James Longstreet

Best General: SHERMAN. He gave the filthy south the beyatch-slapping it so desperately deserved.

I'd say that it is close between Lee and Sherman. I personally like Sherman because he was able to end the war and physically break the South's back. Total war was his game and he won.

If you ever get pulled over in Georgia for speeding don't do what I did...

Officer: "Do you know how fast you were going?"

Me: "No officer."

Officer: "I clocked you at 85 miles per hour."

Me: "Oh, I'm sorry officer. I wasn't aware."

Officer: "I see from your plates that you are from Washington."

Me: "Yes, I'm here visiting family."

Officer: "Well you may go that fast up there in Washington but nobody goes that fast in Georgia."

Me: "What about Sherman?"

Needless to say, I got a hefty ticket.

You guys/girls should check out some of these goodies about the Civil War on YouTube. Here's a starter for you...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swuq76coAC4

You can go from there.

Travis

My list of good generals are;
1) CSA Stonewall Jackson
2) USA William T. Sherman
3) CSA Nathan B. Forrest
4) USA John F. Reynolds
5) USA George H. Thomas
6) CSA A.P.Hill (Division Commander)
7) CSA John B. Hood (Division Commander)
8) CSA Robert E. Lee
9) USA James B. McPherson
10) USA U.S. Grant

No mention of him?
None other than Gen. Winfield Scott said,
"He was the bravest and most perfect soldier I have ever known."

No it wasn't Lee or Longstreet or Grant. Although Scott knew all of the Generals of both sides.
This man would've replaced McClellan, he had time in grade over Hooker and Burnside.
Unfortunitly for the Union, he like T.Jackson, liked to do his own scouting.
Lee would have been squashed by Christmas of 1862.

The one armed devil

quote:

Originally posted by ToeNailTerror:
Best General: SHERMAN. He gave the filthy south the beyatch-slapping it so desperately deserved.

Not before we (southerners) had spent the past 4 years defeating armies much larger and better equiped than our own.

quote:

Originally posted by TeamAmerica:

quote:

Originally posted by ToeNailTerror:
Best General: SHERMAN. He gave the filthy south the beyatch-slapping it so desperately deserved.

Not before we (southerners) had spent the past 4 years defeating armies much larger and better equiped than our own.

You were alive during the War of Secession? Wow.

Grant was one of the best, read Grant and Lee and Study in Personality and Generalship by JFC Fuller, and also his Generalship of Ulysses S Grant, and also read Lee Considered.

My moneys with Robert E. Lee. Grant was ok if you keep the whisky away from him? the rest of then yankee Generals were no better then carpet baggers.

"Long live the South,and my God help the North".

I don't see what's so great about Lee. The guy screwed up at Gettysburg big time. Of course, Southern apologists try and get around this by blaming Longstreet or Ewell. Sorry, Lee was in charge and he's the man responsible. He's way overblown as a military leader.

quote:

Originally posted by xuscgrm:
I don't see what's so great about Lee. The guy screwed up at Gettysburg big time. Of course, Southern apologists try and get around this by blaming Longstreet or Ewell. Sorry, Lee was in charge and he's the man responsible. He's way overblown as a military leader.

What about

- The Seven Days Battles?
- Battle of Second Manassas
- Battle of Fredericksburg
- Battle of Chancellorsville
- Battle of Cold Habor
- Holding the line at Petersburg for 11 solid months against all odds

As you can see Robert E Lee produced a number of great victories for the Confederacy and I listed a few of them. He also took on the Army of the Potomac during the overland campiagn and inflicted much higher losses than he suffered. Robert E Lee ****ed up at Gettysburg, it was a stupid move i will agree with you on that. However you are clearly looking over a great many things.

And yes, I am a Southerner and I am proud of it

Lee was victim to technology, the story is repeated over and over with some of the best generals in history.

Grant was a little too dependent on the human wave, in my opinion.

