J. Johnston Thoughts on Joseph E. Johnston

[leftyhunter]

yes and very similar to johnston but he also would not give up petersburg and richmond. ultimately he did give them up but had he followed johnston's strategy he could have lived to fight another day which he tried to do. if the fall of places like vicksburg and richmond meant the end of the confederacy why fight beyond new orleans , ft henry and donelson, nashville , and memphis ?

not always in the west. plus having longer lines of communication Grant and Sherman developed a tactic of supplying the army off of the countryside thereby having no logistical support.

why were they so limited ? because lee had them chewed up. at war's end johnston surrendered 90,000 troops although many were not under his direct control.

hood actually had a numerical superiority at atlanta and roughly even numbers at peachtree creek. why ?

a comment about the failure of johnston to defend snake creek gap.
i was not the mistake it is made out to be.
first johnston could not stay at rocky face ridge forever. when sherman withdrew so johnston had to also or be encircled . also mcpherson could have gotten in his rear farther south just as Polk did in joining Johnston from alabama or one of the union armies could have flanked the confederates to the east. also let us not forget the examples of missionary ridge and lookout mountain. they did not stop the union armies. as demonstrated at lookout mt. "there ain't no mountain high enough ". these battles doomed atlanta not snake creek gap.
if there was a way to achieve independence it was johnston's way and it was a close thing. without the battles of antietam , gettysburg, and the loss of an army at vicksburg, which in it's self might have prevented the georgia campaign, the south would have been in a much better position in 1864 for foreign recognition or declining northern popular support for lincoln and nomination of a peace candidate.

True enough that Union forces did not always outnumber Confederate forces in the West but still achieved victories such as Mills Springs,Pea Ridge and Prairie Grove.
At Vicksburg Grant had a better then two to one manpower superiority ratio and at Champion Hill Grant only had a 1.45 to one manpower superiority ratio and still won an offensive battle which is not altogether shappy.
Leftyhunter

 

[John Fenton]

Lots of interesting points so I will take one at a time.
Not sure about saving the AnV to fight another day. There is only so much territory that can be surrendered and letting Richmond fall to the Union would destroy any hope of Confederate self sufficiency in producing armaments. Also a large army needs access to a reliable transportation network to supply it with food and related military supplies. By the summer of 1864 there weren't many places that the AnV could be based in.
Leftyhunter

and yet johnston was still maneuvering. he found space.
it is said that going into the war the south had an advantage of being as large as russia which would have to be conquered and occupied, although i would counter that with the fact that it also had to be defended. Lee threw this advantage away and operated almost exclusively in virginia. johnston was charged with holding much more territory, something he knew he could not do.
Selma was only defended with 4000 troops , half of which were deemed undependable .
The Selma Ordnance and Naval Foundry, also known as the Selma Naval Foundry and Ironworks and the Selma Arsenal and Gun Works, was a leading manufacturing center for the South during the Civil War.

 

[John Fenton]

At Vicksburg Grant had a better then two to one manpower superiority ratio and at Champion Hill Grant only had a 1.45 to one manpower superiority ratio and still won an offensive battle which is not altogether shappy.

champion hill was pemberton not johnston. pemberton did not follow johnston's orders.

 

[leftyhunter]

champion hill was pemberton not johnston. pemberton did not follow johnston's orders.

True my point was that you are correct that the Union did not always have a huge manpower superiority ratio in the West. Grant certainly had some military skills in that with only a 1.45 to one manpower superiority ratio Grant was able to achieve a significant military victory.
Leftyhunter

 

[John Fenton]

Lots of interesting points so I will take one at a time.

my argument here is that johnston was underrated, had a better strategy (i don't think there was a winning one but he certainly had less casualities ), and did not enjoy the confidence of Davis and priorities that Lee did.

 

[leftyhunter]

and yet johnston was still maneuvering. he found space.
it is said that going into the war the south had an advantage of being as large as russia which would have to be conquered and occupied, although i would counter that with the fact that it also had to be defended. Lee threw this advantage away and operated almost exclusively in virginia. johnston was charged with holding much more territory, something he knew he could not do.
Selma was only defended with 4000 troops , half of which were deemed undependable .
The Selma Ordnance and Naval Foundry, also known as the Selma Naval Foundry and Ironworks and the Selma Arsenal and Gun Works, was a leading manufacturing center for the South during the Civil War.

