Most Underrated General

[rpkennedy]

Plus his Corps was hammered. Too many new guys versus veternas

I believe he made that comment when he resigned his command of the corps. Something along the lines of, "This isn't the old Second Corps anymore."

R

 

[Civil War Scholar]

Hancock was one of the best generals produced during the war (not just "good") but his wound was crippling and he really shouldn't have returned to the field after Gettysburg.

R

The original 2nd Corps, AoP began as a bunch of young guys. Battle is what turns inexperienced soldiers into veterans. The soldiers are not the problem. The officers are.
Civil War Scholar.

 

[wilber6150]

The original 2nd Corps, AoP began as a bunch of young guys. Battle is what turns inexperienced soldiers into veterans. The soldiers are not the problem. The officers are.
Civil War Scholar.

Except when the majority of the replacments are draftees or bounty men.....

 

[Civil War Scholar]

Except when the majority of the replacments are draftees or bounty men.....

And the Confederates used conscripts, but there was no decline in the fighting quality of the men. You have two options: a) acknowledge that the rebels were better fighters, or b) admit that the problem is not the fighting quality of the soldiers, but the commanding quality of the officers.
Civil War Scholar.

 

[rpkennedy]

The original 2nd Corps, AoP began as a bunch of young guys. Battle is what turns inexperienced soldiers into veterans. The soldiers are not the problem. The officers are.
Civil War Scholar.

The Second Corps had some of the best officers of the war, as well.

And when most of your men are unreliable bounty men and draftees because the veterans have either left when their enlistments expired or are dead or wounded, the men are the problem. That was the case after the Overland Campaign, as Hancock pointed out.

R

 

[Civil War Scholar]

This applies to the Army of Northern Virginia, as well. Why didn't they face the same problem? Because they had better officers.
Civil War Scholar.

 

[wilber6150]

And the Confederates used conscripts, but there was no decline in the fighting quality of the men. You have two options: a) acknowledge that the rebels were better fighters, or b) admit that the problem is not the fighting quality of the soldiers, but the commanding quality of the officers.
Civil War Scholar.

First where was it shown that there was a decrease in fighting quality, the remark that was made was that the 2nd Corp wasn't the same after Gettysburg and the Overland campaign where a lot of the vets were replaced with brand new men...

 

[wilber6150]

This applies to the Army of Northern Virginia, as well. Why didn't they face the same problem? Because they had better officers.
Civil War Scholar.

Ummmm so you don't think that Confederate armies had issues with draftees?

 

[wilber6150]

This applies to the Army of Northern Virginia, as well. Why didn't they face the same problem? Because they had better officers.
Civil War Scholar.

Better in what regard...

 

[28thNewYork]

I learned early on that repeating the same false statement multiple times does not make it true.

 

[wilber6150]

I learned early on that repeating the same false statement multiple times does not make it true.

Im bored so I like throwing bread crumbs under the bridge lol

 

[rpkennedy]

And the Confederates used conscripts, but there was no decline in the fighting quality of the men. You have two options: a) acknowledge that the rebels were better fighters, or b) admit that the problem is not the fighting quality of the soldiers, but the commanding quality of the officers.
Civil War Scholar.

The reason was because the Confederacy generally put new men in preexisting regiments, giving each regiment a mix of veterans and new men. In the North, new regiments were created and only a relative few men were sent to reconstituted veteran units. And that doesn't include veteran units that went home en masse when their enlistments expired. The organization of Confederate units was generally better than the Federal system.

R

 

[rpkennedy]

This applies to the Army of Northern Virginia, as well. Why didn't they face the same problem? Because they had better officers.
Civil War Scholar.

They did have problems, just not on the same scale.

R

 

[CSA Today]

This applies to the Army of Northern Virginia, as well. Why didn't they face the same problem? Because they had better officers.
Civil War Scholar.

The Confederates had better soldiers all the away around. Soldiers defending their country against invaders usually do fight better.

 

[wilber6150]

The Confederates had better soldiers all the away around. Soldiers defending their country against invaders usually do fight better.

Union soldiers were defending their country against those who would tear it apart...Man for man the Confederate soldiers were no better then Union men...

 

[Civil War Scholar]

Union soldiers were defending their country against those who would tear it apart...Man for man the Confederate soldiers were no better then Union men...

You underestimate motivation. The Confederates had home and hearth to defend and the Yankees had to fight for the rich, Northern industrialists to get richer.
Civil War Scholar.

 

[rpkennedy]

You underestimate motivation. The Confederates had home and hearth to defend and the Yankees had to fight for the rich, Northern industrialists to get richer.
Civil War Scholar.

Once again, you demonstrate a decidedly inaccurate view of the war.

R

 

[Civil War Scholar]

Why would the average Billy Yank take up arms and invade the Southern states? Either in unison or separation, he was not hostile to Southerners. Generally, the average person, Billy Yank or Johnny Reb, didn't hate somebody. The Billy Yanks were brainwashed that the South was populated by evil slaveholders. They were COERCED to hate their late countrymen. By telling them that the South was synonymous with slavery and was responsible for breaking the Union, they had controlled his mind and filled his heart with hatred and anger.
On the opposite end, the Johnny Reb rushed to defend his own country, his very state and home from an invader, a disturber of their peace and welfare. This gave them motivation enough to be a whip ready to punish the bull.
Civil War Scholar.

 

[wilber6150]

You underestimate motivation. The Confederates had home and hearth to defend and the Yankees had to fight for the rich, Northern industrialists to get richer.
Civil War Scholar.

And you underestimate the fighting spirt and the love of country that Union men had...As usual....

 

[wilber6150]

Why would the average Billy Yank take up arms and invade the Southern states? Either in unison or separation, he was not hostile to Southerners. Generally, the average person, Billy Yank or Johnny Reb, didn't hate somebody. The Billy Yanks were brainwashed that the South was populated by evil slaveholders. They were COERCED to hate their late countrymen. By telling them that the South was synonymous with slavery and was responsible for breaking the Union, they had controlled his mind and filled his heart with hatred and anger.
On the opposite end, the Johnny Reb rushed to defend his own country, his very state and home from an invader, a disturber of their peace and welfare. This gave them motivation enough to be a whip ready to punish the bull.
Civil War Scholar.

And who brain washed the thousands of Southerners that rushed to arms even befor Sumter and even before a single Union man was called up by the government?