Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 204

Thread: When?

  1. #51
    Professor
    dave8383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Boston Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,173

    Re: When?

    I think we know that the major difference in the Civil War is that the North always has been superior to the South. So Lee never had a chance.

  2. #52
    Sage
    Fledermaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    65,704

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by dave8383 View Post
    Lee lost, end of story.
    So did Hannibal, Rommel, and a myriad of great generals....
    'All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.'

    Douglas Adams

  3. #53
    Sage
    Fledermaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    65,704

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangmo View Post
    We find generals throughout history distributed in the classic bell shaped curve because your average general wins some and he loses some. The average general is of course the rule and he populates each side. Grant who is an authority on the average general said after the war Lee was an "average general."

    Central to Grant's evaluation of Lee was his significant lesson from his command in the West when Grant recognized quickly that when you've turned away the enemy, and when he chooses to run rather than surrender, you drive on after him and you plug his yellow backside full of hot lead. That is of course you defeat him or you reduce his force significantly enough to make the enemy general and his force insignificant for a significant period. It remains obscure to armchair military history buffs that disabling 40% of the opponent's offensive force typically renders it insignificant as a major offensive force or as a significant forward force. Lee and several major Union commanders knew this acutely hence Grant's disparaging barb against the CSA's Saint Robert that he never strayed far from from his defenses in a given offensive battle.

    Meade at Gettysburg is a favorite of the Saint Robert crowd who criticize Meade for not taking after the tattered remains of Lee's retreating troops. Yet Lincoln himself accepted that, at that point, the Union forces were spent from the three days of fierce fighting while no fresh troops were available from reserves or otherwise to take pursuit, not until later at which point Lee had pulled up to establish formidable defenses along a river as recognized by Union Engineers, while no significant Union supporting Naval force was available either.

    Indeed, professional military historians connect only two generals of the war to past commanders who stand at the pinnacle of warfare and each of 'em are Union commanders: Grant whose Napoleonic fire, maneuver and pursuit led to the kill, and Sherman whose largely self sustaining March to the Sea invoked Caesar in Gaul. Yet while Grant began the war as an average general he grew into an exceptional general with each battle, and while Sherman was, well, an average general on average, Sherman found his niche as a marching general of troops who believed in him without knowing he was drawing on Caesar, Hannibal, Alexander et al. Grant and Sherman conceived of the grand strategy of victory in spring 1864 at the grand Burnet House hotel in Cincinnati as the two Ohio boys used the old axiom two heads are better than one -- indeed one year later the South was fragmented into piles of ashes and Saint Robert had to surrender his sword of treason. This grates the Putin Trump Rowers to no end as they seek determinedly and relentlessly to realize what the post WW II Germans and Japanese know they cannot do morally, ie, glorify their military commanders.

    Grant and Sherman alike knew well Washington drew on his lifelong study of Alexander and Hannibal, ie, Alexander as a marching general and Hannibal as the general of the unexpected and of the factor of the hard hitting surprise. Washington's exposed flank as it were was that neither Alexander nor Hannibal was a defensive general, so Washington -- who was pre Napoleon's great feats -- relied for advice on Lafayette, L'Enfant among other French nobles who were familiar with the doctrines of French fortification and defenses.

    Yet Saint Robert was and remained unsuccessfully impelled to adapt Alexander the marching general and Caesar the conqueror only to end up as Hannibal did at the hands General Publius Cippio and his Roman armies that leveled Carthage and sent Hannibal on the run and to his fatal demise at the hands of the Romans. As we see today with the cultural and ideological descendants of Saint Robert and the CSA -- the Putin Trump Rowers -- the crushed Lee and his miserable defeated cohorts were treated erroneously by the victorious Union. The United States must never repeat this most costly error that bedevils us in the present as existential yet again.
    More Tangmohistory...

    Which will gt you a D- if you unleashed it on a history exam.
    'All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.'

    Douglas Adams

  4. #54
    Professor
    dave8383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Boston Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,173

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fledermaus View Post
    So did Hannibal, Rommel, and a myriad of great generals....
    How does that change Lee's loss?

  5. #55
    Sage
    Fledermaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    65,704

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by dave8383 View Post
    How does that change Lee's loss?
    It doesn't. Did I say it did?

    What it does show is that Generals can lose battles and even wars and still be considered great Generals based on their careers and deeds.
    'All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.'

    Douglas Adams

  6. #56
    Professor
    dave8383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Boston Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,173

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fledermaus View Post
    It doesn't. Did I say it did?

    What it does show is that Generals can lose battles and even wars and still be considered great Generals based on their careers and deeds.
    Fortunately, Lee wasn't great enough.

