What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Trump says Robert E Lee would have won in Afghanistan

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
The Civil War was still basically a Napoleonic era war, with a few weapons upgrades, and some new Navy shipbuilding upgrades.
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
25,340
Reaction score
12,207
Points
1,268
If had taken it to heart, what would have been different ??

We might not have descended into bad manners and belligerent partisan divisiveness. It just a basic attitude of "Christian" decency .. although its also present among civilized Jews, Muslims and Atheists.
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
25,340
Reaction score
12,207
Points
1,268
The Civil War was still basically a Napoleonic era war, with a few weapons upgrades, and some new Navy shipbuilding upgrades.

You mean ambush, surprise raids and irregular styles of combat like Guerrilla warfare?
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
32,948
Reaction score
22,862
Points
2,865
let's assume that Robert E Lee was a great general and a good Christian man (he wasn't)

Lee presided over a traitorous army that wanted no America left

Lee enslaved people, despite disavowing slavery



Lee was a great general who was offered command of the Union army before Virginia succeeded and joined the Confederacy

For Lee as it was for many southerners the issue was local

They were loyal to their home state

He own slaves that he inherited from his father-n-law

But is was the 18th Century and things were different then
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
25,340
Reaction score
12,207
Points
1,268
Lee was a great general who was offered command of the Union army before Virginia succeeded and joined the Confederacy

For Lee as it was for many southerners the issue was local

They were loyal to their home state

He own slaves that he inherited from his father-n-law

But is was the 18th Century and things were different then


"seceded"
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
You mean ambush, surprise raids and irregular styles of combat like Guerrilla warfare?

No, I mean like Napoleonic era warfare, as in massed artillery batteries and troops manuevering around each other seeking advantages. Foraging raids and and hit and run cavalry raids didn't decide the war, and are common for all armies throughout history, nothing special, in any case. Lee should have avoided Gettysburg, but was worried about his flank and a Union Army getting behind him and blocking his retreat back home. But hindsight is just for fun and learning.
 

Otis Mayfield

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
2,319
Points
1,893
The Civil War was still basically a Napoleonic era war, with a few weapons upgrades, and some new Navy shipbuilding upgrades.

minie-ball-3624045037-1556314609644.jpg



That's not true at all.

The mini ball was a game changer.
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
25,340
Reaction score
12,207
Points
1,268
No, I mean like Napoleonic era warfare, as in massed artillery batteries and troops manuevering around each other seeking advantages. Foraging raids and and hit and run cavalry raids didn't decide the war, and are common for all armies throughout history, nothing special, in any case. Lee should have avoided Gettysburg, but was worried about his flank and a Union Army getting behind him and blocking his retreat back home. But hindsight is just for fun and learning.

Swamp Fox was Revolutionary war.. he didn't fight Napoleonic style either, did he?
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
minie-ball-3624045037-1556314609644.jpg



That's not true at all.

The mini ball was a game changer.

lol rubbish. They still used nearly the same formations and lines. Railroads added a new element for supply and logistics, but didn't change field tactics. They still relied on massed musketry and artillery for most important engagements.

With many thanks to Napoleon turning movements became a major part of U.S. military strategy. Napoleon introduced the turning movement witch could be used to threaten enemy lines of communications and either force their withdrawal or force a premature action by the enemy. If an attacking force executed this tactic efficiently and with speed it could reach the enemies rear before an effective retreat could be carried out. A properly carried out turning movement could provide a significant advantage for the aggressors. Now with the defenders communications cut off the defenders would be forced to attack, shifting the fight to a tactical defensive, to the advantage of the attacker.(3) The campaigns of Napoleon formed the bases of formal military education through out the western world. At the start of the civil war European observers were anxious to see to what extent the American campaigns would conform to the accepted doctrines of Napoleonic warfare.(4) In West point the writings of Jomini were used as a textbook through Hennery W. Halleck's "Elements of Military Art and Science", which was essentially a translation of Jomini. As the curriculum at West Point leaned in the direction of engineering, mathematics, fortifications and administration most cadets absorbed this text, as it was the only resource on military strategy.(5) Federal General George B. McClellan took those concepts one step further. After rebuilding the army of the Potomac he devised a turning movement that utilized virtually all fields of military discipline. Had this plan been carried out with full confidence the war may have ended much sooner. Based on the principle of turning movements McClellan planned to fully exploit the North's secure water lines. This would actually be a water based turning movement where the navy directly complemented and necessitated the infantry, in a sense providing land, were none existed. The goal was to accomplish three tasks, getting to the confederate rear, re-claim territory, and capture Richmond. This plan showed the importance of fully exploiting all of a militaries resources for joint success. It also showed the American perfection and expansion of Napoleonic tactics.(6) Jomini, a Swiss aid of Napoleon wrote the "Traite des Grandes Operations Miltaire". Jomini was intrigued by Napoleons strategies and sought to systematize his methods. Jomini emphasized the necessity of good internal lines of operations, presented the concept of lines of operation and stressed the difference between interior and exterior lines. He stressed the importance of proper choice of these lines concerning geographical and geometrical factors. He stressed that solid and reliable interior lines were essential to the fundamental principle of strategy.(7) Since Jomini's theories were included in the text at west Point most of the Commanding Generals felt his influence. For Jomini these were summed up in the following four points:
"1. Bringing, by strategic measures, the major part of an armies forces successively to bear upon the decisive areas of a theater of war and as far as possible upon the enemies communications, without compromising ones own;
"2. Maneuvering in such a manner as to engage ones major forces against parts only of those of the enemy;
"3. Furthermore, in Battle, by tactical maneuvers, bringing ones major forces to bear on the decisive area of the battle field or on that part of the enemies lines which it is important to overwhelm;
"4. Arranging matters in such a fashion that these masses of men be not only brought to bear at the decisive place but that they be up into action speedily and together, so that they make simultaneous effort."(8)



