Wednesday, September 24, 2008

George Meets David?

I'm playing with a new camera this evening, so I'll keep it short.

For you McClellan lovers (hi, Dimitri!) -- and Bush haters (hi, everyone else!) -- here's an article guaranteed to raise your blood pressure, by Mackubin Thomas Owens, one of my favorite military writers: Our Generals Almost Cost Us Iraq. Here's a taste:
In late 2006, President Bush, like President Lincoln in 1862, adopted a new approach to the war. He replaced the uniformed and civilian leaders who were adherents of the failed operational approach with others who shared his commitment to victory rather than "playing for a tie." In Gen. David Petraeus, Mr. Bush found his Ulysses Grant, to execute an operational approach based on sound counterinsurgency doctrine. This new approach has brought the U.S. to the brink of victory.

Have a nice day.


  1. My great great grandfather, who was in the Union Army, HATED McClellan! The one quotation we have from him was him shouting, rather mysteriously, to his wife, "Damn it, Mama, I can't SAY McClellan!"

    (But - didn't he just say it? So many questions, and no time machine0

  2. Lidian,

    Thanks for your comment. In all honesty, I still haven't made up my mind about him. But I have no doubt that there is a great irony lurking in the McClellan story. He sought to make "soft" war (or whatever the opposite of hard war is) on the south in order to bring it back into the Union with a minimum of disruption. The result was, the war dragged on for four years, slavery was destroyed, and the 13, 14 and 15 amendments were passed. If McClellan had wiped out Lee at Antietam (or on the Peninsula), before things got really ugly, the southern states might have been readmitted with slavery more or less intact.


Related Posts with Thumbnails