I had at least two grandfathers that fought in the Civil War from the same family. A father fought for the Confederacy while his sons for the Union. It must have been wild. General Lee was a 3rd cousin, Sherman oddly an 11th Cousin. Don't know much about Sherman but yes he seemed to be a more brutal military force & therefore "superior"leader.
I had at least two grandfathers that fought in the Civil War from the same family. A father fought for the Confederacy while his sons for the Union. It must have been wild. General Lee was a 3rd cousin, Sherman oddly an 11th Cousin. Don't know much about Sherman but yes he seemed to be a more brutal military force & therefore "superior"leader.
"Brutal" is the operative word; I remember I was visiting a girlfriend in Virginia, and her grandmother got one look at me, and asked if I were a "yankee" - she kept referring thereafter to the "war of northern aggression" in my hearing. Only later did I realize she meant the Civil War. I had a lot of learnin' to do . Truly.
I was born in Berkeley, CA and have had a great deal to learn after moving to Nashville. Have wandered the battle fields of Franklin with twin 7 year old grandsons and answered their interminable questions.
Off-topic, but anyone with an interest in the American Civil War should go to the Antietam battlefield. The guides are excellent and it is easy to visualize that battle where more American soldiers were killed in one day than in any other.
Far be it from me to argue with my Internet friends; but, without resorting to posting a definition of the word "superior", I challenge anyone who thinks that Sherman (or even Grant) was a leader superior to Robert E. Lee. While Sherman has gone down in history primarily for his brutality and inhumane treatment of his enemies (He famously starved the native Americans into submission by ordering the destruction of the buffalo herds they depended on for their survival) and for his destruction of their way of life, Lee was beloved by his troops and, with the exception of Gettysburg, was a master of strategy.
Omar Bradley was a great general and so was Patton. Who was "superior"? In a popularity contest, Bradley would win, hands down. On the battlefield? Patton.
William Tecumseh Sherman was no less a monster than Genghis Khan or Mohammed.
Yes, we have much of both brutality and compassion in our collective inheritance. Robert E Lee always seemed like a compassionae type within the context of his times but yes, William Sherman certainly had his epically brutal side. War breeds such monsters - so, apparently, does the Corporatocracy. Live for peace, die for peace.
I had at least two grandfathers that fought in the Civil War from the same family. A father fought for the Confederacy while his sons for the Union. It must have been wild. General Lee was a 3rd cousin, Sherman oddly an 11th Cousin. Don't know much about Sherman but yes he seemed to be a more brutal military force & therefore "superior"leader.
"Brutal" is the operative word; I remember I was visiting a girlfriend in Virginia, and her grandmother got one look at me, and asked if I were a "yankee" - she kept referring thereafter to the "war of northern aggression" in my hearing. Only later did I realize she meant the Civil War. I had a lot of learnin' to do . Truly.
I was born in Berkeley, CA and have had a great deal to learn after moving to Nashville. Have wandered the battle fields of Franklin with twin 7 year old grandsons and answered their interminable questions.
Off-topic, but anyone with an interest in the American Civil War should go to the Antietam battlefield. The guides are excellent and it is easy to visualize that battle where more American soldiers were killed in one day than in any other.
Far be it from me to argue with my Internet friends; but, without resorting to posting a definition of the word "superior", I challenge anyone who thinks that Sherman (or even Grant) was a leader superior to Robert E. Lee. While Sherman has gone down in history primarily for his brutality and inhumane treatment of his enemies (He famously starved the native Americans into submission by ordering the destruction of the buffalo herds they depended on for their survival) and for his destruction of their way of life, Lee was beloved by his troops and, with the exception of Gettysburg, was a master of strategy.
Omar Bradley was a great general and so was Patton. Who was "superior"? In a popularity contest, Bradley would win, hands down. On the battlefield? Patton.
William Tecumseh Sherman was no less a monster than Genghis Khan or Mohammed.
Yes, we have much of both brutality and compassion in our collective inheritance. Robert E Lee always seemed like a compassionae type within the context of his times but yes, William Sherman certainly had his epically brutal side. War breeds such monsters - so, apparently, does the Corporatocracy. Live for peace, die for peace.