Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 12/7/2003 7:17:32 PM EST
Which army, of the Army of the Potomac, Army of the Tennessee (Union and Conf), Army of the Cumberland, and the Army of NoVa, would you consider to be the most poorly led, especially after July 1863, including Gettysburg? Out of these choices, tactics, leadership, politics, and organization, which would you deem most important in destroying the chances of success that said Army had? I'm having a hard time deciding, though I am leaning toward the Army of TEnnessee (CSA), none of the above really seem to stand out in terms of extreme incompetence.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 7:55:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/7/2003 8:02:44 PM EST by FanoftheBlackRifle]
Ask me next week AFTER I get done looking over all my civil war notes for my final. [:D] On the up side, this DOES give me another angle to consider when studying for said test. I think it woulda been a more challenging question to ask about the pre-'63 leadership, since, as a rule, ALL the Union armies were rather poorly lead, with some notable exceptions. But the battles and reorganizations of '63 did a LOT to push the bad generals out, and the good people up into higher leadership positions. Especially true of Union Cavalry, which was dismal at best until late '63 and into '64. Edited to add bit about pre-'63 leadership. Edited (again) to say that to answer the pre-'63 leadership bit, Gen. McClellan (Army of the Potomac) was, IMHO, a paranoid, no-good, incompetent leader. Good at training men, HORRIBLE at actually leading them. Severe confidence problems, always thought he was outnumbered, even when he had evidence (reports, etc) that he was outnumbering them 2:1, never wanted to attack. All bad traits in a combat commander.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 8:42:39 PM EST
very true, all of that in regards to McClellan, but what about [i]post[/i] July 1863 leadership? I too would have chosen McClellan for his ineptness, but things get a little more difficult to argue when you look at the events after July 1863.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 8:55:53 PM EST
Like I said...ask me about post-'63 leadership NEXT week. I've got sooooo much stuff to memorize before thursday night. LOL.
Link Posted: 12/15/2003 6:51:25 AM EST
Burnsides' Army of the James. OK, he did well at the beginning of the war and held Longstreet at bay at Knoxville, but when it came to offensive operations, forget Burnsides. Easily the most incompetent corps commander the Union had was Butler. Great administrator, politician and lawyer, but horrible corps commander. Within the Southern Army, why Branston Bragg of course. Hated by the men, he was protected by Davis too long before Uncle Joe replaced him. Unfortunately for the Army of Tennessee, Uncle Joe was replaced by Hood who proceeded to destroy it.
Top Top