I will have look up the battle for Selma. Yes Johnston always found space but loosing Georgia is quite a heavy price for the Confederacy to bear. Not that Good was a huge improvement as a Confederate commander if the AoT.
Leftyhunter

 

[Henry Hunt]

champion hill was pemberton not johnston. pemberton did not follow johnston's orders.

As I understand it Johnston also wanted Pemberton under no circumstances to allow himself to be traped in Vicksburg. He would rather have let the city fall and Pemberton push north along the Big Black River. This makes sense as it would have saved the army and maintained the limited manpower pool.

 

[leftyhunter]

my argument here is that johnston was underrated, had a better strategy (i don't think there was a winning one but he certainly had less casualities ), and did not enjoy the confidence of Davis and priorities that Lee did.

Not sure I agree but that is a classic argument and an interesting one.
Leftyhunter

 

[John Fenton]

True my point was that you are correct that the Union did not always have a huge manpower superiority ratio in the West.

at peachtree creek the forces were almost equal and then at the battle of atlanta hood had a 5500 man advantage. why ?
atlanta fell on sept 2 1864 but if they could have held out for 2 months the election was nov. 8. could johnston had held out that long if not relieved of command ?

 

[John Fenton]

i have compared davis's insistance that vicksburg and atlanta be held to hitler's demands of paulus at stalingrad. i wonder if the russian strategy might have worked for the confederates at atlanta by drawing the federals in but not letting them out again ? like the russians he could have called on distant troops from mobile and florida and the carolinas if he had time to get them there. he only need 2 months for the election. how would holding 3 union armies in a pen have affected northern moral ? just a wild thought on my part.

 

[Henry Hunt]

at peachtree creek the forces were almost equal and then at the battle of atlanta hood had a 5500 man advantage. why ?
atlanta fell on sept 2 1864 but if they could have held out for 2 months the election was nov. 8. could johnston had held out that long if not relieved of command ?

I think the Confederates put too much hope in the election. From McClellan's writings he clearly wanted to restore the Union. Also he had already renounced the peace platform so I am confident that he would have pushed to finish the war.

 

[Henry Hunt]

i have compared davis's insistance that vicksburg and atlanta be held to hitler's demands of paulus at stalingrad. i wonder if the russian strategy might have worked for the confederates at atlanta by drawing the federals in but not letting them out again ? like the russians he could have called on distant troops from mobile and florida and the carolinas if he had time to get them there. he only need 2 months for the election. how would holding 3 union armies in a pen have affected northern moral ? just a wild thought on my part.

So something similar to Nashville? Johnston withdraws from Atlanta then besieges a superior force inside while calling on reinforcements. It, of course, wouldn't work but still interesting.

 

[John Fenton]

I think the Confederates put too much hope in the election. From McClellan's writings he clearly wanted to restore the Union. Also he had already renounced the peace platform so I am confident that he would have pushed to finish the war.

you are probably correct notwithstanding that lincoln might have been reelected anyway.

 

[John Fenton]

So something similar to Nashville?

i do not know much about the battle for nashville so it did not come to mind. i will read up on it. but yeah.

 

[Jamieva]

at peachtree creek the forces were almost equal and then at the battle of atlanta hood had a 5500 man advantage. why ?
atlanta fell on sept 2 1864 but if they could have held out for 2 months the election was nov. 8. could johnston had held out that long if not relieved of command ?

Because Sherman did not have his entire force engaged at either if these fights

 

[John Fenton]

Because Sherman did not have his entire force engaged at either if these fights

Neither did hood. Never the less of those engaged at each one was even and one was a confederate advantage. How is it that hood was able to exceed union strength . Because of johnston's Tactics up to that time. Johnston also exceeded union strength at kennesaw mountain and inflicted 3 times the casualties he incurred .

 

[leftyhunter]

i have compared davis's insistance that vicksburg and atlanta be held to hitler's demands of paulus at stalingrad. i wonder if the russian strategy might have worked for the confederates at atlanta by drawing the federals in but not letting them out again ? like the russians he could have called on distant troops from mobile and florida and the carolinas if he had time to get them there. he only need 2 months for the election. how would holding 3 union armies in a pen have affected northern moral ? just a wild thought on my part.

