Was Rober E. Lee actually a great strategist???

a reply to: madmac5150

Hehehahh..
92.. ( bounced between Reno and the Burgh )
Friendly rivalry if no one gets skin graphs.. still a mountaineer.

Appreciate the past. ( so changes can be made to not harm everyone ) Makes you look foward to the future.

or we all get this.

a reply to: ketsuko

It says he had military brilliance , but I cant name what that brilliance was...

Also it takes a situation like this to even know if you have great leaders..



Lee had been the golden boy at West Point and had become the protoge of .. the old man of the army.. hero of the previous war.. can't remember his name.. (Winfred Scott)

But anyway he was also super well liked and EXPECTED to be a great commander.. makes me wonder if a lot of that wasn't more personal opinion than from evidence.

Gettysburg burg has become a what not to do in military classrooms..

a reply to: neo96

That wasn't the question lol..

I know that..

The north fought with one arm behind its back..

a reply to: madmac5150

No he wasn't..

He was anti succession..

His father left him a few slaves to be freed 5 years after his death..

Lee went to court to keep the slaves from being freed by voiding his fathers decision as he was the new master..

That's lost cause BS.

a reply to: clay2 baraka

It's worse than that..

His father left him 3 or four slaves in his will with a clause to free them 5 years after he died.

Lee (I think as broke) and went to court to void his fathers decree and allow him to keep them as slaves..

a reply to: IAMTAT

My point is ANYONE you could consider a military super star WOULD have listened to Longstreet..


It was a move so made how can he ever be considered a great commander...

Except for his actions in the aftermath..

a reply to: misterhistory

I think Lee got command as a popularity contest..

He was "the old man of the armies" star pupil..

a reply to: eManym

Idk..

I think the best strategy was always Winfred scotts.. which was what basically won it..

Take all the west that was lightly guarded and slowly tighten the noose..

Only they decided to charge into gunfire head first for awhile ..first .

a reply to: madmac5150

Sherman cut the supply lines and proved the confederacy couldn't defend the south.. ..

Which is how ALL wars are fought to even this day..

Cut off supply, show the population the government cannot maintain order..

It is 101..

well before we get to Gettysburg lets consider this.
lee was a career military officer he didn`t resign his commission and join the south because he thought the south would win.He was too smart for that he knew that southern independence was an uphill battle and probably would never happen.

so, why did he resign and join the confederate army?

unlike today where everyone wants to be on the winning side, he had honor and loyalty to his state.Back then the federal government didn`t control every aspect of your life,each state was like an independent country,he was from virigina and Virginia was his "country",only a traitor would turn their back on their country.
as an honorable military man he had no choice but to side with his country "Virginia".

as far as getysburg: He was deep in enemy territory, he had limited supplys. He was outmanned and outgunned by the federal armies. His troops were spread out from the potomoke river to the sesquahanna river looking for food to feed his army.

When his scouts told him that the federal army was clogging every road making a bee line for Gettysburg, he had 2 choices: try to get all his people spread all over Pennsylvania back to Virginia or get all his people to Gettysburg before the federals got there.

Virginia was a long way away but he had people north, east and west of Gettysburg,so he had 2 choices, try to get everybody back west of the mountains on the west side of gettysburg and then send them heading south to Virginia or have everybody head to Gettysburg and try to get there before the federals did.

so why did he do what he did after he got to Gettysburg? because he had already made up his mind that this had to be the last battle win or lose the south didn`t have the resources to win the war, he went all in.

Lee was the commandant of west point he was no idiot he knew what the confederate abilities were to continue the war and he knew what the federal abilities were to continue the war. he knew that Gettysburg was the make or break battle,he knew that if the confederates lost Gettysburg that it would be a war of attrition and the south would lose a war of attrition.


so, here lee is sitting deep in enemy territory, scavaging for food to feed his army and he has to decide,do we run and have them decimate us a war of attrition or do we stand and fight to the death and hope for a victory?

what would you do?

if you knew that retreating would cause your ultimate defeat and that losing the battle would cause your ultimate defeat,would you retreat and guarantee your ultimate defeat or would you roll the dice and hope for victory?

if you retreat you will lose the war, if you stay and lose the battle you will lose the war but if you stay and win the battle against overwhelming odds you might win the war,so what do you do?
2 of the 3 choices guarantee you that will lose the war only one choice gives you a chance of winning the war.

a reply to: carewemust

Except he wasn't...

His father left him slaves willed to be released 5 years after his fathers death.. Lee went to court to stop their release 5 years later..

Think he was broke..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: madmac5150

No he wasn't..

He was anti succession..

His father left him a few slaves to be freed 5 years after his death..

Lee went to court to keep the slaves from being freed by voiding his fathers decision as he was the new master..

That's lost cause BS.

Lee was a fine officer, and West Point graduate. Lee was genuinely torn between the causes; he became a Confederate officer because of his loyalty to Virginia.

