Best Leaders in History and a partial why if can

[diefree666]

Lee's spirit was "attack". Even at Antietam where he was greatly outnumbered, he was looking to put together enough units to attack.

He had a terrific defensive position at Fredericksburg which calmed his desire to lay into the AOP.

The challenge at Gettysburg is that the Union army was more apt to "dig in" than the AONV. Plus the Confederates felt very good about their situation after July 1st and I just can't see them (Lee) suddenly giving up their aggressive tendencies. On top of that their position at Gettysburg, Seminary Ridge wasn't nearly as good a defensive position as what Meade had.

Longstreet's desire to go left and try to intercede between the AOP and Washington DC is interesting to talk about but moving an entire army with supplies and wounded on that kind of journey in territory he wasn't 100% familiar with would have been interesting.

The Union did have units strung out south between Gettysburg and Frederick who would have alerted the AOP braintrust of such a move if Meade & Co. did not notice it from the get go.

Longstreets reasoning was this:

By moving to intercede between the AOP and DC that would panic the politicians in DC and Meade would be ordered to attack immediately. Considering the interference from both Halleck and Stanton to that point he was almost certainly correct.

Longstreet would have dug in and let them attack. Basically a Gettysburg in reverse. Cripple the AOP and then march towards Washington. While there were some units there was nothing substantial between there and DC. The Garrison forces of Washington were fairly substantial but none of them had ever heard a shot fired in anger. Forts were strong but they were not continuous.

Frankly considering the disaster that was Gettysburg for the South this would have been the better option.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Longstreets reasoning was this:

By moving to intercede between the AOP and DC that would panic the politicians in DC and Meade would be ordered to attack immediately. Considering the interference from both Halleck and Stanton to that point he was almost certainly correct.

Longstreet would have dug in and let them attack. Basically a Gettysburg in reverse. Cripple the AOP and then march towards Washington. While there were some units there was nothing substantial between there and DC. The Garrison forces of Washington were fairly substantial but none of them had ever heard a shot fired in anger. Forts were strong but they were not continuous.

Frankly considering the disaster that was Gettysburg for the South this would have been the better option.

Oh I very much understand Longstreet's plan.

I just think it was much easier to say than to pull off successfully.

And really what made Gettysburg a disaster was July 3rd. Up until that point the southerners more than held their own.

Yeah, Pickett's charge was a cluster.

 

[diefree666]

Oh I very much understand Longstreet's plan.

I just think it was much easier to say than to pull off successfully.

And really what made Gettysburg a disaster was July 3rd. Up until that point the southerners more than held their own.

Yeah, Pickett's charge was a cluster.

Not quite correct. The second day was very costly to the ANV not just in manpower but leadership.

Frankly you are making the move much more difficult then it would have been- IF on the second day Lee had done it. Meade had just arrive very late at night on day one; and was still trying to get things organized. The ANV had people familiar with the area if not on the degree Lee would have liked; there were good maps available. This was not the far side of the moon. Now with Stuart out wandering Lee was indeed without his usual data and of course this time he was north not in Virginia. He had been spoiled fighting on territory he knew very well.

The problem with Lee was that he was naturally aggressive and combined with his contempt for the AOP and its leadership (pretty well earned it must be said) he really did not take them anywhere near as seriously as he should have. He also forgot that THIS battle was truly on Northern soil and that THAT might make a fair difference in this battle.

He refused to believe that in THIS battle so far the AOP was actually taking fewer casualties and it was not even close. Both Day one and Day two the ratio was over 2-1 in the AOP favor and that had NOT happened before. So by Day 3 he thought the AOP was about fought out- instead it was very much more intact then his own was. And it had started out with over 15,000 man advantage anyway. So he did believe the center had to be lightly held because of the length of the Union lines. Instead it was very heavily held and under the command of the best Corps commander the AOP had in Hancock.

I have stood where the Attack began and looked out over the field; and I marvel at the courage that Pickets and Tremble's and Pettigrew's divisions had in making that charge. Over one mile of very clear land right into a well held position with heavy artillery support. The Film Gettysburg did a very good job of showing that.

How such a brilliant General such as Lee could not see how costly that charge would be is one of the questions unanswered in history. Longstreet and several others saw it very clearly.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Not quite correct. The second day was very costly to the ANV not just in manpower but leadership.

Frankly you are making the move much more difficult then it would have been- IF on the second day Lee had done it. Meade had just arrive very late at night on day one; and was still trying to get things organized. The ANV had people familiar with the area if not on the degree Lee would have liked; there were good maps available. This was not the far side of the moon. Now with Stuart out wandering Lee was indeed without his usual data and of course this time he was north not in Virginia. He had been spoiled fighting on territory he knew very well.

The problem with Lee was that he was naturally aggressive and combined with his contempt for the AOP and its leadership (pretty well earned it must be said) he really did not take them anywhere near as seriously as he should have. He also forgot that THIS battle was truly on Northern soil and that THAT might make a fair difference in this battle.