There were certainly innovations, there are in every war, but the core was still Napoleon's own innovations. Napoleon didn't really rely on a Navy much for his Continental strategies, so those were 'new', which is not to say that Napoleon wouldn't have implemented much the same 'new' tactics and strategies as U.S. Generals did given the same environment and situations.
 
Last edited:

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
Swamp Fox was Revolutionary war.. he didn't fight Napoleonic style either, did he?

Obviously you don't know anything; The Revolutionary War preceded Napoleon by a couple of days ....
 

Otis Mayfield

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
2,319
Points
1,893
lol rubbish. They still used nearly the same formations and lines. Railroads added a new element for supply and logistics, but didn't change field tactics. They still relied on massed musketry and artillery for most important engagements.

With many thanks to Napoleon turning movements became a major part of U.S. military strategy. Napoleon introduced the turning movement witch could be used to threaten enemy lines of communications and either force their withdrawal or force a premature action by the enemy. If an attacking force executed this tactic efficiently and with speed it could reach the enemies rear before an effective retreat could be carried out. A properly carried out turning movement could provide a significant advantage for the aggressors. Now with the defenders communications cut off the defenders would be forced to attack, shifting the fight to a tactical defensive, to the advantage of the attacker.(3) The campaigns of Napoleon formed the bases of formal military education through out the western world. At the start of the civil war European observers were anxious to see to what extent the American campaigns would conform to the accepted doctrines of Napoleonic warfare.(4) In West point the writings of Jomini were used as a textbook through Hennery W. Halleck's "Elements of Military Art and Science", which was essentially a translation of Jomini. As the curriculum at West Point leaned in the direction of engineering, mathematics, fortifications and administration most cadets absorbed this text, as it was the only resource on military strategy.(5) Federal General George B. McClellan took those concepts one step further. After rebuilding the army of the Potomac he devised a turning movement that utilized virtually all fields of military discipline. Had this plan been carried out with full confidence the war may have ended much sooner. Based on the principle of turning movements McClellan planned to fully exploit the North's secure water lines. This would actually be a water based turning movement where the navy directly complemented and necessitated the infantry, in a sense providing land, were none existed. The goal was to accomplish three tasks, getting to the confederate rear, re-claim territory, and capture Richmond. This plan showed the importance of fully exploiting all of a militaries resources for joint success. It also showed the American perfection and expansion of Napoleonic tactics.(6) Jomini, a Swiss aid of Napoleon wrote the "Traite des Grandes Operations Miltaire". Jomini was intrigued by Napoleons strategies and sought to systematize his methods. Jomini emphasized the necessity of good internal lines of operations, presented the concept of lines of operation and stressed the difference between interior and exterior lines. He stressed the importance of proper choice of these lines concerning geographical and geometrical factors. He stressed that solid and reliable interior lines were essential to the fundamental principle of strategy.(7) Since Jomini's theories were included in the text at west Point most of the Commanding Generals felt his influence. For Jomini these were summed up in the following four points:




There were certainly innovations, there are in every war, but the core was still Napoleon's own innovations.


lol rubbish.

Mini balls were accurate out to 250 yards.

A Civil War line would've cut down any Napoleonic army way before the Napoleonic army got within range.

There were advances in artillery too.
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
lol rubbish.

Mini balls were accurate out to 250 yards.

A Civil War line would've cut down any Napoleonic army way before the Napoleonic army got within range.

There were advances in artillery too.

And they were cut down, so what is your point again? It's not like they had repeating rifles in large numbers, they still relied on cheap muskets and bayonet charges and bombardments. They were still trying to use mass infantry and cavalry charges by the WW I era, in the face of much better artillery and rifles.
 

Otis Mayfield

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
2,319
Points
1,893
And they were cut down, so what is your point again? It's not like they had repeating rifles in large numbers, they still relied on cheap muskets and bayonet charges and bombardments. They were still trying to use mass infantry and cavalry charges by the WW I era, in the face of much better artillery and rifles.

Napoleonic muskets had trouble hitting targets at 25 yards. They practiced "volley fire" where they stood in a line and fired all at once, hoping they would randomly hit someone on the other side.

Civil War muskets were accurate out 10 times as far.

