Armchair Generals

[major bill]

My major point is that even generals are human. Winning generals make mistakes, they usually only make less mistakes than their foes. Any general whose battle plan will fail if they or a subordinate makes a single mistake, needs to rethink their battle plan.

 

[Greg Taylor]

Major Bill, I respectfully differ about "One of the basic requirements was West Point education." Perhaps for the highest level of command it was necessary to have that education, but a quite a few brigade and division commanders weren't West Pointers. Some corps commanders weren't, either. John McClernand comes to mind as one corps commander, and I don't believe Ben Butler went there either. John Gordon and N.B. Forrest weren't students at the Point either. Some, like J.L. Chamberlain and Strong Vincent, graduated from other colleges.

I would suggest these men were promoted for other, more important abilities than their educations. While neither you nor I may have made a good Civil War general on the field of battle, surely Montgomery Meigs has not been given the recognition he deserves as a quartermaster, even with a West Point education? Overall, he did keep the Union Army supplied.

I'm not sure that Ben Butler is the best example to cite in this discussion!

 

[7th Texas Mounted Rifles]

Armchair General seems to be dirty words. Are we not all armchair generals?

Good point.
My input is solicited based off of this definition of the term.

"A person who speaks authoritatively but not convincingly on matters where that person lacks practical experience"

My mindset is this:
If your argument is based upon firsthand experience, facts, or speculations suggested (and widely accepted) by scholars, I don't believe you can be portrayed as having an 'unconvincing' point.

 

[ole]

Good point.
My input is solicited based off of this definition of the term.

"A person who speaks authoritatively but not convincingly on matters where that person lacks practical experience"

My mindset is this:
If your argument is based upon firsthand experience, facts, or speculations suggested by (and widely accepted by) scholars, I don't believe you can be portrayed as having an 'unconvincing' point.

Our interest in the USCW is mainly in evaluating the campaigns amd battles of, bottom line, GENERALS. I'll guess that makes us all armchair generals.

Except that I don't sit in an armchair while pontificating. Same difference.

Ain't none of us has authoritative or practical experience.

"Armchair General" has become a perjorative. But we're all one.

 

[major bill]

Our interest in the USCW is mainly in evaluating the campaigns amd battles of, bottom line, GENERALS. I'll guess that makes us all armchair generals.

Except that I don't sit in an armchair while pontificating. Same difference.

Ain't none of us has authoritative or practical experience.

"Armchair General" has become a perjorative. But we're all one.

We have a few veteran, including combat veterans, but I don't belive we have many with what I would call senior level experience. Although I have worked at Corps level I was not in a senior leadership roll.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I still say there's a difference between learning, understanding, and discussing a historical event and its possible alternate outcomes on the one hand, and saying "I coulda done it better" on the other hand.

 

[ole]

We have a few veteran, including combat veterans, but I don't belive we have many with what I would call senior level experience. Although I have worked at Corps level I was not in senior leadership. roll.

Perzackle, Bill. None of us has served at the level of a general; however, we are here pointing out the failures or successes of Civil War generals. Therefore, we are all armchair (or recliner) generals.

 

[civilken]

I can honestly say I have known generals in the military and retired and trust me then not all geniuses.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I can honestly say I have known generals in the military and retired and trust me then not all geniuses.

Not to digress too much, but we just did lose one that was... my wife and I attended the funeral of Brigadier General James Abraham (USA, Ret) last Saturday. He received his battlefield commission from Patton himself, was an electrical engineer with several patents to his credit, an instructor, and an author; and in his spare time (!) helped senior citizens with their taxes as an IRS volunteer. I had the privilege to meet him a few years ago. RIP.

 

[7th Texas Mounted Rifles]

Our interest in the USCW is mainly in evaluating the campaigns amd battles of, bottom line, GENERALS. I'll guess that makes us all armchair generals.

Except that I don't sit in an armchair while pontificating. Same difference.

Ain't none of us has authoritative or practical experience.

"Armchair General" has become a perjorative. But we're all one.

I highly respect your opinion, but i feel that this statement has 3 gross generalizations with which i disagree.

