Leadership

[Elennsar]

Speaking as a civilian, but a civilian fascinated by military history:

Good leaders lead.

Elaborating to clarify:

Good leaders don't say "go on". They say "come on".

Good leaders don't have soldiers going through the motions and counting "752 days until I'm out." They have soldiers proud to say "I fought with General Soandso." (emphasied for a reason)

Good leaders speak and their men listen. Good leaders don't make fancy speechs about how they feel the pain of their soldiers from their nice, air conditioned (or toasty warm) buildings. They pitch their tents with their men.

They don't have fine, exquisitely prepared dinners. They wait in the cafeteria and offer the last chocolate fudge bar to the soldier behind them.

Good leaders don't make their troops willing to sacrifice. Good leaders make their troops want to sacrifice.

Remember the movie Spartacus with Kirk Douglas?

"I'm Spartacus!" "No, I'm Spartacus!"

A good leader inspires that.

When a good leader is faced with having to send a forlorn hope, he doesn't have to persaude men to volunteer, he has to order most of them to stay behind.

A good leader, in brief, brings out the very best in his men.

He strengthens his soldiers.

He is not just their commander. He is not just another guy with stars on his collar (or eagles or stripes or whatever). He is their leader. He is the point of the spearpoint.

He is there for them, and they are there for him.

That, to me, is leadership.

A bad leader can take a diamond and make it into common coal dust. A good leader can take coal dust and make it into diamonds.

I don't know how much sticking up for your troops on things like discipline counts (as stated, I'm a civilian). But when the chips are down, a leader rolls up his sleeves, and says "Boys, we're going to get dusty before this is through."

We. Not you. We.

 

[101combatvet]

It is a well known fact that on the average pound for pound the Confederate soldier was better then his Yankee counterpart. In regards to who makes the best soldier given various time periods studies have been done. For example it has been said that during WW2 the best enlisted soldiers came from Maine and the Dakotes... the best officers from Pennsylvania.

101,your premise seems to be that since there were riots and resistance to the draft in the north the quality of the troops was low. There was also resistance to the draft in WW2 and in the 60's. I do not conclude by this that the quality of those troops was low. It is not necessarily a causal relationship, IMO.

 

[ole]

Who conducted those studies? And where might one gain access to at least one of them?

Thanks.

Ole

 

[Baggage Handler #2]

It is a popular opinion in some circles that the troops of one side were better pound for pound than the troops on the other. Which side entirely depends on the baggage of the opinion holder.

It is hard enough to compile meaningful metrics on an army now.
Is literacy rate a useful metric? Not even when illiteracy hinders communication? How about mechanical aptitude? Sherman's 10 miles a day on corduroy roads required both of those.

Willingness to obey difficult orders? Mayre's Heights equals Pickett's charge.

It's an interesting opinion, but without some way of actually measuring things, it is beyond the bounds of reasonable discussion.

 

[101combatvet]

I'm not sure but it may have been the Combat Studies Institute.

Who conducted those studies? And where might one gain access to at least one of them?

Thanks.

Ole

 

[Elennsar]

There are too many examples of hard fighting Yankees for me to take the idea that the average Confederate had any advantage over the average Yankee seriously.

As someone who has studied both major theaters (the East more than the West), nothing I have read leaves me convinced that whether a man was from Ohio or Tennessee, Virginia or Vermont, Texas or Delaware, had jack poopie to do with anything.

 

[unionblue]

It is a well known fact that on the average pound for pound the Confederate soldier was better then his Yankee counterpart.

This is the first time in my life, let alone my study of the Civil War, that I have heard of this "well know fact."

This one is going to require an actual document/agency that can be verified before I even begin to consider it in any kind of serious light.

And it strikes me very strange, that Union forces for the most part were handing Confederate forces defeat after defeat in the Western theater while the reverse was true in the Eastern theater.

"Pound for pound," sounds like the old brag my Uncle the MP used to hear from the Airborne soldiers in his day. They used to say one Airborne soldier could lick any 5 regular Army guys. My Uncle used to say it got boring hitting them over the head when they were drunk, yelling this quote, and hauling them off to the stockade.

In regards to who makes the best soldier given various time periods studies have been done. For example it has been said that during WW2 the best enlisted soldiers came from Maine and the Dakotes... the best officers from Pennsylvania.

If we go that route, again, I would have to see actual proof of such a study. Again, we seem to have exceptions to every rule. A school teacher with no previous military experience, saves the entire Army of the Potomac at Gettysburg with an unorthodox manuver at Little Round Top.

