Peter Stines
Sergeant
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2007
- Location
- Gulf Coast of Texas
I've heard of this book but haven't read it yet. Older one. Is it worth it ? Biased or fair ?
Fascinating. Thankyou.Seems a bit odd, it does seem I've heard more about Lincoln then Davis.......
But Lincoln was more hands on? Like standing by some like Grant while replacing others for lack of offensive spirit?.......Sounds like Davis standing by Bragg while replacing others for lack of fighting such as JJ.....
And Lee as some de facto C and C for the war? One of the few faults historians find with him was he never did view things as a C and C......instead he only looks at Virginia. And never had any real say outside the AoNV. Nor seemed to wish to provide much direction outside the AoNV.
Also agree as pointed out in different thread, no biographer can spend years researching a single person without forming their own favorable or unfavorable view of them which is going to be reflected......so any reviewers opinion of "biased and fair" is also largely dependent on how it meshes with the reviewers personal opinion........
The thing is facts are impersonal actions......but interpreting the action as "good or bad", "correct or incorrect thing to do" or "moral or immoral" are are all subjective personal opinions.......
This is a good piece, but for the very last paragraph is a bit wooly It is in every soldiers own and collective interest to stick to what they are taught. And they know the rules of War. They usually do. But sometimes bad things happen. It's the nature of war, and a very gervious thing it is.Seems a bit odd, it does seem I've heard more about Lincoln then Davis.......
But Lincoln was more hands on? Like standing by some like Grant while replacing others for lack of offensive spirit?.......Sounds like Davis standing by Bragg while replacing others for lack of fighting such as JJ.....
And Lee as some de facto C and C for the war? One of the few faults historians find with him was he never did view things as a C and C......instead he only looks at Virginia. And never had any real say outside the AoNV. Nor seemed to wish to provide much direction outside the AoNV.
Also agree as pointed out in different thread, no biographer can spend years researching a single person without forming their own favorable or unfavorable view of them which is going to be reflected......so any reviewers opinion of "biased and fair" is also largely dependent on how it meshes with the reviewers personal opinion........
The thing is facts are impersonal actions......but interpreting the action as "good or bad", "correct or incorrect thing to do" or "moral or immoral" are are all subjective personal opinions.......
It remains the action itself is still simply an impersonal event............to spin it good or bad, or justifiable or not is personal opinion.This is a good piece, but for the very last paragraph is a bit wooly It is in every soldiers own and collective interest to stick to what they are taught. And they know the rules of War. They usually do. But sometimes bad things happen. It's the nature of war, and a very gervious thing it is.
No, I agree. I am also spin intolerant. Its just a distraction.It remains the action itself is still simply an impersonal event............to spin it good or bad, or justifiable or not is personal opinion.
Have you ever been in action? Im a vet.It remains the action itself is still simply an impersonal event............to spin it good or bad, or justifiable or not is personal opinion.
Never been the military, always been a military history buff, think that tended to discourage me ever volunteering.Have you ever been in action? Im a vet.
Don't volunteer. There are plenty of jarheads to do that for you now. But I have to say that being a military vet does put a certain perspective on things. I cannot say in truth whether this is at all useful in peacetime, but let's be positive and do what wa can.Never been the military, always been a military history buff, think that tended to discourage me ever volunteering.