- Jan 24, 2017
Let's hear your thoughts.
I agree.Both, at various times.
Also very much like Nathan Bedford Forrest.Both, at various times.
Much of the praise and the condemnation directed at him have been from partisan sources, both "pro" and "con," which makes it highly difficult to arrive at an objective appraisal of his abilities. Grant, like Lincoln and Sherman, is someone that people have opinions about, no matter what the actual level of knowledge is behind those opinions.
I was referring to the Lost Cause denigrating Grant as a general while elevating Lee.I don't think "confederate apologetics" had anything to do with that feeling.
Grant was a great General, but not a great President.
No ... we' ve got new guys hereAre not not the exact same guys arguing the exact same things at:
I picked neither as general since he won.Let's hear your thoughts.
One of the basic tenets of warfare through time is to try to have the advantage in quality and numbers...If battles were only about numbers and resources, Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville would have been union victories.
One of the basic tenets of the Lost Cause, and of diminishing Grant as a general, is to blame disparity in numbers and resources.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|He could have been tried - Ulysses S. Grant and his resignation from the army||Ulysses S. Grant||13|
|January Video Discussion: Ulysses S. Grant Memoirs||U of ACW Study Center||22|
|Top Ten Ulysses S. Grant threads of 2019||Ulysses S. Grant||0|
|Military Rivals Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee||Ulysses S. Grant||62|