The Battle of Antietam

Subject: The Battle of Antietam Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:44 am

McClellan had the whole AONV bottled up at Antietam Creek but wouldn't press his advantage. The War could have been over very swiftly if he had done so. Ideas?

Subject: Re: The Battle of Antietam Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:12 pm

Mmm I'm not going to say anything. I really don't like McClellan as a General.

Subject: Re: The Battle of Antietam Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:20 am

Me neither. He was to slow and didn't have really any fight in him.

Subject: Re: The Battle of Antietam Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:22 am

I don't think he was slow, I just think he was too cautious

Subject: Re: The Battle of Antietam Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:24 am

Catious is the understatment of the CW. I mean, he is near Richmond and a month does nothing while Lee is trying to keep a demoralized army together. And, at Antietam. Twice the AOTP breaks the soythern lines and he does not commit his reinforcment. And he had 20,000 of them!

Subject: Re: The Battle of Antietam Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:26 am

Yeah he wasn't a good general.

Subject: Re: The Battle of Antietam Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:28 am

I think the only moment he shined was during his Campaign of the Northwaestern Counties of Virginia. He wasn't cautious then.

Subject: McClellan Mon Oct 23, 2006 7:32 pm

This is my first post on this site, and hopefully not the last. Saw Captain of Gondor's announcement on MinasTirith.com. Anyway.....

God knows McClellan is probably the favorite scapegoat of the war. One thing I found interesting though, is that Gen. R.E. Lee, who I respect as unquestionably the greatest general of the conflict, when asked after the war who his toughest opponent was, answered without hesitation "McClellan".
If you think about it, McClellan did enjoy the most success against southern arms out of the entire Union army up until Grant. I think there is a good possibility that given more freedom of movement and action by Washington, (who's main concern was protecting Washington) McClellan might have captured Richmond. His intelligence, led by Allen Pinkerton, (yes, the future detective) was so faulty and unreliable that he had no choice but to believe wildly exagerated reports of a reble force of hundreds of thousands always to his front.
And Lee's response is even easier to believe when you concider that Grant, the only general to have any success against Lee, did so only because he constantly enjoyed a 2-4 to 1 superiority in numbers to Lee. Lee found Grant so predictable and naive when it came to stratagy and tactics that he could hardly consider him a challenge. If only he had the proper manpower to resist the northern onslaughts, the war would have had a much different ending.

Sorry for the long post. Hope I don't ruffle too many feathers.
lee