Most Overrated General?

Elennsar · Jul 29, 2014

rbasin said:
well, next time, start at the end and work your way to the beginning! I had to do that study Eastern Roman History (Byzantine)

Oooo, Byzantine history.

Must . .. stay . . . on . . . topic.

Going back to Grant and his rating in general, one thing that comes to mind. To what extent do we value an officer's ability to stay on good terms with Washington (or Richmond)?

Grant and Lee stand head and shoulders above their peers there.

rbasin · Jul 29, 2014

Elennsar said:
Oooo, Byzantine history.

Must . .. stay . . . on . . . topic.

Going back to Grant and his rating in general, one thing that comes to mind. To what extent do we value an officer's ability to stay on good terms with Washington (or Richmond)?

Grant and Lee stand head and shoulders above their peers there.

Yes. Lee knew how to play Davis. And Grant knew enough to get the hell out of D.C. and let Halleck take the heat.

Pat Answer · Jul 29, 2014

Nathanb1 said:
No, it's not, and this will all come to a screeching halt at this moment, if anyone wants to walk away unscathed. Otherwise, stand in line. I've had a long, long day and I have a splitting headache and a throbbing knee. I will take Ole's axe and start whacking if everyone chooses to continue behaving in this juvenile manner. I don't like name calling. Before I was a teacher I didn't like name calling. Get over it, people.

I do appreciate those of you who have attempted to operate in a civil manner--very much.

Posted in Capacity as Moderator

Sometimes my attempts at 'light-hearted' are light-headed instead. :redface:

My sincere apologies to all.

rbasin · Jul 29, 2014

this may sound a bit hard, but I think that Grant's best ability is what we just discussed, mainly that he could see the finish line better than any other general on either side, and worked his way back to the start. Vicksburg comes to mind

Elennsar · Jul 29, 2014

rbasin said:
Yes. Lee knew how to play Davis. And Grant knew enough to get the hell out of D.C. and let Halleck take the heat.

Not just let Halleck take the heat, but respond to what Lincoln wanted and was worried about. Grant may not have liked all of Lincoln's ideas or preferences any more than most of his peers, but he seems to have accepted that - for example - Sigel and Butler were politically important and that "politically important" was like mud - cursing at it wouldn't make it go away.

rbasin · Jul 29, 2014

Elennsar said:
Not just let Halleck take the heat, but respond to what Lincoln wanted and was worried about. Grant may not have liked all of Lincoln's ideas or preferences any more than most of his peers, but he seems to have accepted that - for example - Sigel and Butler were politically important and that "politically important" was like mud - cursing at it wouldn't make it go away.

I always try to underplay my favorite ACW guy, Halleck, so as not to start a new tangent. Grant was lucky to have had a Halleck in D.C. to show him the political side of the war. Imagine if Grant had to stay in the Capitol. He'd have ended up like Halleck, I think.

JerseyBart · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
I always try to underplay my favorite ACW guy, Halleck, so as not to start a new tangent. Grant was lucky to have had a Halleck in D.C. to show him the political side of the war. Imagine if Grant had to stay in the Capitol. He'd have ended up like Halleck, I think.

There is definitely something important about knowing personalities and situations: how to improve them, coddle and pet them, keep them from going to hell and to manipulate them when necessary to get jobs accomplished.

diane · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
I always try to underplay my favorite ACW guy, Halleck, so as not to start a new tangent. Grant was lucky to have had a Halleck in D.C. to show him the political side of the war. Imagine if Grant had to stay in the Capitol. He'd have ended up like Halleck, I think.

Halleck's example went to waste, I'm afraid. Grant's presidency showed what would happen to him in Washington. His BFF Sherman knew that but Grant, having that necessary ego all good generals have, could not resist the temptation. However, Lincoln was wise enough to know Grant was way better out of Washington than in it!

rbasin · Jul 30, 2014

diane said:
Halleck's example went to waste, I'm afraid. Grant's presidency showed what would happen to him in Washington. His BFF Sherman knew that but Grant, having that necessary ego all good generals have, could not resist the temptation. However, Lincoln was wise enough to know Grant was way better out of Washington than in it!

Grant the politician had horrible people around him and was easily the most naïve President we've ever had. I wonder if his reputation as President doesn't have a lot to do with the way authors have tried to raise him above what he was in the ACW?

Sherman had a lot of issues with President Grant.

Elennsar · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
I always try to underplay my favorite ACW guy, Halleck, so as not to start a new tangent. Grant was lucky to have had a Halleck in D.C. to show him the political side of the war. Imagine if Grant had to stay in the Capitol. He'd have ended up like Halleck, I think.

Could be, though I think Grant would have had different issues - Halleck had some real strengths, but he doesn't really seem to have been the kind of, um, assertive general in chief to make things happen because he willed it so.

Good bureaucrat - and I don't mean that as a backhanded compliment, it's a very significant skill - but not always effectively forceful.

Grant seems like he might lean the other way.

rbasin · Jul 30, 2014

Elennsar said:
Could be, though I think Grant would have had different issues - Halleck had some real strengths, but he doesn't really seem to have been the kind of, um, assertive general in chief to make things happen because he willed it so.

Good bureaucrat - and I don't mean that as a backhanded compliment, it's a very significant skill - but not always effectively forceful.

Grant seems like he might lean the other way.

