Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


View Poll Results: Who was the greatest general in American military history?
George Washington 13 22.03%
Nathaniel Greene 3 5.08%
Winfield Scott 13 22.03%
Zachary Taylor 1 1.69%
Ulysses S. Grant 22 37.29%
Robert E. Lee 16 27.12%
William T. Sherman 3 5.08%
John J. Pershing 2 3.39%
Douglas MacArthur 5 8.47%
George C. Marshall 10 16.95%
Dwight D. Eisenhower 13 22.03%
Omar Bradley 4 6.78%
George S. Patton 4 6.78%
Matthew Ridgway 6 10.17%
Other 3 5.08%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:37 AM   #121

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,638
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon View Post
I demonstrated that European battles have been more decisive, troops better trained and committed, casualties higher and some battles have even decided something: whole armies were forced to surrender or ceased to be a fighting force. There were always elites of fanatics willing to fight until enormous casualties: even half and more and able to stop a vastly superior forces while defending a position or forcing a breakthrough at a key time and place.
You have presented literally no sources to any of those claims, whereas I linked the actual casualties of Civil War battles in response to your flagrant BS about, let us quote..

Quote:
Useless skirmishes of few hundreds to few thousands who were unable to hold a line for longer than a time to eat a breakfast with max few hundreds casualties insult a holy word battle.


So, here's where you put up. Sources. Now.
Viperlord is offline  
Remove Ads
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:40 AM   #122

Sam-Nary's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: At present SD, USA
Posts: 6,101

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkenny View Post
Interesting you should bring Wiki into this because I happen to know that a South African is furiously making changes to every Wiki article that mentions Monty in order to peddle his crazy anti-Monty conspiracy views. His name is Wdford and you can find him on Monty's page, The Battle For Caen and several others. He has been blocked several times but keeps plugging away until he wears everyone down and makes his silly version of Monty the Wiki version. That is why Wiki will always be worthless as an authorative source.


From the Monty page you link and from the 'Talk' section:

Please help. I am working on building up the article for Battle for Caen, which was obviously part of Overlord. I started on the controversy about the fact that Montgomery failed to achieve some D-Day objectives, specifically capturing Caen, and then pretended that everything went according to his “real” original plan after all. Another editor is fiercely defending Montgomery, ruling that actual correspondence from Eisenhower and other commanders of the time are “primary sources” that must take second place to the secondary sources, even though the actual correspondence from Eisenhower and other commanders are presented in secondary sources, and that all the secondary sources which criticize Montgomery were written by people who simply failed to understand Monty’s genius plans, and who were part of a 1970’s conspiracy. It’s getting to be a bit of an alt-truth situation. Please could some other editors who are knowledgeable on the subject, assist on the Battle for Caen article? Wdford (talk) 21:21, 29 May 2017

Clearly his aim is to introduce the outright lies that were a staple of the post-war US books that blamed Monty for every wrong in WW2.
I bet you were unaware of that fact as well. Me? I always like to keep an eye on the Monty-bashing obsessives!

This is the Wiki Talk page for the Battle For Caen. Start at the bottom and work your way up to see how remorseless the troll Wdford is in his obsession to denigrate everything Monty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_for_Caen
I wouldn't say that Wikipedia is perfect. And I would even agree that it is the best source. And in fact, like many secondary sources, I'd even argue that at times there are plenty of times when it can be wrong...

However, neither does that mean that Wikipedia is an instant "wrong source" the instant it is mentioned. And as others have mentioned it is a starting point and one that admittedly, one that one would start with and take with at least a grain of salt.

This guy you mention may have an agenda and may attempt to be using Wikipedia to forward it... but his presence doesn't delegitimize every Wikipedia source. By that sort of measure, you could claim a Wikipedia source built on the top biography of Monty with top praise is ALSO wrong because of its praise of the man.
Sam-Nary is online now  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:42 AM   #123
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
As has already been pointed out, the casualty rate for pretty much all major Civil War engagements was well over 5%...
It was not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...il_War_battles

I was going once over this list, I won't be going again.
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:43 AM   #124

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,638
Blog Entries: 21

In point of fact, of the battle example you did list, Königgrätz, the losing Austrians suffered 18% casualties, of which half were captured. Prussian casualties were far lighter. At the Battle of Stones' River in the American Civil War, for just one example, both sides lost about 30% casualties, with the vast majority of both being wounded.

https://www.nps.gov/abpp/battles/tn010.htm
Viperlord is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:47 AM   #125
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
You have presented literally no sources to any of those claims, whereas I linked the actual casualties of Civil War battles in response to your flagrant BS about, let us quote..



[/I]So, here's where you put up. Sources. Now.
I have no idea who are you to demand something from me. I don't read your support to your claims, I easily rebuffed your list with clear reasoning while you don't want to admit it.

My second statement was regarding your revolution, not a civil war. I know that numbers were bigger in your civil war and also number of people in USA was much bigger (2 millions against 30).
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:47 AM   #126

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,638
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon View Post
It was not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...il_War_battles

I was going once over this list, I won't be going again.
I provided a list of around 50 battles, including virtually all of the war's major engagements, where the casualties were higher than that, and you failed to refute that, so no, try again.
Viperlord is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:51 AM   #127

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,638
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon
I have no idea who are you to demand something from me. I don't read your support to your claims,
Then all you are doing is posting dishonest propaganda and not caring at all whether there's the slightest historical basis for it.
Viperlord is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:53 AM   #128
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
I provided a list of around 50 battles, including virtually all of the war's major engagements, where the casualties were higher than that, and you failed to refute that, so no, try again.
I started with kia, wia and mia over 5% in my first post and later explained why no prisoners.

I refuted you some posts back.
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:55 AM   #129
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
Then all you are doing is posting dishonest propaganda and not caring at all whether there's the slightest historical basis for it.
Please stop. I know when I claim something and have a defense prepared in advance. It is based on numbers, not on a subjective feeling.
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 11:57 AM   #130

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,638
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon View Post
I started with kia, wia and mia over 5% in my first post and later explained why no prisoners.

I refuted you some posts back.
You did no such thing. Your explanation for not counting prisoners was not only indefensible, but hypocritical, because you did not demonstrate that not counting prisoners brings the average casualty rate for ACW battles that low, and further, for one of the only two specific European battles you have mentioned, that same standard actually has a far more drastic lowering effect on the European battle than for any major American Civil War battle. So again, provide your sources.
Viperlord is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
american, general



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Greatest Medieval General? Haardrada Medieval and Byzantine History 71 July 22nd, 2017 09:28 AM
Greatest General in American History? red4tribe American History 352 March 2nd, 2013 02:09 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.