scheme of things, it meant little. And, I might add, it's not difficult to run up a gaudy record against the likes of Sam Sturgis and the rest of the junior varsity that your idol went up against for most of the war. Funny--how did he do when he ran up against the first team at Selma?

Pray tell: precisely what did Forrest accomplish other than to capture Streight's command and to defeat a third-rate officer like Sturgis? This is a serious question, and I expect a serious answer, not more overheated hysterical emotional response.
If you want to play that game then I guess Lee went up against military geniuses such as McClellan, Pope, Burnside, and Hooker, Stonewall Jackson went up against 19th century reincarnations of Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great , and Hannibal in Banks, Fremont, and Shields respectively, to say nothing about Grant going up against another Duke of Wellington in Pemberton. How great was George H. Thomas going up against Braxton Bragg? By the way I do not idolize any military commanders so tone down the sarcasm but I respect military skill shown by people who had no pre-war background and that includes John Logan, Nelson A. Miles, Hampton, Wilder, Grierson, Hiram B. Granbury, and John B. Gordon. As far as the "what ultimately did it accomplish?" argument, you can say the same thing about Hannibal at Cannae or Napoleon at Austerlitz since ultimately Carthage and France were defeated. What ultimately did Hampton's Beefsteak Raid or Trevillian Station accomplish (by your reasoning)? Forrest kept at least a minimum of 10,000 soldiers away from Sherman in Georgia. As far as Selma 1865 goes, for the love of God the Confederacy was on its last legs, the Union had 12,000 superbly equipped cavalrymen armed with repeaters and even Burnside might not have screwed it up and probably won that battle, the Confederates may have numbered around 3-4,000. Bringing up April 1865 is a bad argument. I guess Sherman at Chickasaw Bayou, Tunnel Hill, and Kenesaw Mountain proved he was a worthless commander. By the way I read your book about Sheridan and I think that given the Union's resources he was a fine commander but not a military genius.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that's why the Battle of Brice Crossroads was studied by Erwin Rommel. And why when General Grant was asked who he thought was the best General in the war, he replied "I never met Forrest". And why General Sherman called him that Devil Forrest and said There will never be peace in Tennessee until Forrest is stopped. He needed to be killed if it cost 10,000 lives and broke the US treasury.
General Lee also spoke admiringly of Forrest (and Cleburne). Forrest was best used in an independent capacity but he was far more than merely an excellent raider. During his Kentucky raid of Spring 1864 he noticed the preparations for Sherman's Spring offensive. By the way his Memphis raid recalled a Union corps from Mississippi. His refusal to surrender and his leading his men out of trapped Ft. Donelson was superb and had the rest of the Confederate commanders at Donelson showed the same fighting spirit then the army there might have broken out too instead of surrendering.
 
Overall Command: Jackson (Black Flag)

1st Corps: Longstreet

2nd Corps: Gordon

3rd Corps: Cleburne

Cavalry Corps: J.E.B. Stuart

Raiding party with independent command: Forrest

HM: Lee, as a advisor to Davis, mainly to keep him away from decisions.

On to Washington! :D
 
Eric,

In the context of this thread, would you use Forrest as a separate cavalry corps/division commander with orders to operate on his own? We've got our army on the move with either Buford or Stuart in command of the Army's cavalry (my choices) and it's use in a traditional role. Would you give Forrest 2,000 men or more and orders to go cause whatever mischief he can while the main army goes about it's business? Just as a distraction against our hypothetical enemy? That seems to be what he would be suited for and give him his head as long as he followed the general campaign. No screening, very little reporting. Just wreaking havoc in the rear areas.

Bob,

Since that was the only role he could fill, sure. Which leads me directly back to my original contention: Mosby on a larger scale.

Eric
 
Overall Command: Jackson (Black Flag)

1st Corps: Longstreet

2nd Corps: Gordon

3rd Corps: Cleburne

Cavalry Corps: J.E.B. Stuart

Raiding party with independent command: Forrest

HM: Lee, as a advisor to Davis, mainly to keep him away from decisions.

On to Washington! :D
Jackson would not have made a good army commander. He was a poor judge of subordinates, treated some of them abysmally and frankly was way too uncommunicative. Jackson operated most successfully in a semi-independent command where he could maneuver and move quickly and not set-piece battles such as at the Seven Days (which I would prefer George H. Thomas or James Longstreet).
 
Last edited:
Overall Commander-Lee
I-Jackson
II-Grant
III-Meade
Calvary-Forrest
HM-JEB Stuart
As a corps commander I would take Longstreet, Hancock, Logan, and Reynolds over Meade. Ironically Meade was probably a better army commander then corps commander.
 