May i add that i just noticed you have 34,000+ posts here on CWT... that is insanely impressive! Shall we ever cross paths, the first couple drinks are on me.

 

[ole]

My definition of an armchair general is a man or the occasional woman who believes they could do better in another mans shoes. But they wouldn't know a Girl Scout from a Marine and couldn't make it from their easy chair to the fridge without breaking a sweat.

Calling BS on this, Shane.We don't have to be wannabes to observe and comment on someone's generalship.

I spend a lot of time defending and attacking the generalship of Grant, Lee, Sherman, Jackson, Johnston ad nauseum.
Am I a general? Not even within a whisper.

But I am not constrained from pointing out bone-headed mistakes or brilliant moves. So that makes me a disgusting armchair general?

We are in no way comparing ourselves to them.

 

[7th Texas Mounted Rifles]

Perzackle, Bill. None of us has served at the level of a general; however, we are here pointing out the failures or successes of Civil War generals. Therefore, we are all armchair (or recliner) generals.

We have no presence of retired generals here on CWT because they are all too busy writing synopses of the tactical blunders or alternative decisions that Civil War field commanders made/could have made...

Effectively making them 'RETIRED (armchair) GENERALS'.

 

[ole]

I highly respect your opinion, but i feel that this statement has 3 gross generalizations with which i disagree.

May i add that i just noticed you have 34,000+ posts here on CWT... that is insanely impressive! Shall we ever cross paths, the first couple drinks are on me.

Name the three and I can respond. We can find common ground. This is why we are here.

 

[johan_steele]

Calling BS on this, Shane.We don't have to be wannabes to observe and comment on someone's generalship.

I spend a lot of time defending and attacking the generalship of Grant, Lee, Sherman, Jackson, Johnston ad nauseum.
Am I a general? Not even within a whisper.

But I am not constrained from pointing out bone-headed mistakes or brilliant moves. So that makes me a disgusting armchair general?

We are in no way comparing ourselves to them.

You aren't one because you don't claim to be better, smarter, luckier etc. that & I'm rather sure you can pick a marine out of a lineup.

 

[Will Carry]

I'm an armchair Private. The things that interest me most in studying American military history are from the perspective of common soldiers. I like reading about strategies and tactics too but I know if I had been in an army fighting, I would be a lowly private.

 

[David Knight]

I attempt to be a lap top gamer general and I think I am rubbish but getting better. It is amazing how attempting to put into practice alternative schemes of attack are easily defeated by the AI of the game engine.

Commenting on obvious failure is one thing, saying how it could have been done better of course was never tested in battle conditions with an opponent who may have done something different as a consequence. Therefore all the so called magic alternatives that would have ensured victories are pure speculation.

 

[damYankee]

If we were not arm chair generals this forum would be a blank page! Book stores would sell nothing but cookbooks and romance novels and book peddlers selling reheated history would be siting on a bar stool bragging 'bout their own succses instead of complaining about everyone else's !

 

[photoman475]

Greg: My point was simply to say that Ben Butler was not a West Point educated general; neither were Logan, McClernand, Forrest and Gordon. All became generals-good, bad or indifferent-without that education. Surely no one here would argue that Ambrose Burnside was a successful, West Point educated, Army of the Potomac commanding general?

All received their appointments for other reasons; ability with Forrest and Gordon, recruiting and/or political influence with the others I mentioned. I just wanted to point out to Major Bill that while neither one of us may have made good CW battlefield generals, we have other abilities that may have made us generals anyway-with Montgomery Meigs as a prime example.

I understood Bill to be saying you couldn't be a commanding general without a Point education. Chamberlain and Strong were certainly not West Pointers, but I'd say they were successful commanders-although Strong didn't live long enough to get the star he would have had as a brigade commander. There are plenty of others we could name, too.

I just think Bill may have been underrating himself.

Alan

 

[rebelatsea]

Armchair General seems to be dirty words. Are we not all armchair genenerals?

No I'm an armchair Admiral !

 

[GELongstreet]

Armchair General seems to be dirty words. Are we not all armchair genenerals?

My chair has no armrests; making it just a chair and no armchair ... so I´m technically disqualified.