Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, December 10, 2012

Sickels: George McClellan, Dayton Moore, and the Kansas City Royals


Dayton Moore is trying to avoid being McClellan. He’s got the farm system built up, the army trained and organized. He’s good at that. Now he’s taking the field of battle and deploying those forces. That’s admirable.

Of course, what’s the next part of the story? Is Moore going to turn into an aggressive, brilliant field commander like Ulysses S. Grant or William Tecumseh Sherman? Will he be cautious but effective like George Gordon Meade? Mercurial and erratic like Joe Hooker? Or will he be the well-meaning but dangerously inept Ambrose Burnside? The suicidally aggressive John Bell Hood?

Heinie Mantush (Krusty) Posted: December 10, 2012 at 07:25 PM | 652 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: civil war, history, rays, royals

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 7 of 7 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7
   601. Ron J2 Posted: January 10, 2013 at 02:12 PM (#4344314)
#598 Rocket armed fighter-bombers were the weapon of choice in the west. (Though I recall reading an after action report saying that the allies considerably overestimated how effective these were)

Also, naval bombardments were extremely effective against strong static defensive points. Naval support pretty much prevents massive gathering of tanks.

In the action McCoy describes the Mayo came to within 500 yards of the coast and did indeed engage specific targets. The Brooklyn was much bigger and had many more guns (15 six inch guns as well as 8 five inch as opposed to the Mayo which I believe had only 5 five inch guns) but couldn't come in nearly as close as the Mayo.
   602. zonk Posted: January 10, 2013 at 02:14 PM (#4344317)
Rommel's experiences in North Africa made him extremely fearful of Allied air power. Thus, he wanted to position his forces so as to neutralize that as best he could. Rundstedt knew the invasion would be fast and hard, and he wanted to maintain a flexible response, and he feared naval bombardment. In truth, the Germans were between and a rock and a hard place. They were at the choose your poison stage, podnuh.


Was it his experience in North Africa -- or -- his own experience, but from the other end, in the invasion of France?

One of the other advantages the Wehrmacht had in 1940 was that their tank columns were able to call in air support via radio in then-amazingly quick timeframes (15 minutes to 45 minutes, depending on which sources you use). The allies didn't quite have that advantage during the Normandy landings but would once they were able to secure a few airstrips.
   603. Ron J2 Posted: January 10, 2013 at 02:15 PM (#4344319)
#600 Large guns were called in to specific map coordinates. As at Salerno, the destroyers worked much closer in and could potentially go after a specific target. (typically fixed emplacements like pillboxes_
   604. Ron J2 Posted: January 10, 2013 at 02:19 PM (#4344324)
#602 He talked about his own experience on the receiving end.

And during the Normandy campaign as long as the weather cooperated it was pretty common to have fighter-bombers lurking -- waiting for targets of opportunity (or to be called in). The allies often had more tactical air power than they could effectively use. The extreme example being Falaise -- where the fighter-bombers had to queue up waiting their turn to attack.
   605. zenbitz Posted: January 10, 2013 at 06:54 PM (#4344586)
The other thing restricting the German armor in Normandy was lack of fuel... but they could barely even move during the day because of the allied planes.
   606. McCoy Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:10 PM (#4345227)
I've been on a war jag the last couple of weeks but I'm slowly running out of books to read. Wouldn't mind reading something about the Spanish American war but I can't seem to get my hands on any good ones. Also wouldn't mind reading some of Mosier's books but again I can't get my hands on any of them.
   607. Ron J2 Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:24 PM (#4345242)
#605 The effectiveness of the resistance is generally overplayed, but they also did a good job here. I remember reading that Das Reich encountered so many sabotaged bridges and what have you that it took them more than two weeks longer than expected to reach Normandy.