Maybe. But being a good desk jockey Grant wasn't. And once the war was over, so too, to some degree, was Grant.

diane · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
Grant the politician had horrible people around him and was easily the most naïve President we've ever had. I wonder if his reputation as President doesn't have a lot to do with the way authors have tried to raise him above what he was in the ACW?

Sherman had a lot of issues with President Grant.

Yes, indeed Sherman and President Grant had problems. Sherman was very hurt by it, too. I think Grant was as well, although he seemed to be the one doing most of the parting. Sherman...well, he was Sherman! Half of Grant's problem was long entrenched corruption that had not been dealt with - Lincoln had plans for that but he did not live. The other half was his opportunistic and greedy family as well as hangers-on Grant did not recognize as such.

JerseyBart · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
I always try to underplay my favorite ACW guy, Halleck, so as not to start a new tangent. Grant was lucky to have had a Halleck in D.C. to show him the political side of the war. Imagine if Grant had to stay in the Capitol. He'd have ended up like Halleck, I think.

Like a good assistant coach: able to deflect the negative, let through the positive, be a good go between from player to coach, owner and coach and vice versa for both, and be honest or say things in a way that are either honest or get the point across to the head coach without damaging his/her fragile psyche.

Elennsar · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
Maybe. But being a good desk jockey Grant wasn't. And once the war was over, so too, to some degree, was Grant.

Exactly. Halleck was cut out for that, Grant was not.

I think it speaks well of Halleck that he accepted this about himself, on that note. Not every general ill suited for combat takes well to desk duty, but Halleck seems to have liked that environment.

NedBaldwin · Jul 30, 2014

rbasin said:
I guess, and I'm sure its me, my question about Grant is why did Lincoln allow him so much more time in 1864 then he did McClellan in 1862?

Results. Despite the losses, despite Cold Harbor, the result of April - July 1864 was better than the result of April - July 1862.

Also Halleck. McClellan's position in July 1862 went against Halleck's strategic concepts. He had to be called back. Wasnt the same in 1864.

rbasin said:
And why did Lincoln not make Grant leave enough troops to watch D.C., etc. as he did Mac?

Depends on that tricky word in bold. McClellan decided to move most of the army by water in a way that would uncover DC to Johnson's army near Culpeper, north of the Rapidan. Grant intended to move in away that engaged with Lee's army, already south of the Rapidan, and Grant still left 30,000 PFD in the Department of Washington during May 1864. So seems Lincoln did make Grant leave enough troops to watch DC.

Elennsar · Jul 30, 2014

NedBaldwin said:
Depends on that tricky word in bold. McClellan decided to move most of the army by water in a way that would uncover DC to Johnson's army near Culpeper, north of the Rapidan. Grant intended to move in away that engaged with Lee's army, already south of the Rapidan, and Grant still left 30,000 PFD in the Department of Washington during May 1864. So seems Lincoln did make Grant leave enough troops to watch DC.

Where is that figure from?

Trying to collect the figures for the major campaigns of the AotP and compare them, as the number varied from time to time and it would be interesting to see how the forces in the field compare to those left in Washington at various dates.

diane · Jul 30, 2014

NedBaldwin said:
Results. Despite the losses, despite Cold Harbor, the result of April - July 1864 was better than the result of April - July 1862.

Also Halleck. McClellan's position in July 1862 went against Halleck's strategic concepts. He had to be called back. Wasnt the same in 1864.

Depends on that tricky word in bold. McClellan decided to move most of the army by water in a way that would uncover DC to Johnson's army near Culpeper, north of the Rapidan. Grant intended to move in away that engaged with Lee's army, already south of the Rapidan, and Grant still left 30,000 PFD in the Department of Washington during May 1864. So seems Lincoln did make Grant leave enough troops to watch DC.

Lincoln did make Grant leave enough troops to be sure of DC but it was a different city than Mac looked after. By the time of Grant, it was the most heavily fortified city on earth.

NedBaldwin · Jul 30, 2014

Elennsar said:
Where is that figure from?

Trying to collect the figures for the major campaigns of the AotP and compare them, as the number varied from time to time and it would be interesting to see how the forces in the field compare to those left in Washington at various dates.

http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/c...on,+Department+of&view=image&seq=591&size=100

Also see June number (slightly smaller):

http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/c...on,+Department+of&view=image&seq=721&size=100

Elennsar · Jul 30, 2014

NedBaldwin said:
http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=moawar&cc=moawar&idno=waro0070&q1=Washington, Department of&view=image&seq=591&size=100

Also see June number (slightly smaller):

http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=moawar&cc=moawar&idno=waro0070&q1=Washington, Department of&view=image&seq=721&size=100

ole · Jul 30, 2014

Guess we're not talking about Grant, the President, so I will expect this to be gone in the morning.

As a general, Grant could select those subordinates he could trust. As a President, he was given subordinates (favors and all that political mesh) which still exists. And Grant typically trusted them. It was his thing. He didn't know how to distrust.

We'd remember him better if he'd have never been president

Most Overrated General?

Colonel

1st Lieutenant

2nd Lieutenant

1st Lieutenant

Colonel

1st Lieutenant

Lt. Colonel

Retired User

1st Lieutenant

Colonel

1st Lieutenant

Retired User

Lt. Colonel

Colonel

Major

Colonel

Retired User

Major

Colonel

Brev. Brig. Gen'l

Similar threads

Similar threads