Pemberton a scapegoat?

[Yankeedave]

But CSA is a independent nation just like Mexico. If the states have to be held together at gunpoint that is not a union of states but an empire.

By the definition of 'empire' America is one. the definition being a nation that has territorial holdings outside it's continental boundry.

 

[civilken]

scapegoat you say, we like the man so much in the North we wanted to share him with you and apparently so did Jeff Davis Promoting the man every chance he could so for this the North would love to give you our best wishes and if you need any more like him will be happy to send them over.

 

[Saruman]

He was busted to colonel after being exchanged but Davis assigned him as a senior artillery officer in the Richmond defenses.

He wasn't busted to colonel. He requested it.

"Pemberton resigned his lieutenant generalcy and requested assignment as a lieutenant colonel of artillery. He had suggested such a possibility in conversation with Bragg during his visit with Davis to Bragg's army. Bragg, when asked for his comments on Pemberton's situation, had informed Davis of Pemberton's wishes. So this action was no doubt taken as a result of a prior understanding with Davis and the War Department. This humble act, especially humble given the pride of Pemberton, quieted some of his critics and gave him what he had always preferred: a command in his beloved Virginia."

- Ballard

 

[TFSmith121]

He wasn't busted to colonel. He requested it.

"Pemberton resigned his lieutenant generalcy and requested assignment as a lieutenant colonel of artillery. He had suggested such a possibility in conversation with Bragg during his visit with Davis to Bragg's army. Bragg, when asked for his comments on Pemberton's situation, had informed Davis of Pemberton's wishes. So this action was no doubt taken as a result of a prior understanding with Davis and the War Department. This humble act, especially humble given the pride of Pemberton, quieted some of his critics and gave him what he had always preferred: a command in his beloved Virginia."

- Ballard

Sorry, "busted" as in no one wanted him as a general officer...

Best,

 

[Rebforever]

Durn iPad.

 

[huskerblitz]

Pemperton is arguably the wrong man at the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe Pemperton did the best he could with what he had in the way of forces and logistics.

Never quite understood the 'wrong man at the wrong place' when it came to Vicksburg. He took the offensive by setting up pretty darn good defenses around the city. Held off a larger Sherman force at Chickasaw Bayou in December of '62. Joe Johnston was absolutely no help to Vicksburg. Had Pemberton taken a more offensive strategy he ran the risk of his supply line or his retreat back to Vicksburg being cut off and forced surrender right there and then. And then he held off Grant and Sherman as long as he possibly could. I think Pemberton did the best he could with what he had. Had Johnston came sooner when Grant was further south then maybe there was a chance, but with Johnston delaying it was already a done deal when the Union troops came up through Mississippi.

 

[Saruman]

Never quite understood the 'wrong man at the wrong place' when it came to Vicksburg. He took the offensive by setting up pretty darn good defenses around the city. Held off a larger Sherman force at Chickasaw Bayou in December of '62. Joe Johnston was absolutely no help to Vicksburg. Had Pemberton taken a more offensive strategy he ran the risk of his supply line or his retreat back to Vicksburg being cut off and forced surrender right there and then. And then he held off Grant and Sherman as long as he possibly could. I think Pemberton did the best he could with what he had. Had Johnston came sooner when Grant was further south then maybe there was a chance, but with Johnston delaying it was already a done deal when the Union troops came up through Mississippi.

Agree. Johnston was the architect of Vicksburg's demise. As Department Commander, he stripped Mississippi of all its cavalry leading Pemberton blind to Grant's movements and unable to threaten Union supply lines during the campaign. Pemberton was forced to scatter his infantry to protect the State and its assets. If he had been given cavalry, it would have been much easier for Pemberton concentrate his infantry in response to enemy movements.

 

[leftyhunter]

Never quite understood the 'wrong man at the wrong place' when it came to Vicksburg. He took the offensive by setting up pretty darn good defenses around the city. Held off a larger Sherman force at Chickasaw Bayou in December of '62. Joe Johnston was absolutely no help to Vicksburg. Had Pemberton taken a more offensive strategy he ran the risk of his supply line or his retreat back to Vicksburg being cut off and forced surrender right there and then. And then he held off Grant and Sherman as long as he possibly could. I think Pemberton did the best he could with what he had. Had Johnston came sooner when Grant was further south then maybe there was a chance, but with Johnston delaying it was already a done deal when the Union troops came up through Mississippi.

See Bees post #8 which has a link to an article written by the chief ranger historian at Vicksburg. Maybe Pemperton did the best he could certainly Davis thought so other Confederates not so much.
The basic criticism of Pemperton is he didn't put two and two together and evacuate Vicksburg in time to save his army. The classic defense of Pemperton is he didn't want to appear to be a traitor and surrender Vicksburg eithout a fight; a great example of damed if you do dammed if you don't.
Leftyhunter

 

[huskerblitz]

See Bees post #8 which has a link to an article written by the chief ranger historian at Vicksburg. Maybe Pemperton did the best he could certainly Davis thought so other Confederates not so much.
The basic criticism of Pemperton is he didn't put two and two together and evacuate Vicksburg in time to save his army. The classic defense of Pemperton is he didn't want to appear to be a traitor and surrender Vicksburg eithout a fight; a great example of damed if you do dammed if you don't.
Leftyhunter

Evacuate Vicksburg....then what???? His orders were to defend the city and control of that section of the Mississippi. Simply giving it up would have solved what? A chance for Grant and Sherman to enter the city and fortify it against Pemberton? You think the Confederates could have waged a successful siege to get it back? I doubt it.

