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, 11:59 AM   #131

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

... And as it turns out, of the other European battle macon has mentioned specifically in this thread, Sedan, almost all of the casualties were in fact prisoners.

Battle of Sedan FrancoPrussianWar.com History of the Franco Prussian War

It would appear that excluding prisoners from casualty counts in fact makes the European casualty rates the lower ones, not the American Civil War.
Viperlord is offline  
Remove Ads
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:01 PM   #132
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,393

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
... And as it turns out, of the other European battle macon has mentioned specifically in this thread, Sedan, almost all of the casualties were in fact prisoners.

Battle of Sedan FrancoPrussianWar.com History of the Franco Prussian War
8% of other casualties which is over 5% I believe.
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:05 PM   #133

zincwarrior's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 4,778

Gentlemen, this has nothing to do with the topic. Can we return to it please.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:05 PM   #134

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon View Post
8% of other casualties which is over 5% I believe.
Your argument is entirely turned on its head and that's the best you can do? Incredible. Your claim throughout this (which you have not supported with any data) is that American Civil War battles' proportion of prisoners makes your made-up "real" casualty rate very low. You have not cited anything to support that, and more to the point, as it turns out, the two European battles you have cited, which took place in the same decade, had a FAR higher proportion of the casualties as prisoners, which by your own argument, makes the European armies the ones lacking in spirit, commitment, and training.

I will ask as explicitly as I know how, one more time; provide sources to back your claims about casualties in the ACW.
Viperlord is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:07 PM   #135
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,393

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
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.
Please can't you read? I provided you a wiki list with all battles of ACW. You can count 5% casualties battles if you wish, I was doing it a year or two ago and it was far from 50% for above 5% battles.
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:09 PM   #136

nuclearguy165's Avatar
Snake's Eye
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Ohio, USA
Posts: 3,982

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkenny View Post
The biggest failing with Wiki is that a published source is considered the final word. Given that 70% of all books are written by people who read 10 books on a subject and write no 11 it is a recipe for disaster. At best Wiki points you in the right direction.
Wiki often has several different sources in their articles that don't always agree entirely with each other. This means none of them in particular get a final word and instead means that a balanced diversity of thought is present in them.

I agree though that for true research, Wikipedia should only serve as a starting point before moving onto more in-depth sources.
nuclearguy165 is online now  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:12 PM   #137

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon View Post
Please can't you read? I provided you a wiki list with all battles of ACW. You can count 5% casualties battles if you wish, I was doing it a year or two ago and it was far from 50% for above 5% battles.
Perhaps the reading comprehension problem is on your end, as nobody has said anything about 50%. I provided a list of 54 major Civil War engagements where the casualty rate was above 5%. You have not used your nonsense math to show how those engagements don't count. Please do so. Further, explain how this makes American armies lacking in spirit, committment, etc, when in the two major European contemporary battles you cite, half or more of the casualties involved were prisoners, a rate typically far higher than that seen in Civil War engagements.
Viperlord is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:17 PM   #138

nuclearguy165's Avatar
Snake's Eye
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: Ohio, USA
Posts: 3,982

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
The problem I have with that argument, particularly in regards to Washington, was that he was ultimately a conventional commander with a conventional army, he just didn't win many conventional victories. (Though I entirely reject the notion that Arnold was more important because of his subordinate role at Saratoga)
That is true but his leadership was still indispensable in keeping his army, and with it, the Revolution alive. He didn't need to win many conventional battles to win this kind of war, as it was not an entirely conventional war by contemporary Western standards. What he needed to do was be able to keep his conventional army as a force-in-being. Through both his overall leadership and the successes he did win, he ultimately succeeded in the required goal. I would say that makes a good general.
nuclearguy165 is online now  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:20 PM   #139
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Slovenia
Posts: 2,393

I suppose you were having no basic maths because you repeat same lies over and over.

1.: Mia, kia and wia over 5%.
2.: Majority of such battles, majority is and always was over 50%.

Clear and simple. You write and write about many prisoners while I clearly showed that my two big battles were having over 5% of mia, kia and wia casualties without prisoners. Percentages are not debatable as you want.

I don't care how you include prisoners into your casualty list. I started a thesis and you have nothing to refute it. No prisoners capish?

Yes, militias lack in spirit, commitment, leadership, overall quality and they always were. Yes, pros k!ck militias a$$. Ask Leonidas.
macon is offline  
Old July 28th, 2017, 12:29 PM   #140

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by macon View Post
I suppose you were having no basic maths because you repeat same lies over and over.

1.: Mia, kia and wia over 5%.
2.: Majority of such battles, majority is and always was over 50%.

Clear and simple. You write and write about many prisoners while I clearly showed that my two big battles were having over 5% of mia, kia and wia casualties without prisoners. Percentages are not debatable as you want.

I don't care how you include prisoners into your casualty list. I started a thesis and you have nothing to refute it. No prisoners capish?

Yes, militias lack in spirit, commitment, leadership, overall quality and they always were. Yes, pros k!ck militias a$$. Ask Leonidas.
You still have not shown that major American Civil War battles had a casualty rate of below 5% when you subtract prisoners, so that entire part of your argument remains purely speculative until you demonstrate it. I have asked you multiple times to do so; if you had done so in the past and put it in a post, you could link to that. Further, the claim defies simple logic, as the two battles you cited had a far higher proportion of prisoners to other casualties than most ACW battles, so it's patently ridiculous to suggest that it's the ACW battles that would be affected by application of this arbitrary math method you've made up. Not only is your math meaningless, it's not even factually correct and blatantly hypocritical, as the higher amount and percentage of prisoners taken in your two European battles as opposed to the average ACW battle turns your argument on its head and makes it seem as though the European armies were the ones lacking in the advertised qualities.

Once again. Provide your sources. Demonstrate this supposed math of yours.
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.