Don't we need a US Grant forum?

JeffBrooks

Sergeant Major
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Location
Manor, TX
Nothing changes the fact that he was the single most important commander in terms of the Union winning the war. The Vicksburg Campaign was one of the most critical of the war and the North's finest performance. And it was Grant from start to finish.

The Overland Campaign, we can see in retrospect, wore down Lee's army and caused its collapse in early 1865. But if events elsewhere (especially in Georgia) had not gone the North's way and brought about a collapse of political will and a negotiated peace, Grant would be remembered as the Douglas Haig of America.
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Location
Elliott Bay
The historiography of Grant is probably what the OP is referring to. For a couple of generations he was dismissed as just ham-handed as a general. His own regrets about Cold Harbor were magnified. Winston Churchill was positively negative about Grant (Churchill was wrong about everything in his career, except one – Hitler). Beginning in the 1930s historians took a closer look and Grant has been rehabilitated. Every historic figure deserves a close look and a fair evaluation of the evidence. The trick is the holy grail of historians, good evidence. Newspaper reports and rumors of Grant's drinking are not evidence.

I'm a fan of anyone who is good at his job and Grant qualifies there. It is still important to report an officer's flaws and mistakes. What good is history if we only use it for entertainment and do not learn from it?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 12, 2011
Location
Elliott Bay
The Overland Campaign, we can see in retrospect, wore down Lee's army and caused its collapse in early 1865. But if events elsewhere (especially in Georgia) had not gone the North's way and brought about a collapse of political will and a negotiated peace, Grant would be remembered as the Douglas Haig of America.
Napoleon preferred lucky generals to good ones because in the end, it's the victor who is remembered (except the ACW when everyone is remembered). In the above case it was another general's luck that gave the Union the victory that reelected Lincoln.
 

James N.

Colonel
Forum Host
Annual Winner
Featured Book Reviewer
Asst. Regtl. Quartermaster Antietam 2021
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Location
East Texas
He doesn't get the PR, but was there really any more important officer in the end?

Rob can correct me if I'm misreading his post, BUT... Notice that this is one of the very first posts in the NEW Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain Forum! I believe Rob is questioning WHY this in-the-long-run relatively unimportant figure gets his own forum before The Saviour of the Union and eighteenth President of the United States does. So far we have naturally Lincoln, Stonewall Jackson, and only very recently Lee; isn't the ultimate Commander-in-Chief of all the Union armies and victor of Fort Donelson, Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chattanooga, Petersburg, and finally Appomattox a little more deserving of one than someone best-known as colonel of a regiment, then commander of a brigade, and briefly a division?

If I'm correct, I say Hear, hear!
 

Rob9641

Captain
Annual Winner
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Location
Maryland
Rob can correct me if I'm misreading his post, BUT... Notice that this is one of the very first posts in the NEW Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain Forum! I believe Rob is questioning WHY this in-the-long-run relatively unimportant figure gets his own forum before The Saviour of the Union and eighteenth President of the United States does. So far we have naturally Lincoln, Stonewall Jackson, and only very recently Lee; isn't the ultimate Commander-in-Chief of all the Union armies and victor of Fort Donelson, Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chattanooga, Petersburg, and finally Appomattox a little more deserving of one than someone best-known as colonel of a regiment, then commander of a brigade, and briefly a division?

If I'm correct, I say Hear, hear!

You're kind of correct. The first thing I thought when I saw it was, "Why?", but I don't object to a thread on "Don't call me Lawrence." It's just that Grant was far more important and more interesting.
 

suzenatale

Sergeant Major
Joined
May 25, 2013
You're kind of correct. The first thing I thought when I saw it was, "Why?", but I don't object to a thread on "Don't call me Lawrence." It's just that Grant was far more important and more interesting.
I'm sure you could get a Grant forum if you ask for it and find someone to host it.
Are you asking for a Grant forum? Or are you asking for the Chamberlain forum to be removed?
Perhaps the forums need to seceded from each other in protest. I personally would like to keep the Chamberlain forum part of this union.
 

Henry Whitworth

Sergeant
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
The Overland Campaign, we can see in retrospect, wore down Lee's army and caused its collapse in early 1865. But if events elsewhere (especially in Georgia) had not gone the North's way and brought about a collapse of political will and a negotiated peace, Grant would be remembered as the Douglas Haig of America.

We need to remember though that the events aren't separate. Grant was in charge of the whole show by then and how he pursued the campaign in the east related to what happened out west. Part of his bullheaded aggression that he was so hammered for was about tying down Lee and forcing him to call up everything he could. What was happening out west was Grant's plan and he was making sure there were no more Confederate forces available to turn against Sherman. We look at the Overland Campaign because he was there. But it was all on Grant.
 
Last edited:

Nytram01

First Sergeant
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Location
Portsmouth, Hampshire, England
Churchill was wrong about everything in his career, except one – Hitler

Churchill also was right to modernize the Royal Navy in 1911 and to promote the development of the Airial arm of the Navy, he was right to support the establishment of the minimum wage and labour exchanges and the National Health insurance, he was right to support the development of the Tank, he was right to oppose appeasement, he was right that Britain could only triumph in WW2 through an alliance with America, and he was right, in the end, to oppose the Soviet Union and their dominance of Eastern Europe and warn against it. He certainly had his fair share or things that he got wrong but to say he was only right about one thing during his entire career is very unfair.
 

dlofting

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Location
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Churchill also was right to modernize the Royal Navy in 1911 and to promote the development of the Airial arm of the Navy, he was right to support the establishment of the minimum wage and labour exchanges and the National Health insurance, he was right to support the development of the Tank, he was right to oppose appeasement, he was right that Britain could only triumph in WW2 through an alliance with America, and he was right, in the end, to oppose the Soviet Union and their dominance of Eastern Europe and warn against it. He certainly had his fair share or things that he got wrong but to say he was only right about one thing during his entire career is very unfair.

He was one of my father's heroes....it was a long time ago, but I remember him watching Churchill's funeral with tears in his eyes. I guess if you were part of the British Empire during WWII you loved Churchill for what he did to hold things together when Britain and it's "colonies" pretty much stood alone against Hitler.
 

Nathanb1

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Location
Smack dab in the heart of Texas
Rob...moved this out of the Chamberlain forum since it's not really on him; however, sounds like a nice idea. Probably need a Lee forum as well....but we'll need hosts. Are you volunteering for Grant?
 

CivilWarTalk

Lieutenant General
- ★★★ -
Managing Member & Webmaster
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Location
Martinsburg, WV
Probably need a Lee forum as well....

Actually: http://civilwartalk.com/forums/robert-e-lee.169/

... It's really a staffing issue, I could foresee lots of good Bio forums, Longstreet, Meade, Sickles, Jefferson Davis, and other would all be possible, but we'd require a dedicated staff member for any of these forums.

If a suitable volunteer steps up to host a Grant forum, I'll set it up.
 

JPK Huson 1863

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 14, 2012
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Well, whichever forum, the Grant or NBF, all of them- could we puleeze make a commitment, pinky swear, whatever- just stay the heck away from the forums which you do not care for.It's a place for education and enlightenment, not somewhere to unload bile and 150 year old resentment. Gets old. Yes, I understand someone will pop in here, point out how you have to keep History ' honest '- but that never happens. The whole ' lucky general' thing pretty much highlights that, it's a subjective viewpoint which would end up in a locked thread after 20 pages of beaten chests and gutteral grunts.

From what I've seen, folks here are capable of keeping History on track all by themselves. If these forums transpire, be good to tolerate each other's heros, if it's going to send you up the wall, don't read it.
 
Top