Had Lee been born in Pennsylvania, he could very well have been a Union hero.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Assuming everyone fights to the finish.. absolutely..

But with the confederacy holding Washington, idk...

Just the psychological effect might get you a peace treaty..


Lee had to keep pressing.. he DID NOT have to charge up a defended hill at Gettysburg..

a reply to: Tardacus

Go for washington... just like Longstreet told him...lol


I think you are dead right though.. he had decided to fight that day and got tunnel vision, but how do you get such tunnel vision you break every rule of the military playbook???

a reply to: madmac5150

exactly

he was offered command of all the union armies but he turned it down and resigned his commission in the federal army, not because he cared so much about keeping his slaves but because he couldn`t fight against his "country" Virginia.

Lee never mentioned anything about slavery when he turned down the offer to command the union armies but he did say this:

“Save in the defense of my native State, I never desire again to draw my sword.”

the man was old by 1860 standards, he didn`t want to fight anyone, he wanted to retire and chill.

He fought for a noble cause, the politicians who sent him to fight, not so much.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: carewemust

Except he wasn't...

His father left him slaves willed to be released 5 years after his fathers death.. Lee went to court to stop their release 5 years later..

Think he was broke..

Except it wasn't his father. He was the executor of his father in laws estate.

The estate was already in debt and I have never seen anything about him going to court as you say. In fact in 1863 Freedman's Village was set up on the estate while the civil war was still ongoing.

Not a great strategist, no. His left and right hand men, Longstreet and Jackson, however, were very good.

What Lee was, was a leader. He was able to mesh under-equipped men into an Army that gave the Union fits for much longer than they should have been able to.

Once the North weeded out some of the, shall we say, lesser talented political officers, and put men who wanted to win into positions to do so, things went **ahem** south for the South.

Generals like Meade, Chamberlain, Kearney, Thomas, Hancock, and others--you'll notice I don't mention Grant, or Sherman, I hope--the wars ending was inevitable.

Someone mentioned Gettysburg, and the mistakes made there... It's been posited that Lee may have suffered something like a stroke in the run-up to, or the early stages, the battle.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I'm guessing you didn't understand why he didn't try to take washington. He realized he couldn't and even if he did he wouldn't be able to hold on to it. Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker had stationed his corps in locations that would assure their being between him and Washington. The other problem was logistics Chancellorsville left the Army of Northern Virginia severely wounded. It was a victory however his losses where high. He lost stonewall Jackson who was killed and his second in command was severely wounded and needed time to recover. To make matters worse for him J.E.B . Stuarts Cavalry was resupply ed and would have done major damage to his men. If he tried to take washington he would have lost quickly.

His plan was to move in to pensylvania hoping to draw the Norths reserves down and hoped he could defeat them. The mistake he made was I believe he thought he would get support from pensylvanians he did not.

As far as Gettysburg his plan was smart problem was longstreet made a huge mistake. Instead of getting his troops in position to take advantage of a weakness Lee spotted in their lines he decides to move his troops in to a support role. He attempts to help hold a position they were not going to lose anyway.


Lee's big mistake he made was picketts charge. Long street actually refuses to charge his men up that hill and walks away. Lee was worried if they ended up in a long battle they couldn't hold out. But a charge was stupid and cost them dearly. They tried to fight uphill over open ground with a fully supplied northern army. His fear that his supplies were running out caused him to take a stupid gamble.

Now overall as a general he was very smart and several of his battles are still taught at the army war college. Including the mistake of letting supply problems to force you into a battle you can't win.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Tardacus

Go for washington... just like Longstreet told him...lol


I think you are dead right though.. he had decided to fight that day and got tunnel vision, but how do you get such tunnel vision you break every rule of the military playbook???

maybe tunnel vision or maybe he knew that the confederates couldn`t win a war of attrition.
he knew one thing for sure his army couldn`t stay in Pennsylvania for long because they were short of food,so if they were gonna eat they had to stay, and if they were gonna retreat they weren't gonna eat.

Lee wasn`t stupid, you don`t graduate from west point with no demerits and then become the commandant of west point by being stupid. lee knew exactally what the deal was at Gettysburg both militarily and politically. I don`t feel qualified to sit here 150 years later and try to play Monday morning quarterback, he chose the best option available to try and ensure a confederate war victory.

The south had many genius generals,the Nazi blitzkrieg was based on the tactics created and developed by Nathan Bedford forrest,a confederate cavalry officer. the military tactics that we use and take for granted today were created by those guys back then,they were smart people, we are just riding their coattails today with helicopters, tanks and jets.

a reply to: misterhistory I'd be curious what book you've read. Most recent scholarship (post-Lost Cause influenced authors) has raised Longstreet's stature. Also, Lee must have seen something as he made sure Longstreet's promotion to Lt. General was dated a day before Jackson's.