McClellan trained that army. For all the fuckery after he at least was able to bring the union up to snuff so a proper commander of men could use it.
Always remember that ken burns documentary reading of Lincoln’s letters. Something like “if I gave him 2 million men he would write me saying the enemy has 3 and he needed 4.”
It’s funny, because there are actually a number of similarities between McClellan and Sherman. Both were logistics-oriented men of impeccable intelligence and military education who were hard to get along with, with a tendency to overestimate their enemies and plan against themselves.
The fundamental differences, however, were enough to make one into a leader of legend, and another to a leader of infamy. Sherman had the boldness, aggression, and most of all, humility necessary to overcome his flaws as a leader; McClellan let his flaws define him and guide his actions, and then sought to blame everyone save himself for the results.
McClellan trained that army. For all the fuckery after he at least was able to bring the union up to snuff so a proper commander of men could use it.
Always remember that ken burns documentary reading of Lincoln’s letters. Something like “if I gave him 2 million men he would write me saying the enemy has 3 and he needed 4.”
Us civil war is fascinating.
It’s funny, because there are actually a number of similarities between McClellan and Sherman. Both were logistics-oriented men of impeccable intelligence and military education who were hard to get along with, with a tendency to overestimate their enemies and plan against themselves.
The fundamental differences, however, were enough to make one into a leader of legend, and another to a leader of infamy. Sherman had the boldness, aggression, and most of all, humility necessary to overcome his flaws as a leader; McClellan let his flaws define him and guide his actions, and then sought to blame everyone save himself for the results.