I'm going out on the limb here and make the case for Grant. Lee was by far the absolute best tactician of the war but, he didn't have the strategic ability to win the war. I am not saying that he could not have done it but the southern command structure did not seem to have the long range or end state objective. When Grant took over and with the help of Sherman and the often forgotten Sheridan, the war went over from tactical battles to strategic all out war. It did not last very long after that. Grant really was no tactical genius but he continued to advance on Richmond even when Lee won the individual battles. Flank and advance, wear no literally grind the Army of Virginia down with his larger number of troops and material. Sherman showed that after Lee there was nothing else command wise on the Southern side to worry about when he marched to the sea and showed the heart of Southern civilain populace that their armies could not protect them or there industry and farms. And then Sheridan with his absolute crushing of the Southern cavalry and other commands. Though this was a three pronged attack on the South, Grant was the mastermind of the overall strategy and that is why I respectfully submit the name of U.S. Grant as the top general of the civil war.

quote:

What about

- The Seven Days Battles?
- Battle of Second Manassas
- Battle of Fredericksburg
- Battle of Chancellorsville
- Battle of Cold Habor
- Holding the line at Petersburg for 11 solid months against all odds

As you can see Robert E Lee produced a number of great victories for the Confederacy and I listed a few of them. He also took on the Army of the Potomac during the overland campiagn and inflicted much higher losses than he suffered. Robert E Lee ****ed up at Gettysburg, it was a stupid move i will agree with you on that. However you are clearly looking over a great many things.

You need to go back and read a previous post made by Sackcoat&Ashes.

During the Seven Days he..."(Threw) men away all day on uncoordinated assualts at Gaines' Mill (which) he finally won, but only due to the apperance of an unexpected gap that appeared in the Union line at sunset.

At Malvern Hill he communicated so badly with his subordinates that once again the attacks were uncoordinated and resulted in a complete and utter failure... (that McClellan failed to exploit, which lends credence to the concept that Lee didn't do as much to win battles as his opponents did to lose them).

He managed to hang on at Antietam and was only spared defeat by a lucky turn of the cards when Hill's troops came up at the end of the day.

He did nothing at Fredericksburg to win other than allowing Burnside to lose. His greatest moment at that battle was to simply wax poetic: "It is well that war is so horrible otherwise we would grow to fond of it." Wow. Such a philospher.

Chancellorsville is called his "greatest victory" but he didn't win that battle as much as Hooker lost it and, as usual Lee threw away so many troops that it was merely a pyrrhic victory.

The rest of the war for Lee was nothing more than a fait accompli; bidding time until he completely managed to drive his army to wreck and ruin long after the handwritting was on the wall."

And my own comment: Cold Harbor was a tactical mistake for Grant, but a strategic victory.
Lee himself said that if Grant crossed the James River the war would be lost by the CS. At Cold Harbor Grant crossed the James and the handwriting was on the wall. What's pitiable is that Lee didn't have big enough balls to surrender his army at that point in order to avoid more bloodshed but his pride got in the way. If he had practiced the religion he preached he would have opened his Bible and read the following:

Proverbs 16:18: "Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall."

quote:

And yes, I am a Southerner and I am proud of it. At Cold Harbor Grant began to cross the James and the handwriting was on the wall.

So am I, but I don't have blinders on. There are many white southerners today who blithely think how great the Confederacy was without taking into consideration that many southerners had no great love for that insurrectionist goverment and despised it's draconian laws, it's despotic politicians and it's overly aggressive military leaders who destroyed the flower of southern white youth with repeated frontal assualts that brought spectacular but short-term tactical victories but failed miserably at both the political and strategic level.

quote:

Originally posted by scutarii:
Grant by far.

No other general sucessfully commanded the at the level and scope which he did. From the Unit-to Corps-to Army-to Theater-to National Level, no one did this except he.

This is prob. the most difficult question, outside of the true cause of the war, that can be posed....

