Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Napoleon Bonaparte vs. Ulysses S. Grant ***Final Round!***

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Mabel I: Thanks for the advice grognard.

    Comment


    • #92
      I do not believe Nappy could have understood or countered Grants type of war for the same reason Lee and others Southern Generals were in the end doomed. Most of the Civil War Generals were waging Napoleonic type warfare believing in the grand confrontation of armies with vicotory won on the field of honor. Grant and his western generals understood warfare and the destruction of the enemies economic basis of waging war. It was the offensive equivalent of the Russia scorch earth policy the was Nappy's undoing in Russia. Grant had one mission, the total destruction of the economy of the South that made war possible. The South really never had the resources to counter this and in the end neither would Nappy.

      In the end, cross era comparisons are impossible. Warfare breaks into at least three eras: Muscle power, steam power(railroads and steamships) and petroleum powe (airplances, tanks, trucks) there really is no basis to compare the quality of generalship between these eras and the skills and frame of thinking required are radically different.
      Boston Strong!

      Comment


      • #93
        Mabel I:From JSMoss:In the end, cross era comparisons are impossible. Warfare breaks into at least three eras: Muscle power, steam power(railroads and steamships) and petroleum powe (airplances, tanks, trucks) there really is no basis to compare the quality of generalship between these eras and the skills and frame of thinking required are radically different
        That is true.The purpose of Grant was to defeat the south,but the purpose
        of Napoleon was his desire to be king of the world.The motivation of each
        was different.Napoleons motives were selfish while Grants motivation
        was justice.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Mabel View Post
          Mabel I:From JSMoss:In the end, cross era comparisons are impossible. Warfare breaks into at least three eras: Muscle power, steam power(railroads and steamships) and petroleum powe (airplances, tanks, trucks) there really is no basis to compare the quality of generalship between these eras and the skills and frame of thinking required are radically different
          That is true.The purpose of Grant was to defeat the south,but the purpose
          of Napoleon was his desire to be king of the world.The motivation of each
          was different.Napoleons motives were selfish while Grants motivation
          was justice.
          We can make some comparisons, did the general try to manuver rather than launch head-on attacks?(All three under discussion did, but not always successfully) How well did he\she utilize the available resources and intelligence systems?(Steam, POL or unpaved roads, etc.) Did the general come up with new ways of doing things? Did he\she get the best out of subordinates? (That was one area where Lee excelled)

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Mabel View Post
            Mabel I: Thanks for the advice grognard.
            You're welcome

            Comment


            • #96
              Mabel I:From grognard:We can make some comparisons, did the general try to manuver rather than launch head-on attacks?(All three under discussion did, but not always successfully) How well did he\she utilize the available resources and intelligence systems?(Steam, POL or unpaved roads, etc.) Did the general come up with new ways of doing things? Did he\she get the best out of subordinates? (That was one area where Lee excelled)
              True ,but like JSMoss said you can never get a compete coparison unless
              they are from the same time.the main reasons are because 1-weapons
              2-mobility 3-technolgy. If Grant and Napoleon lived during the same time
              then you could have a real comparison.
              Last edited by Mabel; 03 Mar 11, 18:13.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Mabel View Post
                Mabel I:From grognard:We can make some comparisons, did the general try to manuver rather than launch head-on attacks?(All three under discussion did, but not always successfully) How well did he\she utilize the available resources and intelligence systems?(Steam, POL or unpaved roads, etc.) Did the general come up with new ways of doing things? Did he\she get the best out of subordinates? (That was one area where Lee excelled)
                True ,but like JSMoss said you can never get a compete coparison unless
                they are from the same time.the main reasons are because 1-weapons
                2-mobility 3-technolgy. If Grant and Napoleon lived during the same time
                then you could have a real comparison.
                The whole idea of the original poll was to evaluate so a decent comparison could be made, and that's what many of us did.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by grognard View Post
                  The whole idea of the original poll was to evaluate so a decent comparison could be made, and that's what many of us did.
                  Mabel I:If I had been in this forum by 2008 I would
                  have done the same thing.But since I was not I am mearly saying/agreeing
                  with JSMoss that since they were from different times it is not as easy
                  to compare them as it would be to compare Grant to Lee(or anyone of Grants time).
                  Last edited by Mabel; 04 Mar 11, 12:44.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Mabel View Post
                    Mabel I:If I had been in this forum by 2008 I would
                    have done the same thing.But since I was not I am mearly saying/agreeing
                    with JSMoss that since they were from different times it is not as easy
                    to compare them as it would be to compare Grant to Lee(or anyone of Grants time).
                    But even comparing contemporaries falls into the same category if they are from totally different military traditions. For instance, Americans, Germans, the British, Japanese and French had different doctrines, training, organizational set-ups, etc. during WWII--so unless someone is comparing 2 generals from the same army, no comparison is 100%.

                    Comment


                    • Mabel I:From grognard:But even comparing contemporaries falls into the same category if they are from totally different military traditions. For instance, Americans, Germans, the British, Japanese and French had different doctrines, training, organizational set-ups, etc. during WWII--so unless someone is comparing 2 generals from the same army, no comparison is 100%. That is correct.It would be extreemly exceptional to find 2 generals
                      of the same caliber as Napoleon living at the same time and army.
                      Last edited by Mabel; 05 Mar 11, 08:21.

                      Comment

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X