A underweight shrimp turned down by other military services as too sickly to fight, manages to enlist in the US Army, and earns almost every award available for bravery, to include the Medal of Honor, and is considered one of the greatest heroes in US Army and American history, Audie Murphy.

Sorry, but a bit more than a vague reference will have to be produced to convince me otherwise.

As Pickett said about the defeat of the Confederate army at Gettysburg, he thought the Union army had something to do with it.

Unionblue

 

[101combatvet]

Same reason applies to why the CIA doesn't usually recruit from the Bay area.

There are too many examples of hard fighting Yankees for me to take the idea that the average Confederate had any advantage over the average Yankee seriously.

As someone who has studied both major theaters (the East more than the West), nothing I have read leaves me convinced that whether a man was from Ohio or Tennessee, Virginia or Vermont, Texas or Delaware, had jack poopie to do with anything.

 

[101combatvet]

Let's just put it this way.... the US Airborne soldier has a more accomplished history then any other.... bar none.

"Pound for pound," sounds like the old brag my Uncle the MP used to hear from the Airborne soldiers in his day. They used to say one Airborne soldier could lick any 5 regular Army guys. My Uncle used to say it got boring hitting them over the head when they were drunk, yelling this quote, and hauling them off to the stockade.

Unionblue

 

[M E Wolf]

You guys!

:jawdrop:

All of you are special!

I have only one favorite -- Horse Cavalry!

So all of you are favorites as the horses other than ceremonial duties these days, are gone.

Behave or I'll ride your backs [Gives 'THE LOOK']

Respectfully submitted to our wonderful veterans,
M. E. Wolf

 

[Elennsar]

Same reason applies to why the CIA doesn't usually recruit from the Bay area.

If there is any documentation to prove that soldiers from one area were better than those of any other area, I would be delighted to see it.

It has been demonstrated that (some of the) units from Maryland and Delaware in the Revolution were consistently better than most of their peers, but for instance - Morgan's riflemen - are Virginians (and Marylanders and Pennsylvanians).

Similarly, in the Civil War, I can reference units from all over which did exceptionally well. If refusing to believe that one group is superior because of some vaguely refered to study with no documentation backing it up is a bad thing for the CIA, no wonder we're in trouble.

So if anyone wants to prove any unit to be more consistently successful, let's see the records. Let's see the hard data.

 

[unionblue]

Let's just put it this way.... the US Airborne soldier has a more accomplished history then any other.... bar none.

101combatvet,

He does, bar none.

But in saying such about one group proves nothing about the "pound for pound" comment concerning Union vs. Confederate soldiers.

We all have our own opinions on any number of given topics, but we are not entitled to our own, unsupported facts.

I also wish to take the opportunity to apologize to you if I have given any appearence of insult when I related my Uncle's story to you and this forum.

I didn't ever realize when I hit the submit button that you were a former airborne veteran as apparent by your log-on ID. I was merely trying to provide support for my own views, and when I suddenly realized my post could be viewed as a deliberate insult to you personally, I came back to my computer to type this apology.

I regret if I have come across as insulting to you and your service and I am sincerely sorry it you took it in such a manner.

Again, it was not my intent to insult you personally.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[101combatvet]

You don't have to apologize. The story is actually not correct it was five enemy soldiers. In some cases it was much higher... I have personally interviewed and have heard of paratroopers from the 101st during WW2 kill sixty or more enemy soldiers during a single engagement. Just to clarify those are individual kills from one paratroopers weapon.

101combatvet,

He does, bar none.

But in saying such about one group proves nothing about the "pound for pound" comment concerning Union vs. Confederate soldiers.

We all have our own opinions on any number of given topics, but we are not entitled to our own, unsupported facts.

I also wish to take the opportunity to apologize to you if I have given any appearence of insult when I related my Uncle's story to you and this forum.

I didn't ever realize when I hit the submit button that you were a former airborne veteran as apparent by your log-on ID. I was merely trying to provide support for my own views, and when I suddenly realized my post could be viewed as a deliberate insult to you personally, I came back to my computer to type this apology.

I regret if I have come across as insulting to you and your service and I am sincerely sorry it you took it in such a manner.

Again, it was not my intent to insult you personally.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[unionblue]

You don't have to apologize. The story is actually not correct it was five enemy soldiers. In some cases it was much higher... I have personally interviewed and have heard of paratroopers from the 101st during WW2 kill sixty or more enemy soldiers during a single engagement. Just to clarify those are individual kills from one paratroopers weapon.