I narrow it down to 3 Generals and will give brief explanation on why...as well as how I would rate them 1-3

R.E. Lee
T.J. Jackson
U.S. Grant

To address your feelings on Grant...He was a Gen. with overall package ratings between above avg. and great. His 2 falws are: 1) with his resources in men and $$, this war shouldnt have gone past year 2. He was bested on the entire field by Lee and Jackson. With an obvious advantage in nearly ever major battle, he still struggled early on. The massive decrease in men and #'s for the CSA were the only things to ensure his victory. 2) His lack of control over sherman. It was morally wrong to allow sherman to commit the crimes he committed in the south on his march to the sea. I realize that they were in a war...but in the mind of those in the north, the CSA was not legal, so sherman murdered women and children who were his countrymen.

Lee showed his strengths 24/7 and 365. The only problem with Lee was his management of his own generals in the "big" picture. I feel that, at times, he allowed leaders who were not fit to lead and have commands in a time of war, to stay a bit too long!!!

As for Jackson..The BEST field commander of all time....period. The only question that could be posed to bring his appraised worth as the Gen. of an Army would be could he have led men on the ultimate scale....His premature death prevents us from ever having that question answered.

My ratings are as follows:

1) Lee
2) Jackson
3) grant

I agree with you on Lee and Jackson, not so sure on Grant.
There's one immediate problem with your logic though. Lee AND Jackson never fought Grant. Jackson died before Grant came East.

I've always wonder why Sherman is so vilified, but Sheridan gets a pass on the devastation his troops wrought in the Shenandoah Valley. The damage they caused was much more complete. " A crow flying over, will have to carry his own rations."

quote:

Originally posted by gumbydammit:
I agree with you on Lee and Jackson, not so sure on Grant.
There's one immediate problem with your logic though. Lee AND Jackson never fought Grant. Jackson died before Grant came East.

I've always wonder why Sherman is so vilified, but Sheridan gets a pass on the devastation his troops wrought in the Shenandoah Valley. The damage they caused was much more complete. " A crow flying over, will have to carry his own rations."

You are right in your statement about Lee and Jackson never facing grant on the field. I was a bit inaccurate in hinting to that. I do feel that in the case of Lee vs. grant, we can calculate somewhat of a comparison. They were both commanders of their respective armies...and in an indirect way, they faced each other on numerous occassions.

My point was directed to those who feel that grant was the best b/c the union won the war. We both know that the measure of grant cannot be determied by that fact. The simple fact of the matter is that grant was dealt a much better hand to play with from the start than Lee. I personally feel that Lee did better with less than grant did with more!!!

General Lee was the greatest General in the Civil War. His men killed over 400,000 Freakin' Yankees....Grant killed about 200,000 Confederates and pissed of Lee. Lee whipped his *** in Chess, Checkers and Monopoly thus...Grant quit quick and went home.

This Confederate General may not be a major player, but I think he was one of the best. He was everywhere, from the surrender negotiators at Fort Sumter, then to Antietam, and on until the bitter end. At one time he was one of the youngest Generals in the Confederate Army. He survived the war and participated in many of the reunions and had a major contribution to the publication of the Confederate Military History.

Who is he?

It was General Lee BUTTT when you come between an alcoholic, his booze and pride, (being covered with Feces of sorts...)

The Battle of Gettysburg…Lee & Grant.
OK, I read this in Look…maybe it was Vogue or Times…Not sure, butttttt Some idiot private turned the outhouse Grant was doin’ # 2 in over, SHEESH, you don’t do this. He lost nearly a full bottle of his 8 year old whiskey. A No, No. This piiiiissssed him offffff to no end, (take my wife but leave the booze baby). Welllll, that was a mistake. Nothing like seeing your General covered with hmmmmm….#2. Welll to say the least, Grantsy baby was POed. He killed the hell outta everything from little bunnies, bucks and innocent Confederate soldiers. Now, you know why the Battle of Gettysburg was sooooo freakin’ horrible.

Jest thought I’d throw this in.

Travis