Quote:here is the instant when it's still not yet two o'clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets

The single dumbest decision of Lee's career.  He should have listened to Longstreet.

Though we're all the better for it, in hindsight, of course. It's almost unbelievable, in the scope of it's incompetence, especially given his prior command. The man was, apparently, brilliant at pursuing a campaign...and absolute shit at closing one. He did that twice, driving the Union to exhaustion (even at Gettysburg, they didn't have the will or the means to pursue)...and then handing them the keys. The second time would be the last time, obvs. Lincold wanted him for Union command......good thing they had to go with the other guys, eh? IDK whether or not the Union could have afforded another leader so adept at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory as Grant was, operationally, and as Lee turned out to be, strategically. The two of them together would most likely have been a shitstorm of failure.

I've read a lot about the civil war and watched a lot of documentaries about it, such as the Ken Burns series from the early 90ies. It's not something our European history departments teach, unless you take special curriculums, which are rare enough.

But given the information I got, I don't quite get the glorification of Lee as a general. There were quite many confederate officers, who were more successful, such as J.E.B. Stuart, who employed a more modern guerilla tactic or Nathan Bedford Forrest.

Lee stymied a superior army for years, handing them defeat where they expected victory -in open battle- on the enemies terms.  That's why.  Both sides were still entrenched in napoleanic nonsense....and yes, guerilla tactics work much better (although the guerillas weren't exactly winning hearts and minds - they were nasty motherfuckers) - but that just wasn't the prevailing paradigm.  Union victory was pretty much ensured at the outset, and it was only through mismanagement that this situation ever changed, or even -seemed- to change.  Lee, again and again, took advantage of that mismanagement though, as mentioned, he was notoriously incapable of closing the deal, of pressing what he -had-.

Nathan Bedford...btw, was a fucking -monster-. That might be why people avoid extolling his military virtues.

(June 23, 2015 at 2:13 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Lee stymied a superior army for years, handing them defeat where they expected victory -in open battle- on the enemies terms.  That's why.  Both sides were still entrenched in napoleanic nonsense....and yes, guerilla tactics work much better (although the guerillas weren't exactly winning hearts and minds - they were nasty motherfuckers) - but that just wasn't the prevailing paradigm.  Union victory was pretty much ensured at the outset, and it was only through mismanagement that this situation ever changed, or even -seemed- to change.  Lee, again and again, took advantage of that mismanagement though, as mentioned, he was notoriously incapable of closing the deal, of pressing what he -had-.

Nathan Bedford...btw, was a fucking -monster-.  That might be why people avoid extolling his military virtues.

Didn't Bedford Forrest also start the KKK?

Not really, no.  He was there at their "official" start, though, as the first man in the funniest of hats.

(June 23, 2015 at 2:13 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Lee stymied a superior army for years, handing them defeat where they expected victory -in open battle- on the enemies terms.  That's why.  Both sides were still entrenched in napoleanic nonsense....and yes, guerilla tactics work much better (although the guerillas weren't exactly winning hearts and minds - they were nasty motherfuckers) - but that just wasn't the prevailing paradigm.  Union victory was pretty much ensured at the outset, and it was only through mismanagement that this situation ever changed, or even -seemed- to change.  Lee, again and again, took advantage of that mismanagement though, as mentioned, he was notoriously incapable of closing the deal, of pressing what he -had-.

I think that Lee was smart enough to realize that he couldn't win, and so instead of playing it conservatively he decided he'd take risks and try to force the issue. So many of the Union generals who faced him probably understood the first part of that equation and therefore wound up doing the opposite of Lee, which played into his strategy.

As for the issue with the "Confederate Flag": whatever its origins or the accuracy of its portrayal, it's become a symbol of slavery, racism and intolerance, unfairly or not. The swastika may be more than 12,000 years old, but today it's a symbol of the Nazi regime and all of the awful things that it did. I don't think that it can be salvaged; I think it's time it was put aside and serve as nothing other than the reminder of a pretty dark period in this countries' history.

(June 23, 2015 at 2:13 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Nathan Bedford...btw, was a fucking -monster-.  That might be why people avoid extolling his military virtues.

But as far as military fame is concerned, being a fucking monster didn't figure very prominently in the equation. If you think about it, Sherman's strategy wasn't guided by humanism either.

(June 23, 2015 at 2:56 pm)Tonus Wrote: I think that Lee was smart enough to realize that he couldn't win, and so instead of playing it conservatively he decided he'd take risks and try to force the issue.  So many of the Union generals who faced him probably understood the first part of that equation and therefore wound up doing the opposite of Lee, which played into his strategy.

Kind of like Yamamoto, who also was convinced that Japan couldn't win the war if he couldn't manage to get the USA to the negotiation table within 6 months.

(June 23, 2015 at 2:56 pm)Tonus Wrote: The swastika may be more than 12,000 years old, but today it's a symbol of the Nazi regime and all of the awful things that it did. I don't think that it can be salvaged; I think it's time it was put aside and serve as nothing other than the reminder of a pretty dark period in this countries' history.

Kind of thought the same. It's funny actually, since in Austria, there are still some preserved priest robes from the Middle Ages and they're over and over covered in swasticas.

(June 23, 2015 at 2:56 pm)Tonus Wrote: As for the issue with the "Confederate Flag": whatever its origins or the accuracy of its portrayal, it's become a symbol of slavery, racism and intolerance, unfairly or not.  The swastika may be more than 12,000 years old, but today it's a symbol of the Nazi regime and all of the awful things that it did.  I don't think that it can be salvaged; I think it's time it was put aside and serve as nothing other than the reminder of a pretty dark period in this countries' history.

Oh, of course....

Lets lay it aside and the bad men of myth can remain badmen for alltime, the badmen of present will remain bad...and we don't have to talk about it anymore. No one is suggesting that we set aside the red white and blue, despite being drenched in blood and oppression the likes of which the virginia battle flag will -never- attain........ Hiding from our past, ignoring it, considering it impolite or "not quite pc enough"....and doing so in the face of the memory of those -american- soldiers just because some dicks took it and ran with it. Like I said, lets take the pillowcases off the shelves while we're at it. That's the better suggestion...I see that now.........

It hasn't "become" anything...we're allowing it, by doing just what you suggest. They should be shamed, and people who see the battle flag of virginia in that way should be shamed as well. Nothing about "those people" is legitimate. We should have been doing this for the past 150 years or so...and now that we've created this situation in which both sides of the coin are buying into a nasty bit of fairy tale history (because it serves both groups equally well, no less) the solution is to what...ignore it, consider it decided? That's how we ended up in this situation in the first place. Meh.

These flags stand, for me, in addition to being the flag under which soldiers died....as monuments to how quickly the promise of our nation can be completely dismissed when it becomes inconvenient. "Secede you say?", says the Union.... "Fuck you." We might want to keep something like that in mind......for the next time we disagree with the federal government, hopefully over something a little less shitty, granted. The darkness involved wasn't -just- slavery, you know.

(nice godwin, btw. 9 points)