He refused to believe that in THIS battle so far the AOP was actually taking fewer casualties and it was not even close. Both Day one and Day two the ratio was over 2-1 in the AOP favor and that had NOT happened before. So by Day 3 he thought the AOP was about fought out- instead it was very much more intact then his own was. And it had started out with over 15,000 man advantage anyway. So he did believe the center had to be lightly held because of the length of the Union lines. Instead it was very heavily held and under the command of the best Corps commander the AOP had in Hancock.

I have stood where the Attack began and looked out over the field; and I marvel at the courage that Pickets and Tremble's and Pettigrew's divisions had in making that charge. Over one mile of very clear land right into a well held position with heavy artillery support. The Film Gettysburg did a very good job of showing that.

How such a brilliant General such as Lee could not see how costly that charge would be is one of the questions unanswered in history. Longstreet and several others saw it very clearly.

Yeah Lee would have had the history in mind of what happened at Malvern Hill and how the Federals suffered at Fredericksburg.

I think he was simply overconfident in what his men could accomplish.

An unfortunate mistake.

Not saying a move beyond the confederate right the morning of July 2nd was certainly possible. I'm just unsure how successful it would have ultimately have been... Given Buford cavalry division had vedettes in the area of the Peach Orchard towards Seminary Ridge. On top of that there were two III Corps brigades marching up the Emmitsburg Pike towards Gettysburg at the crack of dawn.

For Lee to avoid that we would have had to go back towards Fairfield and then south to get around the Union army, which would have taken a chunk of time.

Again not impossible but pretty darned difficult to pull off IMO without A. Being noticed and B. The army left at Gettysburg being left on an "island".

The rebs were very close to punching through the Union line between Little Round Top and the southern end of Cemetery Ridge... Very close... prior to the arrival of the VI Corps and various units of the XII Corps.

McLaws & Hood's 8 brigades demolished nearly twice that many Union brigades... They had a remarkable afternoon on July 2nd. Not having Pickett's division available on the afternoon of July 2nd was a big loss for Lee & Longstreet.

 

[diefree666]

Yeah Lee would have had the history in mind of what happened at Malvern Hill and how the Federals suffered at Fredericksburg.

I think he was simply overconfident in what his men could accomplish.

An unfortunate mistake.

Not saying a move beyond the confederate right the morning of July 2nd was certainly possible. I'm just unsure how successful it would have ultimately have been... Given Buford cavalry division had vedettes in the area of the Peach Orchard towards Seminary Ridge. On top of that there were two III Corps brigades marching up the Emmitsburg Pike towards Gettysburg at the crack of dawn.

For Lee to avoid that we would have had to go back towards Fairfield and then south to get around the Union army, which would have taken a chunk of time.

Again not impossible but pretty darned difficult to pull off IMO without A. Being noticed and B. The army left at Gettysburg being left on an "island".

The rebs were very close to punching through the Union line between Little Round Top and the southern end of Cemetery Ridge... Very close... prior to the arrival of the VI Corps and various units of the XII Corps.

McLaws & Hood's 8 brigades demolished nearly twice that many Union brigades... They had a remarkable afternoon on July 2nd. Not having Pickett's division available on the afternoon of July 2nd was a big loss for Lee & Longstreet.

It LOOKS that way but in effect McLaws and Hood's divisions were wrecked. The Union lost less than half overall the confederate losses when the final tally's came in when you count what happened around Little Round Top and Big Round Top.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

It LOOKS that way but in effect McLaws and Hood's divisions were wrecked. The Union lost less than half overall the confederate losses when the final tally's came in when you count what happened around Little Round Top and Big Round Top.

Oh I agree. McLaw's & Hood's guys were toast.

That's why not having that reserve line of Pickett proved deadly.

 

[diefree666]

Oh I agree. McLaw's & Hood's guys were toast.

That's why not having that reserve line of Pickett proved deadly.

Would not have made any difference - with the way the Union lines were -reinforcements were available and able to get into position quickly. The only difference would have been Picket's division would have been destroyed one day earlier. There would not have been time for him to attack anyway.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Would not have made any difference - with the way the Union lines were -reinforcements were available and able to get into position quickly. The only difference would have been Picket's division would have been destroyed one day earlier. There would not have been time for him to attack anyway.

There was a narrow band of time when the Union reserves were pretty scant between the end of the Union II Corps and the 5th & 6th Corps units around Little Round Top. That was an opening the confederates could have taken advantage of the situation if there was a division-sized unit sitting behind left of McLaw's division (Barksdale) and the right of Anderson's division (Wilcox).

But alas Pickett's division wasn't on the field and the lack of meaningful reserves zeroed out the opportunity.

That's war for you. Opportunities came & went quite often. Once in a while like the confederate attack at Chickamauga the timing worked out splendidly– With Wood's division being incorrectly shifted out of position and leaving a big hole in the Union line just as the southern attack started. But most other times opportunities quickly vanished.

 

[LocimusPrime]

Ghenghis is my vote for #1







Yoda is #2

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Ghenghis is my vote for #1







Yoda is #2

Yeah Genghis uniting the tribes of the Eurasian steppes and creating a empire that stretched from Northern China to west of the ural mountains was impressive.

I would probably go with Qin Shi Huang who came up with the feudal system that ruled China for nearly 2000 years.