If he had not had a personality that could peel paint, D.H. Hill might have made a good corps commander. His combat record in 1862 at the Peninsula and Antietam was certainly one he could be proud of. By 1864 Robert Rodes had established himself as one of the best division commanders but he was never seriously considered for corps command, maybe because of that imbecile Iverson's debacle at Gettysburg. I think it was Moxley Sorrel who lamented the fact that Jeb Stuart was not given Jackson's Corps after Chancellorsville (Hampton wold have been a natural replacement for him at the Cavalry head although Lee might have appointed his nephew Fitz-Hugh Lee). Stuart probably would have been a fine corps commander.
 
Army-McClellan
1st Corp-Sickles
2nd Corp-Bragg
3rd Corp-Polk

Would fight their way out of any wet paper bag you put in front of them.
"Braxton Bragg and Confederate Defeat" by Grady McWhiney completely eviscerates Braxton Bragg (not a difficult task to do). The best one can say about Bragg was that he was a good organizer. Unfortunately once Jefferson Davis made a commitment to a man he never wavered, despite how unsuited that man was for the high position he held.
 
"Braxton Bragg and Confederate Defeat" by Grady McWhiney completely eviscerates Braxton Bragg (not a difficult task to do). The best one can say about Bragg was that he was a good organizer. Unfortunately once Jefferson Davis made a commitment to a man he never wavered, despite how unsuited that man was for the high position he held.

Perhaps that's true. But that does not excuse or otherwise justify gross insubordination.
 
Perhaps that's true. But that does not excuse or otherwise justify gross insubordination.
True, but NBF was far more valuable than Braxton Bragg and Jefferson Davis knew that to cashier Forrest would have been monumentally stupid so he had him transferred to Missippi which worked out quite well for the South in 1864. At Chattanooga in 1863 Forrest, Longstreet, D.H. Hill, Polk, Buckner and Cleburne all expressed misgivings (to be delicate about it) regarding Bragg as commander of the AoT. As far as I know the only generals of the Bragg clique who had any confidence in him were Alexander P. Stewart, Joe Wheeler and W.H.T. Walker. Surprisingly Bragg was a pre-war and post-war friend of W.T. Sherman. Bragg (and Beauregard) recommended Sherman for the position of head of the Louisiana Military Academy (a position which Sherman was happy being in) - now L.S.U. Someone (Beauregard actually) once said that "put Bragg in (Samuel) Cooper's place" - as Adjutant General and Inspector General of the South's armed forces - "and all would be well". Jefferson Davis who prided himself in his knowledge of military affairs failed to use Bragg in a position in which he might have actually done good, a position which would have properly utilized his organizational skills (Inspector General). Instead he made him a field commander and the rest is history.
 
True, but NBF was far more valuable than Braxton Bragg and Jefferson Davis knew that to cashier Forrest would have been monumentally stupid so he had him transferred to Missippi which worked out quite well for the South in 1864. At Chattanooga in 1863 Forrest, Longstreet, D.H. Hill, Polk, Buckner and Cleburne all expressed misgivings (to be delicate about it) regarding Bragg as commander of the AoT. As far as I know the only generals of the Bragg clique who had any confidence in him were Alexander P. Stewart, Joe Wheeler and W.H.T. Walker. Surprisingly Bragg was a pre-war and post-war friend of W.T. Sherman. Bragg (and Beauregard) recommended Sherman for the position of head of the Louisiana Military Academy (a position which Sherman was happy being in) - now L.S.U. Someone (Beauregard actually) once said that "put Bragg in (Samuel) Cooper's place" - as Adjutant General and Inspector General of the South's armed forces - "and all would be well". Jefferson Davis who prided himself in his knowledge of military affairs failed to use Bragg in a position in which he might have actually done good, a position which would have properly utilized his organizational skills (Inspector General). Instead he made him a field commander and the rest is history.

The problem with replacing Bragg, even in 1863, is who will take his place? Joseph Johnston and P.G.T. Beauregard aren't exactly gangbusters and neither gets along with Davis. Within the army, Polk is horrific and Hardee is average. Neither would make good army commanders. Lee was very hesitant about transferring any decent officers from his army. The best option would probably be Richard Taylor but then you'd need to find a replacement for him in the Trans-Mississippi. In the end, for a long time, it was Bragg or bust and, unfortunately for the Confederacy, he was mostly a bust.

R
 
Back
Top