- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Location
- Ohio
They say brilliant minds often think alike. You ever wonder who "They" are?
Nate says that a lot. I'm guessing "They" is Nate.
They say brilliant minds often think alike. You ever wonder who "They" are?
That agrees with everything I've read. Jomini's tactics favored the idea of winning battles without firing a shot due to maneuver and all that. But if you have large armies of essentially civilian soldiers, the Napoleonic way of doing things can be dispensed with. There's no need to conserve those small 18th century armies that were so hard to raise and train, as well as expensive to maintain.
Napoleon did have large armies that could be supplied by better means than the Brits had against us. Someone even invented a way to boil soup and put it in a wine bottle to keep it from spoiling. So Napoleon could play fast and loose with lives the way no Brit could in America. One of their shortcomings in the Revolution was that they almost never moved without a huge supply train following in their wake. It really slowed them down. But they also broke with the rules and frontally assaulted at Breed's Hill (Bunker Hill), and the results almost ruined them. The Brits in America far better reflect the sort of thing McClellan wanted to do, than say, Napoleon in Russia.Though ironically, the Napoleonic way of doing things is both aggressive and using large armies (more conscripts, I think, but still).
The word "fail" comes to mind for those who sought to use such armies in other ways.
There's just something about his personality or mindset that won't allow him to innovate.Unfortunately, McClellan was operating in vastly different circumstances.
I wouldn't mind if he wasn't "free with lives" if he just spent sweat instead of blood.
With an army that big, he thinks the imaginary huge army he faces will be compelled to retire without a fight. Problem is, at some point his opponent MUST fight.The strangest thing about it is that it didn't prevent him from coming up with...fantastic...ideas.
I will never get over the idea of him finding an army of 273,000 as the army for the main army of operations to be a good idea. That's just so mind numbing...something.
That's good to know. So I wonder if his journal tells us anything he saw or experienced in Mexico that might explain his extreme caution?
Thanks! I hope it provides some insight.You can read it, it's online: http://ia341315.us.archive.org/3/items/mexicanwardiaryo00mccl/mexicanwardiaryo00mccl.pdf
"Remember, thou art mortal," was the way I heard it.I understand that in ancient Rome, during it's days as a Republic, Victorious Roman generals were allowed a great parade before the citizens of Rome, and traditionally,at the victorious general's side was placed a slave who whispered in the victor's ear something to the effect that 'this too shall pass away' as a prediction and warning.
McClellan, seemed to have had someone around him, who always asked 'But, General, are you sure?'
McClellan did lead to the fall of Norfolk. That does have to count for something.
Incidentally, what of these troops were originally assigned to the Army of the Potomac (as distinct from McClellan's all-Union-forces overall command): http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/sources/recordview.cfm?content=/014/0054 ?