Quantrill. Good soldier?

[archieclement]

Counterinsurgency is unfortunately a messy business. The more one studies other counterinsurgency conflicts the more one sees many similarities to Civil War era counterinsurgency. Not exact singularities for all counterinsurgency conflucts have unique differences but they always share many similarities.
The boys from Kansas sometimes killed guerrillas and sometimes committed crimes. They were counterinsurgency forces not the most ethical but nonetheless were sometimes effective.
Leftyhunter

And actually if follow the timeline the Jayhawkers would be the "insurgents" as they were conducting guerrilla operations first, which would make the Missouri "guerrillas" actually the "counter-insurgency" forces as they were created in response......And hence at Lawrence they deserve the credit of being the first to utilize the "free fire zone" in a counter-insurgency operation your so fond of.

 

[CSA Today]

Well, I got to say, if I was Lane in that situation, I'd be streaking through that cornfield never mind the nightshirt! He wasn't the only officer to throw dignity to the wind along with his rear end - Washburn run off in his wife's cutty sark because Jesse Forrest had his britches and Kilpatrick had no problem galloping off with his nightshirt flapping in the breeze. But they didn't have a tenth of the excuse Lane had!

Yeah, ol' Lane had a right to be mighty worried.

 

[Patrick H]

Counterinsurgency is unfortunately a messy business. The more one studies other counterinsurgency conflicts the more one sees many similarities to Civil War era counterinsurgency. Not exact singularities for all counterinsurgency conflucts have unique differences but they always share many similarities.
The boys from Kansas sometimes killed guerrillas and sometimes committed crimes. They were counterinsurgency forces not the most ethical but nonetheless were sometimes effective.
Leftyhunter

Lefty, let me put it to you this way: If Charles "Doc" Jennison was a counterinsurgency fighter, I'm Daffy Duck.

 

[mofederal]

Lane and Jennison were both poor excuses for soldiers. I think Jennison had talent as a soldier, but he was more interested in lining his own pockets. The 7th and later 15th became good units when taken away from Jennison's influence. Lane on the other hand was more of a nut case, a political animal who did things for political or financial gain. In fact when Lane killed himself, he was under suspicion and had been accused of financial irregularities. Both Jennison and Lane saw war as a financial opportunity. Together they were the best recruiters for the Missouri guerrillas and the Confederate cause in Missouri. Without them it might have been a little different story along the border and in Missouri itself. One doesn't win the hearts and minds of people, the civilian population in Missouri by burning, robbing and killing them. A fact to keep in mind.

 

[Patrick H]

Lane and Jennison were both poor excuses for soldiers. I think Jennison had talent as a soldier, but he was more interested in lining his own pockets. The 7th and later 15th became good units when taken away from Jennison's influence. Lane on the other hand was more of a nut case, a political animal who did things for political or financial gain. In fact when Lane killed himself, he was under suspicion and had been accused of financial irregularities. Both Jennison and Lane saw war as a financial opportunity. Together they were the best recruiters for the Missouri guerrillas and the Confederate cause in Missouri. Without them it might have been a little different story along the border and in Missouri itself. One doesn't win the hearts and minds of people, the civilian population in Missouri by burning, robbing and killing them. A fact to keep in mind.

You are so right on all comments regarding Lane and Jennison.

To be sure, there were some excellent guerrilla hunters operating in Missouri. Lewis Merrill and his troops were excellent. Reeves Leonard and his militia in Fayette were excellent. Odon Guitar (yes that was his name) was excellent at nearly everything he did. There were many others.

Not included in their excellent company were Lane, Jennison, and Montgomery of Kansas. Those guys were free booting thieves and murderers whose actions were comparable to the worst things Anderson ever did.

 

[leftyhunter]

You assume a false goal, the war was never a primary insurgency war, it was a conventional war, the goal of irregular forces in a conventional war is generally to tie down enemy forces out of proportion to the actual threat, they most certainly accomplished that. Even as he left to KY with what 20-40 men? There was still tens of thousands in the militia that were militia instead of being put into federal service because of the fear a few guerrillas put into the Union authorities.

I haven't ever came across any document in the Trans-Mississippi that alleges the goal of the guerrillas was to overthrow anything by themselves, Instead the actual accounts of the guerrillas themselves is for protection from Union persecution and to avenge wrongs, there is no political movement other then a loose alliance to the conventional war.

If your going to allege the guerrilla war had some political movement separate from the conventional war and its end wasn't tied to the end of the conventional war, I disagree, the fact is everything the Union did as "COIN" if you want to call it that, was a failure and only increased guerrilla support through 1863, the support only waned in 64 as the CSA conventional forces were losing across the board and it was obvious the CSA was going to lose the conventional war. Because they weren't separate, but directly connected to one another...….

In a war of secession by definition the side that is trying to seceede are insurgents unless they receive international recognition.
All violent political struggles have five basic stages;
1.Agitate and organize
2.Assassinate and bomb
3. Hit and run
4.Sieze and hold / create no go areas
5.Mobile or Conventional war
The Confederacy for the most part had at least enough manpower to attempt conventional warfare at least in some areas.
In a civil war both the guerillas and the conventional soldiers are fighting for the same goal nust using different methods.
When Price invaded Missouri in September 1864 the many guerrillas switched to conventional warfare thinking Confederate forces were now strong enough to expell the Union forces from Missouri.
After Price's failed invasion many guerrillas left Missouri. Some stayed but left latter due to pressure from Union counterinsurgency forces had to leave Missouri i.e. Quantrill.
Most if the Union miluta was just to old to fight in the Union Army. It would be more accurate to say Quantrill diverted milita men from their civilian occupations with the caveat of the Missouri State Militia and various Union cavalry regiments rotated in and out of Missouri.
Leftyhunter

 

[archieclement]

The civil war was not primarily a guerrilla war, it was a conventional war conducted primarily through conventional means, what little guerrilla forces there were was secondary to that and just irregular forces....So if by insurgency or counter insurgency you mean to imply or indicate primarily a guerrilla war or COIN which today is what insurgency has become somewhat synonymous with, I disagree

 

[Moutrey]

I am just finishing 'Quantrill and the Border Wars' by William Elsey Connelley which I got as a freebie Kindle download. It was published in 1909 and initially I thought the writer was going to be a bit too biased against Quantrill to be able to make any kind of balanced judgement about the man but as the book went on, Connelley, although merciless in his opinions of Quantrill, his morals and his guerillas depredations against the populations of Kansas and Missouri, seemed to be giving an unbiased slant to his operations in the field against, sometimes superior Federal forces. Now there are a lot of people on here who are far more qualified than me to judge Quantrills ability as the commander of a unit of cavalrymen/ mounted infantry and I would appreciate their comments because to a layman like me, he seemed to be a pretty capable tactician on the battlefield.