RE: They Risk Upsetting The Bulk of Their Customer Base
June 23, 2015 at 2:43 pm
(This post was last modified: June 23, 2015 at 2:44 pm by Nope.)
(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?
