who thinks that general lee was overated as a commander?

Question

i think that he was not so good, but that his rival's on the northern side especially McClellan,were so bad. The south lost the war when jackson was killed. what do you think.

Answer 1

Lee's victories against superior forces won him enduring fame as a crafty and daring battlefield tactician, but his strategic decisions, such as invading the North in 1862 and 1863 and overlooking the Mississippi Valley, have generally been criticized by military historians.

In the final months of the Civil War, as manpower reserves drained away, Lee adopted a plan to arm slaves to fight on behalf of the Confederacy, but this came too late to change the outcome of the war. After Appomattox, Lee discouraged Southern dissenters from starting a guerrilla campaign to continue the war, and encouraged reconciliation between the North and South.

Answer 2

What do I think? I think Robert E. Lee was an excellent commander. Over-rated? Yes. There is a whole myth surrounding him and the "could have" and "would have" ideas that still surface today. Certainly, George B. McClellan was great organizer, but a poor fighter. I do not agree that "the South lost the war when (General Thomas J.) Jackson was shot and killed (by his own soldiers). The South lost the war when it failed to gain any diplomatic recognition, when it lost New Orleans and suffered setbacks in the Western Theater, and when it was repulsed at Antietam and Gettysburg.

Answer 3

Great question! Lee's opponents, until Grant and Sherman, were absolutely the worst the Union could supply. The war should have been over in 1862 with Richmond in Union hands and the Confederate Army in retreat into the Deep South.

However, one must not underestimate the charismatic personality of Lee. He was able to get the best from his men at all times, even at the debacle at Gettysburg.

He had competent, able subordinates: Jackson, Longstreet, Pettigrew, Rodes, Jeb Stuart many of whom died during the war.

He was a great man and a fine leader.

Answer 4

Well he was bested by Grant. McClennan was good, but as Lincoln put it, "He had a case of the slows." McClellan wouldn't chase after the rebs ran. Grant did and Lee couldn't fight against that. That plus he knew that Sherman would be coming up from the South to beat his head in.

The only great generals from the Civil War were Grant and Sherman. Two "crazy drunks" that knew how to kick ***. (Some said Sherman and crazy and Grant was a drunk, to which Lincoln said, "Find out what brand he drinks and send a case to all the generals...I can't spare this man, he fights.")

Answer 5

I don’t agree. I think that Lee was by far one of the best at strategy in the military (both north and south) at the time. His contemporaries feared his prowess on the field of battle and he had what you and I might call Devine inspiration. I don’t doubt there were better generals in specific areas (infantry, cavalry, etc) but he was by far the best overall commander in the war.

Winston Churchill called him “one of the noblest Americans who ever lived” - He inspired an out-manned, out-gunned army to achieve greatness on the battlefield. He was a brilliant strategist and a man of unyielding courage who, in the face of insurmountable odds, nearly changed forever the course of history.

I'll give you a star for the question though

"When the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is not our friend."
- U.S. Army training notice

Answer 6

NO. I don't.

Lee was the considered so highly, Lincoln offered him the Army of the Potomic. His loyality to Virgina led him to turn it down. Consider he had to build a Army from scratch with few resources & poor Civilian leadership. He had his faults and bad days. But "overated" is not a term I would use.

Answer 7

Sherman was the man, I am currently reading his memoirs!

Answer 8

i for one