101combatvet,

Like I said, it was my Uncle, a sergeant of MPs with the 101 Airborne, that told me the story. I'm pretty sure the boys he faced changed the line a bit when facing the MPs when on pass downtown, drunk after hitting the bars.

I'm almost positive my Uncle, the MPs and the soldiers they confronted in such situations did consider each other 'the enemy.'

At least, not in the way you describe above.

Unionblue

 

[cash]

It is a well known fact that on the average pound for pound the Confederate soldier was better then his Yankee counterpart.

Actually, that's a well-known historical lie started by dishonest people and kept alive by folks who don't know any better.

Regards,
Cash

 

[cash]

Let's just put it this way.... the US Airborne soldier has a more accomplished history then any other.... bar none.

Not taking anything away from the brave and highly skilled US Airborne soldier, but an objective observer has to conclude the United States Marine Corps has a longer and more accomplished history, from the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli to the islands of the Pacific to the jungles of Vietnam to the sand of Iraq to the mountains of Afghanistan, including the Civil War.

Regards,
Cash

 

[101combatvet]

I was including USMC paratroopers.

Not taking anything away from the brave and highly skilled US Airborne soldier, but an objective observer has to conclude the United States Marine Corps has a longer and more accomplished history, from the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli to the islands of the Pacific to the jungles of Vietnam to the sand of Iraq to the mountains of Afghanistan, including the Civil War.

Regards,
Cash

 

[101combatvet]

:laugh1:..........:laugh2:

Actually, that's a well-known historical lie started by dishonest people and kept alive by folks who don't know any better.

Regards,
Cash

 

[ole]

Time to lighten up. With that in mind, I submit this bit of fluff.

Rules of Conflict
The Rules of Conflict, according to the various American forces...
US Army Rules
Be courteous to everyone, friendly to no one.
Decide to be aggressive enough, quickly enough.
Have a plan.
Have a back-up plan, because the first one probably won't work.
Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
Do not attend a gunfight with a handgun whose caliber does not start with a "4."
Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Life is expensive.
Move away from your attacker. Distance is your friend. (Lateral & diagonal preferred.)
Use cover or concealment as much as possible.
Flank your adversary when possible. Protect yours.
Always cheat; always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose.
In ten years nobody will remember the details of caliber, stance, or tactics. They will only remember who lived.
If you are not shooting, you should be communicating your intention to shoot...
Navy SEAL's Rules
Look very cool in sunglasses.
Kill every living thing within view.
Adjust speedo.
Check hair in mirror.
US Army Rangers Rules
Walk in 50 miles wearing 75 pound rucksack while starving.
Locate individuals requiring killing.
Request permission via radio from "Higher" to perform killing.
Curse bitterly when mission is aborted.
Walk out 50 miles wearing a 75 pound rucksack while starving.
Marine Corps Rules
Curse bitterly when receiving operational order.
Make sure there is extra ammo and extra coffee.
Curse bitterly.
Curse bitterly
Do not listen to 2nd Lieutenants, it can get you killed.
Curse bitterly!
US Air Force Rules
Have a cocktail.
Adjust temperature on air conditioner.
See what's on HBO.
Ask "what is a gunfight?"
Request more funding fro m Congress with a "killer" Power Point presentation.
Wine & dine 'key' Congressmen, invite DOD & defense industry executives.
Receive funding, set up new command and assemble assets.
Declare the assets "strategic" and never deploy them operationally.
Hurry to make 13:45 tee time.
Make sure the base is as far as possible from the conflict but close enough to have tax exemption.
US Navy Rules
Go to Sea.
Drink Coffee.
Deploy Marines

 

[ole]

Just wondering.

Were the north and south proportionately represented in the 101st?

They certainly weren't in the Iron Brigade or the Texas Brigade.

Can't figure out the north/south difference but, if you had drawn a difference between the western and the eastern boys, I might agree. But that's just a feeling, not the result of a study of any sort.

An amusing aside I read somewhere: Just before the Grand Review, Sherman's western boys were kept out of Washington until the last minute, because there was some talk about mixing it up with the paper-collar soldiers.

I just chalked that up to the idea that there was much difference between the northwestern and northeastern soldiers, as there was between the southwestern and southeastern soldiers. Sectionalism wasn't just north and south.

Just a thought.

Ole