"Stonewall Jackson & "our blood, his guts" Patton" Topic
8 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the General Historical Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Current Poll
|
Korvessa | 31 Jul 2021 2:50 p.m. PST |
I just came across this quote today on old TJ – thought occurred it could just as easily be about Patton – and who knows how many other generals. "I must admit that it is much pleasanter to read about Stonewall & his exploits than to serve under him & perform those exploits." Andrew Wardlaw of the 14th South Carolina in a letter to his wife; October 5, 1862 |
Stryderg | 31 Jul 2021 3:08 p.m. PST |
That is the nature of military/adventurous exploits: long stretches of boredom with sudden spurts of "Oh no, we're all gonna die!" |
robert piepenbrink | 31 Jul 2021 3:28 p.m. PST |
Certainly true. Also true that successful commanders frequently demand more of their men. You won't find Joe Johnson or George McClellan ordering long forced marches or making "put in all the reserves" assaults. I read recently that Patton went to France with an extra colonel for each division, on the assumption that a certain percentage of his regimental commanders weren't going to measure up and they should be replaced immediately. That's not pleasant--but it wins wars. |
Ed Mohrmann | 31 Jul 2021 4:21 p.m. PST |
I don't know because have not analyzed casualty figures but it is logical to suppose that the rapid advance style of such as Patton might produce fewer casualties than the more stolid pace of other types of commanders. It just seems to me that the less time spent in contact/combat the fewer casualties. Could be exceptions of course. Of course 'timid' commanders miss opportunities, Anzio for example. |
Dn Jackson | 31 Jul 2021 4:49 p.m. PST |
By October of '62 Jackson's command did a lot of marching and a LOT of combat. So I understand the sentiment. He demanded a lot of his men, and more from their officers. He once berated an officer who marched his command too long. His policy was 50 minutes marching and then 10 minutes rest. when the officer kept going through the rest period he publicly chewed him out. Very smart move as the men knew he was looking out for them and they knew that no matter how hard they were marching they would get a break soon. |
enfant perdus | 31 Jul 2021 7:18 p.m. PST |
It just seems to me that the less time spent in contact/combat the fewer casualties. One could make the argument that until relatively recently, less time in contact meant more time in camp, which meant more time to succumb to disease. Being cautious with the lives of one's troops is commendable until it interferes with a willingness to prosecute the war and bring it to a swifter end. |
Raynman | 31 Jul 2021 8:59 p.m. PST |
Also, by constantly pushing and fighting the enemy, it gives them less time to dig in and fortify a position. |
Ed Mohrmann | 31 Jul 2021 9:59 p.m. PST |
"less time spent in contact/combat" meant you are pushing the enemy and using constant movement to prevent him preparing fortified positions. Compare casualty rates in Normandy from D-Day to the Cobra breakout with the rate from Cobra to the Westwall. |
|