   608. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:38 PM (#4345259)
Wouldn't mind reading something about the Spanish American war


My favorite thing I read about the Spanish American War was how during the Battle of Cavite/Manila, Gridley was worried that they were running low on ammo and wanted to do a weapons check, but Dewey didn't want to worry the crew, so he called off firing and had the gun crews go to breakfast...
   609. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:43 PM (#4345263)
So what it sounds like was irregardless of what the Germans did, the Allies were going to be successful because of the amount of men and material they had. It was just going to be the question of how much casualties they were going to run into on that first day because there was no way the Germans would have been able to knock them off that beach head.

This link supposes what might have happened had it failed.
   610. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: January 11, 2013 at 04:50 PM (#4345268)
   611. McCoy Posted: January 11, 2013 at 05:24 PM (#4345300)
It's possible that the Allies could have failed on D-Day but under the conditions they did fight the battle under it was highly unlikely that they would fail and we only know that because we get to look back in hindsight and have all the information from both sides.
   612. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: January 11, 2013 at 07:21 PM (#4345371)
It was just going to be the question of how much casualties they were going to run into on that first day because there was no way the Germans would have been able to knock them off that beach head.


Omaha went as badly as it was possible to go- the preliminary bombardment (both Naval and Aviation) completely missed- the shore defenses were untouched- but we still took and held the beach area (and even if we hadn't Omaha would have been untenable for the Germans after a few days anyway- we had 5 landing beaches and Point du Hoc - the Germans would have to have outright repelled at least 3 of those landings (if not all of them)to have chance- but they only came close at one.

Te Japanese defended quite few more naval landings than Germany, they eventually decided that defending the beach given our naval and air superiority was futile - so they adopted the "cornered rat" defense- which was basically designed to inflict as many casualties on us as possible- while simultaneously conceding that the battle was going to be lost. Bad strategy/tactics- if the enemy has naval and air superiority that does in fact make to tougher to repel the initial landing- but it ALSO make repelling it imperative- when the guy with air and naval superiority gets toehold- he's in fact won the damn war- you can never dislodge him and he can build up and build up without you being able to prevent it
   613. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: March 07, 2013 at 06:37 AM (#4382647)
I see commercials for a movie about MacArthur starring Tommy Lee Jones.
   614. Ron J2 Posted: March 07, 2013 at 09:16 AM (#4382704)
#613 Interesting casting. I think it rates to work.
   615. Morty Causa Posted: March 07, 2013 at 09:31 AM (#4382715)
MacArthur, the general, has not been served well by cinema. I don't see that changing with this movie. Now, had Daniel Day-Lewis taken the role...? Part of the reason the MacArthur representations in film are unsatisfying is that MacArthur is not an easily accessible character like, oh, say, Patton.

Also, as to the movie's subject itself, I don't think MacArthur ever seriously considered doing away with the emperor. He thought the emperor had a real use. He understood what symbolism meant to a culture like Japan--indeed, he had been something of a symbol like that.
   616. zonk Posted: March 07, 2013 at 09:36 AM (#4382718)
Was this the thread that spawned some Diplomacy games?

If so - did anyone catch the news that Allan Calhamer, inventor of the board game -- died a week or so back?
   617. Esoteric Posted: May 02, 2013 at 10:32 PM (#4432542)
Sure, this thread is old. But it's still possibly one of the greatest OT threads in the history of Primer, at least for history buffs.
   618. Mayor Blomberg Posted: May 02, 2013 at 10:45 PM (#4432558)
what Eso quotes in 25 is straight out of the Faulkner playbook.

Withdrew in 12 years to assure compliance the law. Well, that's one way of euphemising it.
   619. GregD Posted: May 03, 2013 at 01:45 PM (#4433038)
Brooks Simpson came up in this thread and his blog post today shows what he can do when he is not distracted by stomping on every neo-Confederate commentator but instead shows his own analysis to argue that the decisions 150 years ago today in Mississippi have a better case to be turning points than the simultaneous action near Chancellorsville. link
   620. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: October 11, 2013 at 09:11 PM (#4569692)
Sure, this thread is old. But it's still possibly one of the greatest OT threads in the history of Primer, at least for history buffs.