  7. #57
    Sage
    Fledermaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    65,704

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by dave8383 View Post
    Fortunately, Lee wasn't great enough.
    We agree on that.

    Had the Confederacy prevailed slavery would have continued for decades.
    'All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.'

    Douglas Adams

  8. #58
    Sage
    Tangmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Seaview Tower 5 Condo 2602
    Last Seen
    05-29-20 @ 03:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    13,449

    Re: When?

    As the statues and engraved worship of the CSA generals continue to come down and be taken away so too does the bloated and false mythology of Saint Robert E. Lee and other CSA generals who fought to preserve and extend the oppression and treason perpetrated by the culturally vile South in its blatant racism. We recall CSA was a one party state for Christian white agriculturalists to which the Putin Trump Rowers connect in a direct line to their unrelenting pursuit for a new single party state dominated and ruled by rural America in the 21st century.

    The Civil War monuments are a constant reminder of the oppression and treason perpetrated by the rebellious South. We know the Confederates were traitors — plain and simple. Their place in history is clear. They no more deserve monuments than Hitler does in Germany or Tojo does in Japan in their pursuit of barbarism.

    The South turned Democrat when Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation and it flipped to Republican when Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act and Nixon immediately after him implemented the "Southern Strategy." There is a common thread here that can’t be denied to include the Putin Trump Rowers who have taken control of the Republican party to make it the largest pro Russia political party outside of Russia.

    The Rowers are leaders among those who defend the statues and memorials to the CSA generals. Saint Robert E. Lee has of course always been their first and foremost hero who tried to dissolve the Constitutional United States of America and to remake a world safe for slavery and for rebellion in pursuit of feudal values, attitudes, systems, political structures. Salient about Lee is that his native homeland was the Virginia of 1860 and not the enduring and dynamic United States of America.

    The CSA generals statues coming down and being removed -- Saint R.E. Lee first and foremost -- continues the inexorable decline in the falsified legends of courage and bravery, of the genius and brilliance myths that have been perpetrated to preserve the Lost Cause and its generals led by Saint Robert E. Lee toward the day instead the Lost Cause finally prevails in one way or another as as the Victorious Cause realized finally and at long last by their vile direct descendants whom we recognize as the Putin Trump Rowers.

    As the statues of Lee come down so do the concocted OTT myths that make Saint Robert more, mightier and greater than he was. After all, after the war Grant said Lee was an "average general." I think Grant was rather being kind and generous toward his vanquished counterpart Lee. Indeed once Grant and Sherman took after Lee and Johnston the war was over for Lee and cohorts suddenly and in but one devastating year.
    Restoration Reformation Reconstruction

  9. #59
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    US, California - federalist
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,462

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by dave8383 View Post
    I think we know that the major difference in the Civil War is that the North always has been superior to the South. So Lee never had a chance.
    The South needed to win enough battles to convince Europe to get involved and recognize the confederacy.

  10. #60
    Sage
    Oozlefinch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    State of Jefferson
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,425

    Re: When?

    Quote Originally Posted by swing_voter View Post
    Native Americans were called warriors back in the 1800s.
    Well, that certainly shows your ignorance.

    Most Indian clans are both tribal and clan oriented. The tribe is generally a family grouping, while clan may be specific to a family, or it may only be used by an individual. These are not clans as the Scottish view them, and in many ways an individual adopts a clan when they choose a profession, one in keeping with their new role (depending on tribe of course).

    And no, the number of "Warriors" was generally very small. Only a handful in a tribe, generally they would teach the other males in times of need (war), and mostly were little more then guards. In most Indian groupings, this is the role of the Wolf Clan. In tribes that had a duel-chief system, the Peace Chief would always come from one clan, and the War Chief would always come from the Wolf Clan (or whatever that tribe had as the equivalent).

    Most white men tend to confuse and combine 2 different groupings. Brave was available to any member of the tribe, it was in most tribes part of the Rite of Passage into adulthood, and would be considered to be the same as being a member of the Militia or National Guard. They could fight, but their job was actually something else. Warriors were members of the Wolf Clan, and that was their job, full time fighters who usually did things like herding, patrolling, and escorting traders when during time of peace.

    Myself, I am Potawatomie, and my grandmother's maiden name was Wolf. A practice which was common in the 1800s, when they settled into reservations many used their clan name as their last name. There is a reason why so many today still use last names with Deer, Wolf, Elk, Beaver, and Bear in them. If you look back, I can guarantee the first of their families to select those names were all members of those clans.
    War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. - John Stuart Mill

Page 6 of 21 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •