In the Killer Angels, it is evident that there is a conflict of ideas between Lee and Longstreet. We debated in class as to whether this conflict could be beneficial or dangerous. In my opinion, this conflict is one if not the only reason the Confederacy lost at Gettysburg. As previously stated by almost everyone, Lee is an offensive minded leader whereas Longstreet usually opts for defensive strategies. In the battle of Gettysburg, the Confederacy had already lost a key point in the battlefield: the high ground. Not only did they lose this but they were also outnumbered approximately 94,000 to 72,000. Basically, the Confederates were disadvantaged in almost every way possible. They also had to cross a mile long open field to even be able to attack the Union troops.
In my opinion, the real reason the Confederacy lost at Gettysburg and subsequently the entire war was because of Lee's inability to compromise with his lower officers such as Longstreet. Lee was schooled in Napoleonic war strategies that called for an offensive mindset. His religion also caused him to believe to an extent that his men were expendable and that victory at all costs is the best kind of victory. In terms of this specific battle, Lee believed that he had the upperhand with his experience over the Union commanding officer Meade. He believed that the only way to win this battle would be to attack the Union at its strongest point: Fortified positions on the high ground. As previously stated, the Confederates were already outnumbered by about 22,000 Union troops. Somehow Lee decided that attacking the Union head on with absolutely no cover on a field a mile long, would somehow phase them and cause them to retreat, even with a severe disadvantage in numbers.
I believe that after Day 1 of the battle, after the disastrous amount of casualties the Confederates taken, that Lee should have listened to Longstreet's idea to wheel around behind the Union and close them off from D.C., leaving them completely isolated. If Lee had agreed to this, the Confederates would have isolated the Union and would have cut their supplies off as there was a railroad close to the Union position supplying the Union with an endless amount of ammunition, food, and other supplies. This would have given the Confederacy the advantage as they would also have been able to fortify their positions near the railroads. They would have also been able to basically starve the Union out of their positions on the high ground as they would eventually run out of supplies. Unfortunately Lee never compromised with Longstreet and the Confederacy was basically fated to lose both at Gettysburg and subsequently the entire war.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Lee had a large role in the confederate’s demise, but cannot be entirely blamed for the South's loss in the Civil War. The confederate army looked to Lee as their one and only savior. He was given absolute control and authority over the entire army. The confederates relied too heavily upon Lee's decision making skills as a military general. There was no military assertion of power other than Lee. Longstreet quietly proposed different military tactics, but allowed his plans to easily be dismissed. The confederates gave Lee absolute power and never challenged his authority. They wanted Lee in charge and should be forced to live with the consequences.
Interesting post but I think the "what-ifs" of history are really tough to assume. I think Shanil also brings up a lot of good points. Like he said, Longstreet objects, however, he does not force others to listen. It's very similar to American politics. When one party is in power, the other party can continuously criticize the opposing group in power while not truly suggesting any unique ideas. In this case, Lee is the party in power, and Longstreet is the opposing group. In the end, Longstreet is simply white noise unless he really acts to do what he thinks is right.
Will Acton, I agree. From this novel's earliest chapters it was obvious that Lee and Longstreet's conflicting ideologies would not be able to coexist and that a gloomy end was in store for the Confederates in the near future. Obviously we knew the result of the Battle of Gettysburg before we began reading but despite that, the Confederates fate was pretty predictable. Shaara clearly tries to portray Longstreet as the thoughtful, sensible leader and Lee as an outdated, instinctual leader. As such, they can not work together and their inability to do so is what leads to their eventual demise.
I agree with your reasoning as to why the Confederacy lost at Gettysburg. Lee's ignorance in seeing what everyone was telling him (i.e. Longstreet's defensive mindset) resulted in him ignoring the obvious signs that could have led to better opportunities of attack. However, I do believe that the position the Union had was a huge advantage over the Confederacy.
Despite Lee's Napoleonic military training, it still boggles my mind that he found the idea of Pickett's charge to be intelligent. i'm not saying Lee was an idiot, but it does make you wonder what was going through his head--especially after seeing the pictures of Gettysburg in the presentation last week.
Mikey's point about American politics is fabulous... Criticism without constructive advice is a pillar of our governmental system--for the worse, i believe.
I agree with Shanil. The Confederacy placed too much trust in Lee to win the war. Although there were people who disagreed with his actions, they didn't try to force their opinions on him out of respect which could have been a good thing at times but ended up losing them the war.
I agree with Michael in that a lot of "what-ifs" would change history. I believe that Lee was so focused on showing that he can defeat anyone no matter what the circumstances are that he did not think about the big picture. If I was Lee I would have looked at the landscape and gone from there. People could argue that if Lee just listened to Longstreet and waited that they would have cut off the railroad and could have won the battle and eventually the war. Also if Lee waited the Union could have planned an attack. It is a lot of "what-ifs" but what happened and you can blame the defeat on Lee, but who really knows. No one ever will.
While Lee was extremely offensive minded, I think your claim of Lee being the main reason the confederates lost the war is faulty. You must remember the circumstances. Longstreet was a huge advocate of the chain of command, and while he had different beliefs than Lee, if he seemed unconfident or flaky about his ideas, or even did not present them to the general, how was Lee supposed to act differently?
Post a Comment