This is the last thread I ever bookmarked. It could be edited and published as an ebook.
   621. Esoteric Posted: October 20, 2013 at 11:42 PM (#4579254)
Still a great thread!
   622. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: July 28, 2014 at 01:05 PM (#4759058)
It sure is, Depressoteric.
   623. McCoy Posted: July 28, 2014 at 02:14 PM (#4759102)
My dad got me No Simple Victory for Christmas and I found it dissapointing and boring.
   624. Ron J2 Posted: July 28, 2014 at 03:16 PM (#4759192)
#623 I'm thinking The War That Ended Peace (Margaret MacMillan) is next on my list. Road to WWI
   625. McCoy Posted: July 28, 2014 at 03:23 PM (#4759202)

Is there anything new there? There have been numerous great books about the road to WWI and I just wonder if there is any fresh veins to tap on that front.
   626. Ron J2 Posted: July 28, 2014 at 03:30 PM (#4759217)
#625 I was sort of thinking the same thing. That reservation is the reason I didn't buy it yesterday. I liked the research in her Paris 1919 book so I have hopes even if it's just in making it clear which stories are urban legends and which can be substantiated.
   627. McCoy Posted: July 28, 2014 at 03:33 PM (#4759223)
I will probably take a look at Max Hastings's Catastrophe 1914.

I read Paris 1919 awhile back and have no recollection of it and unfortunately the same could be said for The Sleepwalkers.
   628. zenbitz Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:58 PM (#4759897)
I have been reading "The Blitzkrieg Legend" (WWII obviously)... it's pretty good, although I suspect author likes to argue with strawmens.
   629. There's a bustle in Misirlou's hedgerow Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:07 PM (#4759904)
Is there anything new there? There have been numerous great books about the road to WWI and I just wonder if there is any fresh veins to tap on that front.


It's not new, but Dreadnought is a must read on the subject.
   630. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:47 PM (#4759932)
Read it.
   631. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:54 PM (#4759934)
I said the other day that I read The Sleepwalkers and couldn't remember anything about it. Well, today I noticed I had it on my iPad where I discovered I hadn't started reading it yet. I guess that is why I couldn't remember anything about it.
   632. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: December 15, 2015 at 04:31 PM (#5114905)
This may still be the gold standard of OT threads. I've been listening to Gary Gallagher's Great Course CDs on the ACW and started to reread Confederates in the Attic.
   633. OCF Posted: December 15, 2015 at 05:25 PM (#5114973)
Responding to something from way back on the first page:

My biggest complaint about Civil War commentary is this invoking of "army could have been destroyed"

Civil War armies were damned hard to destroy. Nashville is about as comprehensive a victory as you can imagine and the army wasn't "destroyed". Likewise Chattanooga. As long as a hard core of the army remained it was just plain difficult to organize the kind of pursuit that turns defeat into destruction.


All very true. But less than a decade later, large French armies were destroyed by the Prussians. What was so different then?
   634. McCoy Posted: December 16, 2015 at 09:09 AM (#5115238)
Better guns, better artillery, better military, better leaders, better trained, faster mobilization.

Imagine the north fielding an army of say 300,000 soldiers that knew what they were and marching them down to Richmond within the first month of the war. Pushing the south back back back and then having Davis and lee decide to make a stand at some town outside of Richmond and then surrendering.
   635. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 16, 2015 at 09:16 AM (#5115242)
All very true. But less than a decade later, large French armies were destroyed by the Prussians. What was so different then?

They weren't destroyed, they were captured.

The two major French Armies were Bazaine's, which was surrounded and captured at Metz, and MacMahon's that was surrounded and captured at Sedan. The French maneuvered poorly and let themselves get cut off, and surrendered.
   636. Greg K Posted: December 16, 2015 at 09:32 AM (#5115252)
Is there anything new there? There have been numerous great books about the road to WWI and I just wonder if there is any fresh veins to tap on that front.


It's not new, but Dreadnought is a must read on the subject.

