Lee is a great tactical commander for sure but strategically Grant is better. Lee’s strategy of taking on the Union in big open battles seems flawed because sure he could win them but the North always had more men and equipment to replace that compared to when the South loses men and equipment they can’t replace it. Strategically Grant attacking on multiple fronts to wear down the South so they can’t consolidate is a much better strategy and presses most of the North’s advantages.
2 months ago | 7
Had a smaller army and went beyond it's maximum potential against a larger, more better equipped foe. We could say it was because of near incompitant union generals, however, juat the sheer number of men and material the union jad compared to what Lee had, makes the distinction , sharper.
2 months ago | 5
Lee squandered the war and faced a lot of unfit union Generals. Meanwhile, Grant worked his way up command by winning so ridiculously consistently his nickname was "Unconditional Surrender" Grant. Grants methods of warfare became foundational to American Doctrine. Lee was better tactically but tatics hardly matter in the face of strategy. And even then, it was a near thing.
1 month ago (edited) | 2
Yall really sayin Robert E. Lee was the greatest Civil War general, yet yall forget that he fuckin lost. Yes, he was a great tactician, but last I checked the CSA doesnt exist.
2 months ago | 2
I feel like Lee could sense what kind of generals he was facing and often beat them especially in the early war but Grant was not as sophisticated as Lee but still a great general and president
2 months ago | 2
Lee made the most tactical blunders and reckless maneuvers, probably due to feeling like a tactical genius after beating some of the unions most terrible generals. Quite often getting his men unnecessarily killed. Grant never feared Lee, and for good reason.
1 month ago | 1
Both are similar Grant had more men but lee had more strategy.But seems Lees underestimated the strength of the north.Grants ability to stay calm and his determination was his greatest strength.But if I had to pick a general it would be Grant because in war confidence is a unbreakable force
1 month ago (edited) | 0
Yes, Lee was great at the Battlefield, but when it comes to Strategy He falls short. Grant is the greatest American General in History. Just look at his Vicksburg Campaign, that's his greatest Masterpiece. And can I just say that He won the War by choking the Confedereacy and placing pressure on multiple Fronts.
1 month ago | 0
Lee was better. Grant was good. But to do what Lee did for 4 years with everything stacked against him. That takes skill. Grant was good with logistics was very persistent but he brute forced a lot of his way to victory.
1 month ago | 1
Both were pretty good! But the union won, so the grant is batter! And a damn good president!
1 month ago | 0
realBobPhilips
Who was the better Civil War General and why? Comment your thoughts below.
2 months ago | [YT] | 16