Do People Really Believe Robert E. Lee Wasn't a Great General?

Question

What he was able to do with the resources he was given is nothing short of amazing. If he had played a defensive war and never went on the offensive, the U.S. would probably be split in two right now.

Don't forget Lincoln wanted him to be the lead Northern General.

noname hippie guy: Please read my comments again. Pay particular attension where I stated that "if he HADN'T gone on the offensive"

Answer 1

Lee was one of our greatest Generals.

Answer 2

First off...

Wow there are a lot of idiots here. I really like the "cousin" who did the research and found the man gay. What is it with people labeling everyone gay back then?, ...they even think Lincoln was gay. I can't state the facts of the man's sexual preference but I do know he had children and a wife and was a devoted church goer. If he was gay, which I very much doubt, it wouldn't matter to the question in point.

Also people can't read what you wrote refering to the fact if he "never went on the offensive" meaning that if Gettysburg never happened...and Antietam was a freaking draw...the idiot who said Lee got his butt handed to him needs to brush the books.

Lee organized a new army after an uneasy start, held them together through starvation and short supply, and pushed them against better numbers with good results. He had his downfalls as did every leader back then but Lee held his ground and it took a revolving door of northern Generals before Grant finally got the job to basically just pound Lee into submission.

Lee was a fighting General but nobody lists the fact of changing warfare during the Civil War. North and South were both using dated techniques and the advances of war were long out running tactics. So we are talking about slaughter at the end of guns that could shoot longer ranges, people were put through a meat grinder.

Lee held these men together and gave them a light, it went way beyond the tactics. It was the spirit. Grant just threw his men at Lee until there was nothing left, there was no tactic. Lee had to make everything count.

It just comes down to what people like. People here either like history, hate history, or just hate the South. If you love history you know what Lee was. It does not matter if you are North or South, the fact is Lee was a respected man.

Answer 3

Actually of all the generals in the American Civil War Robert E. Lee was the best general. Unfortunately for him his men were not as well trained, fed, or as well equipped as the Union soldiers. Despite the size difference and the amount of food and materiel he had to work with General Lee did a magnificent job. He knew he would lose the war from the beginning but it was his duty as a Virginian to do his best. Unfortunately for him and the South he lost.He did. Now his home and part of his plantation are called Arlington National Cemetary.

Answer 4

He wasn't the best General in the CSA...he just had great subordinate generals...but his inability to listen to generals that were not from Virgina led to his loss at Gettysburg...he was referred by other generals and soldiers, that were not from Virgina, as "Granny" Lee...this was because too many times he was slow to act on a mistake by the Union...i.e...when General Longstreet recommended that the high ground over the town of Gettysburg be taken the first day, he stated, "...I want to see what those people are going to do..." He always referred to the Union as "Those People" instead of the enemy...and with Lee not taking the high ground the Union took it and thus the battle was lost, even though he threw wave upon wave of soldiers at it...he was a fair General, but I feel his legend far out weights the truth...he just had good Generals under him...

Answer 5

By his achievements he won a high place amongst the great generals of history. - Though hampered by lack of materials and by political necessities, his strategy was daring always, and he never hesitated to take the gravest risks. On the field of battle he was as energetic in attack as he was constant in defense, and his personal influence over the men whom he led was extraordinary. No student of the American Civil War can fail to notice how the influence of Lee dominated the course of the struggle, and his surpassing ability was never more conspicuously shown than in the last hopeless stages of the contest. The personal history of Lee is lost in the history of the great crisis of America's national life; friends and foes alike acknowledged the purity of his motives, the virtues of his private life, his earnest Christianity and the unrepining loyalty with which he accepted the ruin of his party.

Answer 6

Lee was a great general, one of the greatest.

But the strategy of defensive war was bound to fail, as it did when Grant finally went on the offensive with overwhelming force. Even Lee admitted as much.

Answer 7

he was a good general.

but had general mcclellan never been in charge and grant and meade put there earlier the war would have ended three years earlier than it did.

mcclellan was a coward who really didn't want to hurt the army that lee was leading and lee knew it.

when this is borne in mind, lee's accomplishments are slightly less dazzling.

i don't think the south could have ever won though - not ever.

Answer 8

A great General who was once a supporter of the Union until the Federalists waged war on his state. General Lee a slaveholder? both Lee and Stonewall Jackson described slavery a social and moral evil. The war was about the Federalists suppressing the Southern States right to secede from the Union not Slavery as we been made to believe.

Answer 9

he was not only a great general but a very fine man... alot better person that the northern general.

if you read about him. he was against slavery.. while the northern generals wanted and owned slaves.. he also had very high morale standards and if you read about jfk / roosevelt/reagan/ and other presidents they all quote him on many differnt things.

as far as his ablitily to fight the war.. you have to remember the south was out manned and out gunned 3 to 1 and for the most part they came very close to winning the war...

now is that a good or bad thing.... no way to find out..

Answer 10

I'm related to Robert E Lee and have studied him extensively. He was a great leader and general but some other facts are not so well known.

He was a slave holder and believed that slavery was a viable economic path to success for the South.
He was "gay", to the shame of us all.
He had several Black "lovers"; scandalous at the time.
He went with the South because initially they paid him more and gave him more control than the North would (Big fish in a little pond).

I'm very proud of my cousin, dead and gone, but he was merely a man caught up in history.

And j615, he did have homosexual encounters; it's not only a matter of family record but of historical record. I'm not gay and am opposed to the practice. The Lee's were directly related to my mother's great great great grandfather and my family has extensive historical data handed down (as you can imagine) on Lee. History is made up of people that report in the past tense. There are no heroes, only people who perform heroically at times. Homosexuality is a matter of preference not of plumbing; many men get married, have children, go to church and are closet case "gays". Like I said, to the shame of our family, in my answer. Try opening up a little, you'll get a better education.

And Jack; the war was about economics, that's all. The "South" succeeding from the union was ploy that resulted was initiated by Jefferson Davis and his cronies amd ended in the southern militia firing on Fort Sumter, only five days after the "South" declared their cessation from the US.

As I said before, because of the connection with General Lee, my relatives as well as myself have studied the political side much more than the average history book relates.

Answer 11

He was a great military commander. His biggest problem was that the civilian leaders wouldn't give him the tools he needed to get the job done.