For the First World War, I think David Stevenson's Cataclysm is my go-to text. I like Margaret Macmillan, but her 1914 book seems like its geared towards a lay audience (to be exquisitely condescending for a moment). More a gathering of what's already floating around.
   637. Ron J Posted: December 16, 2015 at 10:13 AM (#5115276)
Further to #634 Civil War the victors rarely had any troops in good enough shape for a vigorous pursuit. A Civil War battle was rough on everybody involved. (One general said something to the effect that it was like cats fighting in a sack. No way to avoid being badly hurt even if you win)

In particular nobody ever kept large bodies of cavalry in reserve for a pursuit.
   638. TDF, situational idiot Posted: December 16, 2015 at 10:18 AM (#5115283)
I somehow missed this thread originally, which is a shame because for once I have something of substance to add, if it hasn't already (I only got through the first page before I realized there's 7 pages of comments.
2.) For a guy whose scholarly bread and butter is the Abolitionist movement, it's bizarre to my mind how McPherson fails to adequately discuss or credit the pivotal role of American Christian sects and Protestant religious values (particularly Quakerism and New England Episcopal and Puritan strains) in driving the Abolitionist cause. He nods towards this, of course, but fails to provide it with the proper weight.
Battle Cry of Freedom is part of the Oxford History of the United States series; What Hath God Wrought by Daniel Walker Howe (the book that covers the antebellum period) covers this topic in quite a bit of detail.
   639. GregD Posted: December 16, 2015 at 12:46 PM (#5115433)
This may still be the gold standard of OT threads. I've been listening to Gary Gallagher's Great Course CDs on the ACW and started to reread Confederates in the Attic.
If looking for stuff to listen to or have playing in the background, I would supplement with David Blight's course--available free online at Yale--is quite good and is--without getting into intramural skirmishes between historians--which I find a bit more balanced and reliable if a bit less detailed.
   640. Ron J Posted: December 16, 2015 at 01:20 PM (#5115469)
#639 "White Mansions" mixes decent history with music I like (and I'm very far from a fan of country).
   641. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: December 16, 2015 at 01:51 PM (#5115506)
Too many Gregs here. I'm confused ;).
   642. zenbitz Posted: December 16, 2015 at 02:10 PM (#5115517)
Necro'ing threads with George McClellan gets me EVERY SINGLE TIME.

If you like complicated war games (table top!), GMT just released "The US Civil War" which I think is the new standard for strategic ACW games. I think you could probably play it 1 CW year (4 turns, each with 4 action phases) per long day, so call it 60 hours.
   643. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 16, 2015 at 02:48 PM (#5115555)
Just finished my first play of The US Civil War last week; did the 1862 scenario. With pauses for eating, etc. it took us around 6 hours. Incredible fun, a very good game. Plan on starting a campaign game online this week.
   644. Greg K Posted: December 16, 2015 at 02:52 PM (#5115561)
If looking for stuff to listen to or have playing in the background, I would supplement with David Blight's course--available free online at Yale--is quite good and is--without getting into intramural skirmishes between historians--which I find a bit more balanced and reliable if a bit less detailed.

Those Yale courses are great! I really liked Early Medieval Europe and Early Modern England. Civil War and Reconstruction sounds like a grand idea as I've been trying to get more of a background there lately.

Too many Gregs here. I'm confused ;).

My rule of thumb is, if he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, it's GregD.
   645. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: December 16, 2015 at 04:28 PM (#5115647)
And if the post is outre, it's Omineca Greg?
   646. GregD Posted: December 16, 2015 at 04:51 PM (#5115664)
My rule of thumb is, if he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, it's GregD.
My rule is if it sounds like he knows what he's talking about, it's Greg K