General Paulus had no choice but to surrender has the German Army was completely cut off form supplies and his men were starving.Yes the Luftwaffe did try to airdrop supplies but never enough and sometimes useless supplies such has condoms and all left footed boots.
My understanding is that the Confederate troops at Vicksburg were in danger of starvation so Pemperton had no choice but to surrender. Perhaps the same was true at Atlanta. Has Napoleon said "an army travel's on its stomach".
Leftyhunter

 

[John Fenton]

General Paulus had no choice but to surrender has the German Army was completely cut off form supplies and his men were starving.Yes the Luftwaffe did try to airdrop supplies but never enough and sometimes useless supplies such has condoms and all left footed boots.
My understanding is that the Confederate troops at Vicksburg were in danger of starvation so Pemperton had no choice but to surrender. Perhaps the same was true at Atlanta. Has Napoleon said "an army travel's on its stomach".
Leftyhunter

you missed what i was saying. first pemberton had the opportunity and was ordered by johnston to get out but didn't in preference to davis, almost the same as paulus. the difference being paulus was the top in command and so he overrode himself, who knew better, in preference to hitler until it was too late, which is the same as pemberton.
my speculation was for hood or johnston to draw sherman into atlanta by giving it up , and then surrounding atlanta and holding them there like the russians did and who encircled paulus before he had any idea that they could. his only option was to breakout which he refused to try as per hitler.
someone here told me that nashville was similar but i have not read up on nashville.
had the AoT been able to pull it off i think it would have made a difference in the elections although i do not know if McClellan would be bound by the peace plank of the democratic platform.
the other difference is that the confederates did not have to capture sherman's armies, just seal them up for a few months. anyway it is just wild speculation on my part and belongs in the "what if" forum.
lefty said:
[useless supplies such has condoms and all left footed boots.]
i would call them unless. as cold as it got they would help keep them from freezing their guns off. this is my rifle and this is my gun.

 

[Dead Parrott]

you missed what i was saying. first pemberton had the opportunity and was ordered by johnston to get out but didn't in preference to davis, almost the same as paulus. the difference being paulus was the top in command and so he overrode himself, who knew better, in preference to hitler until it was too late, which is the same as pemberton.
my speculation was for hood or johnston to draw sherman into atlanta by giving it up , and then surrounding atlanta and holding them there like the russians did and who encircled paulus before he had any idea that they could. his only option was to breakout which he refused to try as per hitler.
someone here told me that nashville was similar but i have not read up on nashville.
had the AoT been able to pull it off i think it would have made a difference in the elections although i do not know if McClellan would be bound by the peace plank of the democratic platform.
the other difference is that the confederates did not have to capture sherman's armies, just seal them up for a few months. anyway it is just wild speculation on my part and belongs in the "what if" forum.
lefty said:
[useless supplies such has condoms and all left footed boots.]
i would call them unless. as cold as it got they would help keep them from freezing their guns off. this is my rifle and this is my gun.

Interesting to speculate on the hypothetical 'trap em in Atlanta' strategy. Realistically, it has problems galore (Symbolic, southern press and public reaction, Davis's head explodes in slow motion, probably still gets Lincoln reelected, loss of key railroad junction, etc). But, just to play hypotheticals, IF one assumes Atlanta was doomed to fall anyway, there is a military argument to be made that keeping an intact army between Sherman and an open march is the superior move, compared to destroying said army ala Hood.

Again using the AWI analogy, Washington could lose cities and retreat across states, yet still keep the war going and hope for a counterstroke. Admittedly all analogies are imperfect, and AWI analogies may be overstretched in the era of railroads. Still, speculate Atlanta is lost after more time and more bloody contested flanking battles. Now Johnston sits outside Atlanta with most of his army intact, and Sherman inside the city. Does Johnston's delay (and keeping an intact army) give the Confederacy a better position than after Hood's fiasco?

My contention is that Johnston was a skillful enough commander to keep an intact army delaying and bloodying Sherman throughout 1864. I don't think that means the Confederacy 'wins' - just that the Union wins slower (and less dramatically). I don't doubt Johnston's competence in making that theatre a longer and costlier victory for Sherman throughout 1864.

But by 1864, I'm not sure there is any 'winning' theatre left for the Confederacy, unless Grant is incompetent. So, no.

- K.

 

[Irishtom29]

Washington and Greene could play retreat and advance because the British army was small; too small to consolidate control over large areas. And when it reacted to American moves it often had to abandon territory it occupied. They couldn't build on their victories and get on a roll. The Federal army was large enough to not have that problem.