 

[diefree666]

There was a narrow band of time when the Union reserves were pretty scant between the end of the Union II Corps and the 5th & 6th Corps units around Little Round Top. That was an opening the confederates could have taken advantage of the situation if there was a division-sized unit sitting behind left of McLaw's division (Barksdale) and the right of Anderson's division (Wilcox).

But alas Pickett's division wasn't on the field and the lack of meaningful reserves zeroed out the opportunity.

That's war for you. Opportunities came & went quite often. Once in a while like the confederate attack at Chickamauga the timing worked out splendidly– With Wood's division being incorrectly shifted out of position and leaving a big hole in the Union line just as the southern attack started. But most other times opportunities quickly vanished.

problem was that the area vulnerable to be attacked was narrow; and trying to get a fresh division through that mess would have been slow; allowing the Union forces to gather.

 

[Melonfeud]

Yeah Genghis uniting the tribes of the Eurasian steppes and creating a empire that stretched from Northern China to west of the ural mountains was impressive.

I would probably go with Qin Shi Huang who came up with the feudal system that ruled China for nearly 2000 years.

"Let's hear it for the FEUDAL SYSTEM",,,



that's not leadership,fuzzy!
It's thuggish iron fisted structured rule.
compiled of junior thuggish iron fisted rulers pledged to answer to the big figg of the tree.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

"Let's hear it for the FEUDAL SYSTEM",,,



that's not leadership,fuzzy!
It's thuggish iron fisted structured rule.
compiled of junior thuggish iron fisted rulers pledged to answer to the big figg of the tree.

Of course no one wants to live in a feudal society now but Qin was in 220 BC. Europe didn't get there until 1600 years later. The system was the best system in the world up until the renaissance. Amazing stability along with science and art that lasted well over a millenia. That is profound IMO.

Compared to the slave mongering anarchy that was going on in Europe and the rest of the world it was a veritable Utopia. I much prefer Pericles' Athens but he was weak and allowed factions to kill each other indiscriminately. His didn't even last his lifetime.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

problem was that the area vulnerable to be attacked was narrow; and trying to get a fresh division through that mess would have been slow; allowing the Union forces to gather.

I would suggest the fine book, "Gettysburg Day 2– A Study in Maps" and you'll what I've been referring to.

 

[Melonfeud]

Of course no one wants to live in a feudal society now but Qin was in 220 BC. Europe didn't get there until 1600 years later. The system was the best system in the world up until the renaissance. Amazing stability along with science and art that lasted well over a millenia. That is profound IMO.

Compared to the slave mongering anarchy that was going on in Europe and the rest of the world it was a veritable Utopia. I much prefer Pericles' Athens but he was weak and allowed factions to kill each other indiscriminately. His didn't even last his lifetime.

I'd just watched a PBS program early this morning where they had reconstructed a Chinese chariot & ran it thru its Pace's as compared to Egyptian, Greek designs,,,first they noticed was the wheels were about 3 times the size over anything they'd previously came across & of 28 spoked configuration
( Egyptian's were 6 spoke)
It's puzzling to me as to just when&where ancient China's cutting edge or leap ahead technology more or less petered out,Im thinking the poppey had a lot to do with it,myself.
Also, that engineering feat of the "great wall" that was constructed is a bit of a head scratcher as it's 3 times the height and thickness required in protecting it's self from northern horde's from the steppe's in my opinion, there's just overwhelming evidence by virtue of massive megalithic stone construction worldwide that cannot be satisfactorily explained.

 

[diefree666]

I would suggest the fine book, "Gettysburg Day 2– A Study in Maps" and you'll what I've been referring to.

I have actually WALKED through that area; so from that experience extrapolating the fact that two divisions on each side would have left a lot of bodies and debris in that area that would have slowed down quite a bit a third division trying to get through

 

[diefree666]

Of course no one wants to live in a feudal society now but Qin was in 220 BC. Europe didn't get there until 1600 years later. The system was the best system in the world up until the renaissance. Amazing stability along with science and art that lasted well over a millenia. That is profound IMO.

Compared to the slave mongering anarchy that was going on in Europe and the rest of the world it was a veritable Utopia. I much prefer Pericles' Athens but he was weak and allowed factions to kill each other indiscriminately. His didn't even last his lifetime.

considering the standard state of the Chinese peasant at that time maybe you want to think about all the slobbering you are doing there

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I have actually WALKED through that area; so from that experience extrapolating the fact that two divisions on each side would have left a lot of bodies and debris in that area that would have slowed down quite a bit a third division trying to get through

I have too.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

considering the standard state of the Chinese peasant at that time maybe you want to think about all the slobbering you are doing there

Nice assertion. Tell me about the "standard state of a Chinese peasant" as opposed to say a slave in Gaul or a tribesman around the Caspian sea.

The takeaway here is that life sucked 2200 years ago.

 

[diefree666]

Nice assertion. Tell me about the "standard state of a Chinese peasant" as opposed to say a slave in Gaul or a tribesman around the Caspian sea.

The takeaway here is that life sucked 2200 years ago.

so your contention it was better for them then anyone in Europe is thus without basis