Why are you having so much trouble understanding what a huge advantage that is?
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
Napoleonic muskets had trouble hitting targets at 25 yards. They practiced "volley fire" where they stood in a line and fired all at once, hoping they would randomly hit someone on the other side.

Civil War muskets were accurate out 10 times as far.

Why are you having so much trouble understanding what a huge advantage that is?

lol why do you have trouble admitting you're full of baloney?
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
25,340
Reaction score
12,207
Points
1,268
lol rubbish. They still used nearly the same formations and lines. Railroads added a new element for supply and logistics, but didn't change field tactics. They still relied on massed musketry and artillery for most important engagements.

With many thanks to Napoleon turning movements became a major part of U.S. military strategy. Napoleon introduced the turning movement witch could be used to threaten enemy lines of communications and either force their withdrawal or force a premature action by the enemy. If an attacking force executed this tactic efficiently and with speed it could reach the enemies rear before an effective retreat could be carried out. A properly carried out turning movement could provide a significant advantage for the aggressors. Now with the defenders communications cut off the defenders would be forced to attack, shifting the fight to a tactical defensive, to the advantage of the attacker.(3) The campaigns of Napoleon formed the bases of formal military education through out the western world. At the start of the civil war European observers were anxious to see to what extent the American campaigns would conform to the accepted doctrines of Napoleonic warfare.(4) In West point the writings of Jomini were used as a textbook through Hennery W. Halleck's "Elements of Military Art and Science", which was essentially a translation of Jomini. As the curriculum at West Point leaned in the direction of engineering, mathematics, fortifications and administration most cadets absorbed this text, as it was the only resource on military strategy.(5) Federal General George B. McClellan took those concepts one step further. After rebuilding the army of the Potomac he devised a turning movement that utilized virtually all fields of military discipline. Had this plan been carried out with full confidence the war may have ended much sooner. Based on the principle of turning movements McClellan planned to fully exploit the North's secure water lines. This would actually be a water based turning movement where the navy directly complemented and necessitated the infantry, in a sense providing land, were none existed. The goal was to accomplish three tasks, getting to the confederate rear, re-claim territory, and capture Richmond. This plan showed the importance of fully exploiting all of a militaries resources for joint success. It also showed the American perfection and expansion of Napoleonic tactics.(6) Jomini, a Swiss aid of Napoleon wrote the "Traite des Grandes Operations Miltaire". Jomini was intrigued by Napoleons strategies and sought to systematize his methods. Jomini emphasized the necessity of good internal lines of operations, presented the concept of lines of operation and stressed the difference between interior and exterior lines. He stressed the importance of proper choice of these lines concerning geographical and geometrical factors. He stressed that solid and reliable interior lines were essential to the fundamental principle of strategy.(7) Since Jomini's theories were included in the text at west Point most of the Commanding Generals felt his influence. For Jomini these were summed up in the following four points:




There were certainly innovations, there are in every war, but the core was still Napoleon's own innovations. Napoleon didn't really rely on a Navy much for his Continental strategies, so those were 'new', which is not to say that Napoleon wouldn't have implemented much the same 'new' tactics and strategies as U.S. Generals did given the same environment and situations.

Robert E. Lee would certainly have had supply line problems to Afghanistaan. Trump is a numb nuts who NEVER thinks.
 

DudleySmith

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2020
Messages
4,704
Reaction score
2,916
Points
918
lol why do you have trouble admitting you're full of baloney?

You get yourself 50 men with single shot rifles and put them a 100 pace line, and I'll get 200 men and put them three deep in a 100 pace line, and we'll see who wins stating at 250 yards, then you can tell us massed infantry doesn't work the same whether it's 100 feet or 250 yards when both sides have the same weaponry. They fought in formations and skirmish lines, same as Napoleon did. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you aren't full of baloney.
 

Otis Mayfield

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
2,372
Reaction score
2,319
Points
1,893
You get yourself 50 men with single shot rifles and put them a 100 pace line, and I'll get 200 men and put them three deep in a 100 pace line, and we'll see who wins stating at 250 yards, then you can tell us massed infantry doesn't work the same whether it's 100 feet or 250 yards when both sides have the same weaponry. They fought in formations and skirmish lines, same as Napoleon did. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you aren't full of baloney.

The Civil War line would've shot dead Napoleon's men at 200 yards, way before Napoleon's men reached effective range. Also, Civil War rifles had a bit better rate of fire than Napoleonic muskets.

It's stupid to say 50 against 200.
 
Last edited:

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
12,008
Reaction score
12,944
Points
2,288
Lee lost in the US… so now he’d win in Afghanistan? News to him.
Good Gawd...the communists and their stupidity.
Lee was a brilliant tactician. Respected both in the South and North.
The North had more money and more men and more importantly more ships to block the south from getting supplies. The NORTH had the army before the war---the South had to build theirs after. Even still with all of this, without the potatoe famine in Ireland forcing their people to leave and the North forcing them into the military as soon as they arrived, the North would lost. The tiny little south did quit well under Lee.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$145.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top