If it is about baked goods, it is undoubtedly Omineca Greg
   647. Zach Posted: December 16, 2015 at 06:30 PM (#5115750)
I'm very late to this discussion, but personally I would say that Moore is an Eisenhower. He's a staff guy who kept the same attitude when he was elevated to the top job. Very big on making sure everybody is a team player. A bit of a reputation for being simple minded, which doesn't really hold up in retrospect.
   648. Zach Posted: December 16, 2015 at 07:10 PM (#5115772)
Whoa -- I didn't realise how late I was. Still, I think you have to realise that the Civil War in the East wasn't set up to be a general's war. The distances involved were too small, which funnelled the armies into the same few spots. The technology of the time favored the defense, and it was all but impossible to destroy a retreating army. The geography was set up in a way that an advancing army would have to cross multiple rivers, giving the defense plenty of time to get into position.
   649. zenbitz Posted: December 17, 2015 at 01:59 PM (#5116261)
@643 I think you're right - I was playing this "all weekend" with a bunch of guys (at one point, 3 to a side) drinking tequila and arguing about the rules. Joe Youst even added a house rule BEFORE EVEN PLAYING THE GAME (his rule was that instead of taking all your actions at once, that you should alternate point-by-point and roll init each time!). When 2 of us played 1962 it didn't take more than 6-8 hours (i.e., not the 12 I estimated) and neither of us knew the rules either.

   650. McCoy Posted: December 17, 2015 at 02:08 PM (#5116272)
What's the 1962 scenario? Texas leads a new rebellion because that damn Harvard boy is ruining the South with his civil rights talk?
   651. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 17, 2015 at 02:10 PM (#5116279)
Joe Youst even added a house rule BEFORE EVEN PLAYING THE GAME


That's his schtick. I am not sure he's ever played a game with the rules in the box.
   652. Betts, Bogaerts, and D Price(GGC) Posted: December 17, 2015 at 02:40 PM (#5116309)
TIL that the major protagonist from Confederates in the Attic has a website:

http://www.robertleehodge.com/
Page 7 of 7 pages ‹ First  < 5 6 7

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP: 5 December 2016: Baseball's New Collective Bargaining Agreement
(854 - 7:10pm, Dec 07)
Last: Morty Causa

NewsblogOT: October-November 2016 Soccer Thread
(374 - 7:10pm, Dec 07)
Last: ursus arctos

NewsblogCubs near trade to acquire closer Wade Davis from Royals
(36 - 7:03pm, Dec 07)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogIan Desmond agrees to five-year deal with Rockies – The Denver Post
(26 - 7:01pm, Dec 07)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogKen Rosenthal on Twitter: Sale to #RedSox. Moncada, Kopech and two other prospects to #WhiteSox.
(134 - 6:57pm, Dec 07)
Last: I am Ted F'ing Williams

NewsblogNationals acquire outfielder Adam Eaton | MLB.com
(10 - 6:55pm, Dec 07)
Last: Khrushin it bro

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: Trophy Case
(24 - 6:54pm, Dec 07)
Last: Chris Fluit

Gonfalon CubsStarting to think about 2017
(102 - 6:53pm, Dec 07)
Last: Ardo

NewsblogOT: NBA 2016-17 Preseason Thread
(1221 - 6:51pm, Dec 07)
Last: billyshears

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 2016 Results
(7 - 6:49pm, Dec 07)
Last: Chris Fluit

NewsblogBaseball: MLB hijacks market for Japanese star Otani: report | Kyodo News
(19 - 6:44pm, Dec 07)
Last: Guy Heckler's Veto

NewsblogBaseball Hall of Fame's veteran voting system could keep qualified candidates out | MLB | Sporting News
(23 - 6:20pm, Dec 07)
Last: Rennie's Tenet

NewsblogRyan Thibs has his 2017 HOF Tracker Up and Running
(87 - 5:50pm, Dec 07)
Last: reech

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 12-7-2016
(28 - 5:21pm, Dec 07)
Last: vortex of dissipation

NewsblogRed Sox Reportedly Agree To Deal With Mitch Moreland « CBS Boston
(32 - 5:21pm, Dec 07)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.3461 seconds
47 querie(s) executed