 

[leftyhunter]

Evacuate Vicksburg....then what???? His orders were to defend the city and control of that section of the Mississippi. Simply giving it up would have solved what? A chance for Grant and Sherman to enter the city and fortify it against Pemberton? You think the Confederates could have waged a successful siege to get it back? I doubt it.

No the old argument is that Pemperton would of at least saved his army and perhaps reinforce Bragg and try to drive the AoC out of Tn. I am just going off the well written articel that Bee posted for my opinions. Fell free to dissect the article.
It is telling that Pemperton received no support from his fellow officers and it took Davis to support him. That's why I say Pemperton is a tragic figure.
Leftyhunter

 

[huskerblitz]

No the old argument is that Pemperton would of at least saved his army and perhaps reinforce Bragg and try to drive the AoC out of Tn. I am just going off the well written articel that Bee posted for my opinions. Fell free to dissect the article.
It is telling that Pemperton received no support from his fellow officers and it took Davis to support him. That's why I say Pemperton is a tragic figure.
Leftyhunter

I read the article and a number of books about that campaign (I think there are better articles written, this one seems awful pointed). I simply think Pemberton had very little options. Everything else you mention is perfectly fine for what-ifs and things like that but the fact would remain the Confederates had lost control of the Mississippi, doubtful to get any part of it back, and thus cutting the Confederacy in two. If anyone is to be blamed for the loss of the river and Vicksburg it is Johnston.

 

[leftyhunter]

I read the article and a number of books about that campaign (I think there are better articles written, this one seems awful pointed). I simply think Pemberton had very little options. Everything else you mention is perfectly fine for what-ifs and things like that but the fact would remain the Confederates had lost control of the Mississippi, doubtful to get any part of it back, and thus cutting the Confederacy in two. If anyone is to be blamed for the loss of the river and Vicksburg it is Johnston.

That could be regarding Johnson. On the other hand their are only so many military age white males to go around. By the summer of 1863 many are dead, permanently wounded, many have deserted and my favorite more then a few are now Unionist guerrillas tying down Confederate troops.
Bragg and Lee have their hands full as it is and can't spare troops to assist Vicksburg.
Maybe no one could save Vicksburg.
On the mentioned article it certainly shows Pemperton was an interesting cadet who wasn't interested in military tactics. On the other hand he was a brave and competent artillery officer. It seems to be a fairly written and well thought out article.
Leftyhunter

 

[Burning Billy]

Any American who fires on or leads men who fires on American troops is a traitor. In order to end the Civil War it was necessary for the Union to forgive those who commited treason. If we substitute the word Confederate for a more contemporary miltary/relgious organization that a U.S. military officer decided to resign his commison and instead join that organization , would that not be treason?
Leftyhunter

It always perplexed me why anyone bothers to argue that the Confederates weren't guilty of treason. By any definition of the term, they were guilty of it, just as the 18th Century American rebels who fought against Britain were guilty of treason.

Any one who makes war on their government is committing treason. The issue is whether or not it's justified.

 

[huskerblitz]

It always perplexed me why anyone bothers to argue that the Confederates weren't guilty of treason. By any definition of the term, they were guilty of it, just as the 18th Century American rebels who fought against Britain were guilty of treason.

Any one who makes war on their government is committing treason. The issue is whether or not it's justified.

As been noted, there are plenty of other threads on the topic. No reason to derail this one.

 

[Rebforever]

It always perplexed me why anyone bothers to argue that the Confederates weren't guilty of treason. By any definition of the term, they were guilty of it, just as the 18th Century American rebels who fought against Britain were guilty of treason.

Any one who makes war on their government is committing treason. The issue is whether or not it's justified.

Treason was not proven. Only in opinions.

 

[Rebforever]

oops !!! Back to the op. Durn iPad.

 

[atlantis]

How in the world did it end up with Pemberton resigning his commission and Johnston keeping his rank. Johnston was his superior and knew Pemberton had been ordered to save Vicksburg. What I see is Johnston not doing his best to help Pemberton fulfill his orders. Once the order is given you do your best to carry it out regardless of your personal opinion.

 

[TFSmith121]

How in the world did it end up with Pemberton resigning his commission and Johnston keeping his rank. Johnston was his superior and knew Pemberton had been ordered to save Vicksburg. What I see is Johnston not doing his best to help Pemberton fulfill his orders. Once the order is given you do your best to carry it out regardless of your personal opinion.

Or you resign.

Best,

 

[atlantis]

Or you resign.

Best,

That is true.

 

[TFSmith121]

Rare, but it does happen...

Best,