"Fort Pillow Controversy Lingers, 150 Years Later" Topic

"In April 1864, Confederate forces overwhelmed the outmanned Union garrison at Tennessee's Fort Pillow. The clash left upwards of 300 Union troops, many of them African Americans, dead. Whether they were killed in battle or massacred in cold blood, however, is still debated 150 years later, and the encounter at Fort Pillow remains one of the most controversial incidents of the Civil War.

On the drizzly morning of April 12, 1864, Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest followed the sound of gunfire and galloped toward Fort Pillow. The garrison high on the bluffs overlooking the Mississippi River 40 miles north of Memphis had been built by the Confederacy at the onset of the Civil War but captured by the Union in 1862. Now, after spending weeks destroying Union supply lines in daring cavalry raids throughout Kentucky and western Tennessee, Forrest's men were attempting to take back the fortification named after Confederate General Gideon Johnson Pillow.

Although he had no formal military training, Forrest, who had been a slave owner and trader before the war, had risen from the rank of private to lieutenant colonel in less than five months after enlisting in 1861. At Fort Donelson, Shiloh, Chickamauga and other battles, the man nicknamed the "Wizard of the Saddle" had proven to be a brilliant cavalry leader and keen tactician. Union General William Tecumseh Sherman called Forrest "the very Devil," while noted Civil War historian Shelby Foote wrote that Forrest and President Abraham Lincoln were the "two authentic geniuses" of the Civil War…"
Full article here.
link

Amicalement
Armand

And here we go …

Yep … like someone just posted a thread about the SS being honorable or something like that … moral equivalencies, who is guilty, etc. … some times there is no clear answer and other times, it's clear … depending on which side of the argument you are on …

Sigh…here we go again….

1: A Congressional Inquiry failed to find Forrest responsible.

2: An inquiry set up by Sherman to find Forrest responsible also couldn't find enough evidence to find him responsible for it.

Nothing else needs be said.

So who was responsible then? Someone lost control. That is an officers responsibility. Not saying it was Forrest just someone in the chain is responsible.

doug

Forrest is the "obvious" culprit/scapegoat because of
A: His Rank
B: His presence in the battle
C: His attitude
D: His former occupation before the war.

As to who was responsible? I don't think we will ever directly know….

link He is responsible because he was in command. it is a lesson that is drummed into every squad leader, team leader, and tank commander in the military. you are responsible for your mens actions. It would be refreshing to see a command rank officer stand up once and take that responsibility.

A commander is responsible for everthing your troops do and fail to do … That's the way I remember it from Benning …

sitting in judgement 150 years later? really?