29 June 2009

So Which Is It? (Part 2)

Kevin Levin recently took one of my comments regarding Ulysses S. Grant out of context. I thought it appropriate to respond here, rather than KL's blog - for a number of reasons.

Here's my comment which Kevin writes about:

“If Grant had a drinking problem, the answer to your question could be that he was willing to sacrifice thousands of more men due to the fact his judgment was impaired by alcohol.”

As I further clarified (and which Kevin left out):

My comment was a rhetorical response to James's rhetorical question:

"What does it say about Confederate military prowess that they were beaten by a drunk?"

I think there are many who would label someone who drinks themselves unconscious a drunkard.

Again, as I said in my original post, perhaps one prefers degrees of the label.

However, Kevin did get one thing right:

As the argument goes Lee fought a traditional war of virtuous generals and civilized tactics while Grant and Sherman ushered in a new era of warfare that anticipated the blood baths of the twentieith century.

No comments: