Lee was a good engineer and manager of disparate personalities but far from flawless as a strategist or tactician. The failure at Pickett's Charge was not unforeseeable as Malvern Hill had taken place almost exactly a year earlier with similar results. He was good on the defensive but no better than many others including George Thomas.
Al M He certainly would have done a whole lot better if he stuck with fighting a defensive campaign like he did before. Another thing that really would have helped him out was if General Jackson didn't die.
Years later, Eisenhower followed his example and wrote a speech for if the D-Day landings had failed, placing all of the blame on himself while still congratulating his soldiers on their bravery. Thankfully he never gave it, but he was willing to, and that's what matters.
Unless I am mistaken, General Dwight D. Eisenhower had a picture of General Robert E. Lee in his headquarters. He also called Gen. Robert E. Lee "The most beloved General in all of American history."
It's crazy to think that President's and Generals have these kinds of speeches written just in case something like this happens. There was even a speech that was written in case the original moon landing was unsuccessful, and how the astronauts were all dead. Who knows how many other speeches like this were written, and what the worst case scenario was?
"Let us reform and hit em again, I know we can do it." They were like children that couldn't stand the thought of letting their father down. I think they KNEW they couldn't go through that slaughter again, but God, in that moment, they would've tried for their General. He knew how to inspire loyalty.
@@rickeyhall9994 No, it was fucking suicide. Bravery, would be telling your leader to fuck himself and if he thinks charging superior numbers and superior firepower in the center is such a good idea when you have been trounced trying it on the flanks then his ass needs to be in front, leading the charge. Risking your life and career against a superior who is delusional, that is bravery.
No, that’s called insanity. To do the same thing and expect different results is called insanity. No matter what rank you are in the military, you must question your leader’s command, or else they will never see any error and will never grow as a leader until the damage is already done.
@@Unchainedful Oh I agree. I admire the conviction, but another charge was nothing short of a suicide mission. Lee was right to order a withdraw, it was the only way of salvaging this.
"greatest civil war movies" Sheen himself said it was far too long...The film itself was almost like a documentary explaining everything....So interesting in that reguard....But as entertainment....Not the best by a long shot
@@daviddragonetti8181 Yes have got to agree with you their I love glory. I would say glory should have a remake but Hollywood butchers everything nowadays.
What legend? A man who owned slaves is a legend? A man who fought for evil to maintain evil. All I see is an old, cruel general who should’ve been shot along with the rest of them
@@coolcat5714 People were more loyal to their home states than the union at large in those days. He was against secession and was apathetic about whether slavery continued or not, but he fought for the south anyway because he didn’t want to be ordered to fight his own state and out of a sense duty to his state; his people. He was no saint, but he wasn’t a monster either. He was a man who did what he thought was right at the time. After the war, he became a strong advocate for reconciliation between the north and the south. Famously, he told a widow of one of his slain men to put aside her bitterness and to raise her son as an American. Lee is one of the finest men the states have ever produced.
@@coolcat5714 as stated by user “the night watcher”, General Lee, fought for the south because he didn’t want to nor could he believe it right to betray his fellow Virginians by fighting against them, he fought for his state as did everyone then. Besides that, Even if his beliefs are completely wrong, I had rather see a man who is willing to stand up for, fight, and even die for what he believes to be right, than a man who cares more about his personal safety, and public approval than he does about his values and virtues.
It's a fact that when General Lee apologized to his men and began to order their withdrawal from the field of battle that several of the surrounding soldiers actually requested to reform and attack again. After literally walking through hell and back they were willing to charge again. I'm not sure if any commander in all of history had the love, respect and admiration of his men than General Lee
It was his fault, Lee was the commanding General. Thing is I'm not convinced he could have done much differently that would have gained a different result, especially once the Federals got well situated on the high ground. The idea the ANV could have pulled out of a major attack the first day and redeploy towards Washington DC sounds like a good idea, but from all I've read such a maneuver would have been very difficult to execute in the best of circumstances. Meade certainly would have been made sure the circumstances were most difficult. Perhaps Longstreet could have slid to the right as Hood requested on the 2nd day, but they had trouble coordinating the attack as it was laid out...extending the lines further probably would have made matters worse...meanwhile the Union had shorter distances to move troops to counter Confederate movement . All day long the Federals were able to maneuver reinforcements exactly where they were needed at exactly the right moment. If the rebels had tried to slide right I do believe the Federals would have quickly reacted to counter it as they had all day. The result would have been the same...bloodied than it already was but still the same. The 3rd Day shouldn't have happened. The ANV should have left the field to the Army of the Potomac while they still had Pickets Division in good shape. There was nothing to be gained from a frontal attack against a brutally strong Union center commanded by a very competent General Hancock. Maybe had General Jackson been available to General Lee at the beginning of Gettysburg, things might have been different. But Stonewall wasn't there, and his absence was a huge factor in this.
@greghampton9346 well put and I agree. The loss of Jackson was catastrophic for Lee and the ANV. I'm quite sure Gettysburg would have been a completely different battle had Jackson there. As it was, even a well executed maneuver to the right would have only made the battle even bloodier. The cavalry debacle and the lack of screening around the army certainly didn't help, though I'm not sure Stuart was wholly to blame there. I will say that had Jackson been there, victory was more than likely under his command. Following a victory in Pennsylvania and perhaps a subsequent march on Washington would have resulted in European assistance from Britain and France
Mustafa Kemal was a general that ordered "I'm not ordering you to attack, I'm ordering you to die." and his soldiers gladly followed the order against an enemy that had dreadnaughts supporting them, ammo and superior numbers.
This was Lee's finest moment, he made a mistake, took the blame for it and still had the respect of the men who served under him. That's the kind of man every boy should want to be......
+Darth Belal That was the measure of General Lee, humility, & the love & respect he had for his men, & they for him. Wellington said many things about his men, some horrible, some grudgingly appreciative, but the most important was that he respected them, & they him, after all, he beat every French General sent against him, & finally, Napoleon himself. If Lee had the resources & manpower of the North, It would be the Confederate States of America to this very day. But whoever won, they would have still been to greatest of Allies to us in the UK.
Too long winded. The final release was over 3 hours. Several scenes should have been cut. Still, there were many good moments. The director Ron Maxwell should have been reined in.
kfir levy Joe Smith is right. Too preachy, not as balanced, and aside from Stephen Lang and Jeff Daniels, the acting left much to be desired (especially, sad to say, Robert Duvall as General Lee)
I was very surprised to find out General Kemper survived his “mortal wound”. I was under the misconception for years that he died at Gettysburg. I only found out recently that he survived. The movie should have included him the coda explaining that he lived.
Apparently the bullet got within a hair's breadth of cutting open the femoral artery and thus couldn't be removed (surgery on a major artery not being the kind of thing that was survivable back in those days), that's why everybody figured it was going to kill him. Quite a few people (including Kemper himself, probably) were rather surprised that it didn't.
Kemper, who incidentally didn't look anything like Royce Applegate (he had a very long and very thick black beard, for one thing, and was probably a good 70 lbs lighter) had to be left behind when Lee withdrew and fell into Union hands. It's said his cheerful demeanor while in the hospital endeared him to the initially hostile nurses.
I like how Kemper is not thinking of himself and doesn't ask for help but rather asks Lee to look out for his men who made the charge. That's being selfless. It touched me somehow the way he collapsed onto the cot after asking that of Lee.
That was in large part due to Grant, Johnson wanted to drag Lee and other Confederate leaders into trials, Grant refused to comply based on the surrender agreement signed at Appatomox courthouse (spelling might be off there)
That's what most of these admirers of Lee fail to acknowledge, Longstreet knew, Alexander figured it out and others at the battle saw the fallacy in this attack. I don't romanticize anything about the Confederacy. They took up arms against our Nation to preserve slavery, there is nothing noble on that endeavor. Peace
@@Cuffski Alright, chill out bro. I fully agree that the war happened from slavery, but just dumping a bunch of dudes who never even owned slaves themselves and claiming it was a one-dimensional war makes you sound silly.
@@TheSwedishAssassin You are correct. Like so many things in our history, the real truth is seldom known - both the good and bad. There is absolutely no possibility that any of us today can fully understand that war, why men fought it on each side or refused to fight it at all. Sure, there are books and movies and such, but those always come with a touch of blemish from the creator of the work. It cannot be helped. That war was far from being about a singular problem.
@@charlesrutherford4785 Wise. It's a balance, knowing that the South seceded because Lincoln, a staunch abolitionist, was elected, but many of the masses just didn't see themselves as one nation, but as separate states being dominated by what should not exist as a federal government
This scene is great not just for its emotion, but it's also historically accurate. When Lee says "I thought we were invincible," that's the actual historiographical explanation for Pickett's Charge.
His spies had also given him bad information as they had told him that the union line was weakest in the center. In reality it had been reinforced the night before.
Many of the southern forces had roots that went back to Ireland and Scotland. They were loyal to fault to their captains. Their fathers and grandfathers had stuck it out with Washington, they would stick it out with Lee until he sent them home. They could do nothing less.
More likely shellshock and lack of ability to tell when you're beaten. If they had tried again, they would have ended the war two years earlier by completely destroying the Army of Northern Virginia. One man's bravado doesn't speak for the broken men who streamed back from the horror that was Pickett's Charge.
He even offered his resignation which was refused. When I first read the events at Appomatox i almost cried. Lee was willing to give his life for his men's lives and freedom. Lucky for him Grant offered generous terms but the fact he was ready to die for his men.. such courage for an officer. throughout history, Officers sacrifice their men for their lives. Lee broke that chain.
@Doug Bevins ................i dont know to much about this sir,but you dont have to disrrespect someone to prove your point,it only shows how are you as a human being,maybe jacob is rigth or maybe you,but that donts change the fact that the people who fougth in the american civil war deserve respect,be confederate,be union,it donts matter,plus if we go with your point of view grant was a alcoholic,and abraham a traitor to his own people,but thats not the point here,the point is that for whatever reasons they had to figth,be lee,be grant,we must respect them and honor them.
"General Lee, to the rear!" (soldiers scolding Lee for putting himself on the front line during the overland campaign.) The historical record validates your point, sir.
This is a great scene in an awesome movie! General Lee told his troops it was his fault. It shows what a great Commanding General he was. Martin Sheen did an amazing job acting as General Lee. He should have received an Academy Award.
Could you imagine having a leader so beloved that even after he gave you an order that failed you would basically be like “no it want you we can charge harder bro let us try again!”?
It’s absolutely incredible the amount of loyalty and admiration the troops had for General Lee. Even after facing death and defeat they were willing to go at it again. Lee had the humility to admit his mistakes in fromt of them all and maintain good order amongst his men who shouldve been demoralized after that.
You can call me the biggest liberal or left leaning guy or whatever you want, but Lee's men telling him that he's not responsible for Pickett's Charge never fails to bring me to tears.
Obscure Alex I’m a republican, and if sent back in time, I would wear the blue, even knowing the dangers. But I always held Lee in respect, especially after I first watched this movie. He was the prime example of what every American General, let alone every type of commander should be. He took responsibility when he realized he had wronged, not blame it on somebody else.
Idk if you will read this, but while the confederates beliefs and reason for fighting the war was reprehensible they were also human. And Lee was human and took human responsibility. i dont think its wrong to cry here. the loss of life was staggering. Political leaning doesnt mean sht when we are all humans. Again their reasons for fighting the war were EVIL, they are still human.
Even though he was a Confederate, that doesn’t make him any less of a leader. A man who is willing to admit failure and stand before his men and admit his mistake is a man of integrity and worth of emulation.
It is SUICIDE to charge across an open field with FENCES to slow you down even before you get to your objective. The north had CANNONS pointed directly at that field. What do you think was going to happen ? To this day, you DO NOT cross and open area unless you "own the ground".
@@jameshollen9723 I’m not disagreeing that the action was absolutely stupid and foolish, but at least he was willing to admit to the failure and took responsibility. Too many leaders (political and military) these days make huge mistakes it yet don’t take the same responsibility and blame it on others and say they were actually right.
I consider myself a Northerner and a fan of Lincoln. However, Robert E. Lee is one of my favorite people to learn about. Hes one of my role models. God Bless Robert E. Lee!
Doctor Doom omg you are flat out lying. Why do you willingly lie to yourself. Lee was widely known for being kind to slaves and believed that the institution of slavery must end. Its so sad that so many of you leftists willingly lie to yourselves. So sad. Talking straight out of your ass.
@@CognizantCheddar That was there time back then. Just like the old testament of the bible where you were allowed to have slaves and sell your daughter. Guess even god was a dick too.
General Lee had done his absolute best. With the resources and men at his disposal he was always having the disadvantage against the numerically superior and better supplied Union. By reaching the high water mark at Gettysburg, it is a testament to his impeccable leadership and tactical genius to make it that far
No. He did not. He made huge blunders. The strategy the Army was attempting to operate under, the only one that offered the hope of victory against a numerically superior and better equipped foe was to sit on advantageous ground and do exactly to the Union what the Union was about to do to the Confederates at Gettysburg. When Lees army failed to occupy the advantageous ground on Day 1, he ignored this valid strategy, and let events take their course....hoping that the Union army at some point would break first; as they had in other campaigns. This was not his best. We knows this because we know that the strategy he set out with was a good strategy because its traditionally how armies have won throughout all of history against superior foes; it worked a few days later for the Union.
It's a damn shame that Lee lost so many brave and valiant men in this battle. I feel even more sorry for General Pickett because those were all his men who died. I can only imagine how crushed the Rebs were after that day. The realization that there would be no CSA and it was only a matter of time before they've lost it all.
Amazingly, the war was still not lost at this point. Different outcomes at Chattanooga, Tennessee Valley and most importantly the Wilderness would have brought a Lincoln defeat at the ballot box and a negotiated settlement.
It is an extraordinarily good thing that they lost. Can you imagine what a viable CSA would have meant for mankind? I am still amazed by the sympathy that this evil society still garners to this day.
@@eqmoz yeah… It is stunning and disheartening. Especially considering that most of the ancestors of the posters wouldn’t have owned slaves and were considered white trash at best by the planter class. We can’t 100 percent blame individuals because our country taught a completely false version of history, perhaps one of the few times in world history that the losers wrote the narrative. But yes people should try to educate themselves.
@@eqmozhat it would've meant for the world? Brasil had slavery until 1888 and it hadn't brought any terrors to the world, neither would've surviving Confederacy, today it would've been just another country, probably poorer than average, with slavery long in thepast
@@johnny_thunder_3024 I mean slavery doesn’t dictate economic success in the far future- as you mentioned Brazil as an example, they’re a shitty country but not because of money issues. Hell by your logic the United States should be poor because after the civil war slavery was abolished so that means we shouldn’t be a world leader in economics- oh wait we are :/
it doesnt make any sense....earlier he said, and I paraphrase, a leader must let go and risk loosing all he holds dear....thats the trap....I suspect he had to know he could not win.....for he was such a supposedly smart man.....but his honor blinded him...
@@jamesb3843 and there is the great trap. When you attack you must hold nothing back. You must commit yourself totally. It makes sense in the context of a war that should never have been in some sense sadly
All men that fought on both sides are considered U.S. veterans by law. There should be no removal or desecration of any statues, grave sites, etc. whether they were members of the Confederate or Union armies. Many of the senior officers of the Confederate Army had served with distinction in the U.S. Army before the war, that service should be remembered.
@@k1productions87 “If Virginia stands by the old Union, so will I. But if she secedes (though I do not believe in secession as a constitutional right, nor that there is sufficient cause for revolution), then I will follow my native State with my sword, and, if need be, with my life.” Robert E. Lee. He not only would, he did.
Except for the fact that in the end, he was a traitor to the United States, and he continued to speak ill of Black people even after his "country" lost the war. He was unreformed. This is what happens when evil bestirs such arrogance in man.
If they had taken cemetery hill things could have gone in Lee's favor. Also if Jackson didnt die. A lot of things were not going Lee's way and he was too drunk on success to see it.
Love Longstreet's line when he is addressing Pickett's Brigade Commanders: "All the men who have died in this war are with you here today. I believe this battle will decide the fate of our country."
Kemper survived his wounds but was later captured in September of 1863 and exchanged for a Union general. He commanded reserve units for the rest of the war.
In retirement, Dwight Eisenhower hosted British general Bernard Montgomery at his home in Gettysburg. Eisenhower gave Montgomery a personal tour of the Gettysburg battlefield and they discussed the tactics of both sides. Reportedly, they agreed that given the policies in effect for World War II, today both the Union commander and Confederate commander, Meade and Lee, would have been dismissed by their respective governments after Gettysburg. Lee's invasion of the North was a bloody failure. However, Meade failed to follow up his costly victory, allowing the Confederates to escape back into Virginia.
Were there fresh Union regiments available for pursuit? Why risk a potential loss by ambush, when you can just take the win? Not like the South was ever gonna recover from this loss at Gettysburg.
Every time General Kemper ask that "full justice be done for his men" I get choked up. Of course this whole movie is an emotionally wrenching experience.
" it is all my fault" ...when people ask why we southerners Revere Lee... that's why... it's called leadership...he even tried to resign his commission... Jefferson Davis wouldn't let him...
Alonzo Branson That’s how much they loved Lee. They would kick down the gates of Hell for him and for their homes. And Lee likewise was willing to die for his men.
@@ReformedSooner24 they would have fought ol scratch himself, and laid hell in ruins, for Robert Edward Lee, if Marse Robert had asked them to! Big G and his boy JC would have needed to find a new place to send bad folks to!
That bit- may have been a trifle exaggerated. One of Lee's own officers writing home said that "(Gettysburg) exactly cancelled out Fredericksburg- Lee seems to have become as weak (presumeably, in thinking) as Burnside."
@ravenclaw67 I have read that he also stopped to speak to a wounded Northern soldier and prayed for his speedy recovery. A better leader of soldiers you would be hard pressed to find.
When Lee looked at the Northern Soldiers laid out on Mayres Heights at Fredericksburg it effected him the rest of his life. He was trying to fight hopefully the last battle of the war at Gettysburg. He was so tired of the rivers of blood of the soldiers on both sides. Joshua Chamberlain was a fine man on the Union Side. He respected the Southern Soldier. He quoted Julius Ceasar's speech to his troops before they crossed the Rubicon to war with their own countrymen while waiting their turn to cross the Rappahannock at Fredericksburg. He also wrote how he was amazed at the Southern Soldier's ability to out March them starving. Barefooted and their clothes falling off because they were dying of starvation but still fought like demons. He started the Salute of the Southern Soldier's while they Surrendered. He was asked why he did it. He said they are our countrymen again and they fought well.
wonderful acting in this movie...Sheen's performance as Lee was tops...Robert Duvall played lee in the next movie and as good an actor as he is still did not come up to par with this performance...Excellent
I've seen this movie so many times. It always stuck with me the moment that Confederate soldier yelled out "Hail Mothra!" 1:51 Mothra of course had been wounded in a battle with Godzilla the previous week. The absence of Mothra was instrumental in the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg, but the soldiers of the Confederacy never lost faith in their Kaiju.
@@thewkovacs316 he stuck with his state, his homeland, his community, and his family. He was the opposite of a traitor. A traitor would have betrayed his friends, family, and state
Even though Lee and his men fought for a flawed cause (slavery), I still must admit to being in awe of the courage of these men who fought overwhelming odds. Such courage and strength is need today to fight our current enemies.
Throwing ones self against firmly cemented enemies and never really crushing them in the open is madness, not courage. Lee would have struck better if he went for Washington or at least the Potomac river, not drive into Pennsylvania where he would have little support
I Guess the Founding Fathers, fought for a lost cause too. Slavery was practised, in all 13 Colonies then. The North did away with it, only because it wasn't profitable for them, not some noble humane reason.
Even though a large part of the political background of the CSA did focus on slavery, the others are right. Lee fought mostly for his homeland of Virginia. He would have followed it whether it seceded or not. He fought mostly for home, family and loyalty to state. The soldiers would have had a myriad of reasons for fighting. Some for slavery (although a lot of sources I have seen indicate this is a pretty small minority, at least as far as they disclosed). Some for state's rights. Some for money Some because they were drafted Some for honor The list of reasons is truly massive
@@ChargingStag The same could be said for the Union. There were a small handful fighting to end slavery but most Union soldiers didn't care about it. In fact when emancipation came many were worried about losing their jobs to former slaves. White supremacy was also very common in the North. Most saw it as a patriotic duty and honor to serve their country. Many felt the Union needed to be saved.
@@King_Stannis_Baratheon It's in most of the articles of secession of every confederate state. They left to maintain the institution of slavery. Look it up. Just because Jefferson Davis started writing books to backtrack on it after the war, and those books were held up by southern historians, doesn't make it true.
@@rikk319 95% of them didn't own slaves, my ancestors came from Ireland they were separated from their family members they didn't know where they would end up when they were conscripted off the boats to fight and die for their right to be Americans they were also segregated and put to forced labor by the union. The union made the ports for slaves to arrive in the south of course after they were done with them building their industry in the north further more on that, the sheer amount of slaves that were being poured on the ports was actually un wanted by many southerners. The south had no industry except cotton, they thought the world of that stuff because that's all they had and peanuts the wood was too dry for industry in the south, thus an entire half the country relied on agriculture. So now it's 1861 and the north is done with their slaves and they've successfully forced the burden of it on the south and basically blame us for slavery as a whole, even though there was only 4 years of slavery during the war supposedly about ending it, compared to 100 years of slavery and they get all the glory for "freeing them", jinxed you they didn't end slavery in 1865 they were still using slaves in Delaware and Philadelphia and it was federally taxed, don't believe me look it up, it ended in 1901 and even still black people were being completely randomly picked off the streets and put in chain gangs, all federally taxed. almost like slavery is still here but only your government can do it, Look up the 13th amendment it basically says that. Anyways the war to most people who have a passion for it don't hold these political boundaries like you they know their ancestor fought for the grey so they honor them just like northerners honor their dead it's called human decency. They're dead now destroying their graves their monuments and their memories are only steps backwards and no progression just wasting time to piss someone else off.
Even though the charge was a colossal mistake, Lee’s and the Army’s spirit was still high. Pretty much the end of beginning with 2.5 more long years to go!
Absolutely spot on performance by Martin Sheen. General Robert Eustis Lee may be the best American (yes, American) General Officer the United States ever turned out.
Gazzara5 - Because he was a General, not President. His job was to execute military objectives. The Executive branch of the CS government was supposed to support that and the CS legislature was supposed to fund it.
@@bernardwilson9519 I wouldn't consider him a traitor since he was loyal to his homestate. If his state joined the Union, he would fight for the Union. Of course they didn't so that's why he fought for the Confederacy.
I know his stuff is taught at War College and heard those apologist teachers spout that drivel off too..I dont think a traitor deserves any of that....Old Granny did some remarkable things though
There is only one problem with this scene. If this did indeed happen (too lazy to research right now) Lee would have dismounted and took a knee by his General’s side, even if for a brief moment.
General James Kemper actually survived the battle and the war. He lived for many years, but never fully recovered from his wounds received at Gettysburg.
@@analtubegut66 There is a difference between being misguided and being a bad person. Most truly believed they were fighting for States' Rights against rule of an oppressive central government.
I've walked that battlefield. Pickett's charge was pure madness and the price the south paid for having Robert E. Lee in command. The stone wall is called "the high water mark" of the confederacy in the Civil War. Lee was right when he told the returning survivors "It is all my fault." It was, all his fault. Longstreet knew it was a suicide mission and was so overcome with grief before the charge that he couldn't even speak the order to attack. What a tragedy for our nation with so many good men sacrificed on both sides.
This is all true; Lee was not himself since his heart attacks. But how different could things have turned out if J.E.B. Stuart's Cavalry had attacked the rear of the Union position? George Custer and the Michigan Cavalry defeated them on their flanking maneuver leaving Pickett to attack alone. Buford, Custer, Chamberlain, the 1st Minnesota..... so many miracles
Happenstance on both sides. I'm not calling the slaughter of men on either side a miracle. Custer was the co-leader of the Union cavalry, along with General Gregg, and repulsed Stuart's cavalry, but Farnsworth's Union cavalry attack on the right flank of Lee's army was also repulsed. Overall, a shit-ton of fighting and dying on the third day.
It actually wasn't madness. Today's current battlefield is different from that of 1863, due in large to Camp Colt back in 1917. By July 3rd the Federal Reserves had already been committed, and they were drastically short on ammunition for the artillery; Meade actually ordered Hancock to cease firing before the attack to conserve said ammo. Further, the advance was not one over open ground the entire way, it only was so for the last 500 yards. The chief reasons for the failure were thus not on Lee, but Pickett and Longstreet: 1) Both generals commanded from the rear, with Longstreet in particular being petulant he didn't get his way. This had drastic effects on the battlefield as the attack became disoriented and began to shift its focus in an oblique attack that resulted in their flanks getting exposed to the artillery. Had Pickett been on the field with his men, this could've been avoided. 2) The attack stopped at about 100-75 yards from the wall and they began firing into it instead of keeping their momentum up, creating a reverse Fredericksburg. Again, had Pickett been on the field, this wouldn't have happened. Stannard's brigade had their flank in the air and they could've been crushed, cracking the whole line. 3) Longstreet, due to the threat at South Cavalry Field, withheld several units Lee had initially slated for the attack. Had he released more of these, I have no doubt they would've swamped Hancock.
Commit neckrope. I find alot of you people who judge Picketts Charge act like Lee did some tenno haika banzai suicidal shit based off movies like this, there was a strategy behind it. We never saw most of it. All we saw of his strategy was an attack on the hills. Ever thought of where JEB Staurts cavalry was once they rejoined the army? The Union line was in a fishhook, henceforth it looked like a J < (that arrow sort of points at where picketts men hit them. The top of the J was the hills where the 20th maine etc. made their stands, but JEB Stuarts cavalry was to move behind it and flank the forces being assualted by Pickett. They were actually held off by an outnumbered force of Custer's Cavalry. Besides that the Artillery unlike in this movie was ill represented. There were HUNDREDS of guns firing for a good long while but the issue was the commander had miscalculated the bombardment and they had different fuses because the supplies from Richmond were off. 90% Of the confederate bombardment missed. Imagine if they fried that union position and had confederate cavalry on their ass? those billy yanks would of ran up the line down the hook and into the confederate troops resting there haha.
@@swampmanactual7392 That is an interesting analysis. I'm not aware of Stannard's brigade being vulnerable. But Meade had anticipated an attack on the center and the North had far more shells than the South to fire. Lee had (2) far, far better options staring him right in the face, but he had some sort of tunnel vision that prevented him from seeing the wisdom of them. A) Longstreet's plain common sense idea to put the CSA between Washington and AOP. This was Lincoln's worst nightmare and had instructed Meade to do anything to prevent this. Had Lee done so Meade would have HAD to put himself in an unfavorable position to dislodge Lee. (I see many who love, admire and respect RE Lee refuse to admit the simple brilliance of doing this because they can't bring themselves to say anything bad about RE Lee) I love, admire & respect RE Lee but facts are facts and it is not mutually exclusive to have great admiration for someone and also to recognize they had flaws. Or B) Take Big Round Top. The position commanded the entire battlefield, Lee rejected this because he said the hill was too steep to take. It was much steeper than Little Round Top but was 'takeable'. Col. William C. Oates commanding the Alabama 15th Regiment (the regiment that would later that day take on the 20th Maine commanded by Lt Col. Joshua Chamberlain) actually took it on the morning of the 2nd day, it was lightly defended by the North, but still difficult to take because it was such a strong position. Col. Oates once at the summit surveyed the entire battlefield and immediately knew it was the key to victory. Unfortunately, shortly afterward, he got orders to abandon BRT and attack LRT. He seriously considered disobeying the order, he felt with 1500 well armed men he could hold off the entire Union army in that position. He also knew he could get cannon up there and rain shells down on every single union position. The cannons would have to be taken apart and pulled up with mules but it was doable. Eventually he decided to obey orders and moved off the position. Later that day, after fighting all morning and successfully taking BRT, without any water for his men, they had to attack the 20th Maine and still almost took that position. Even on the 3rd day it was argued to Lee to take BRT but he rejected it. It was Lee's worst 2 days in the field, he got sucked into fighting a tactical battle where the enemy had all the natural advantages (Like Hitler @ Stalingrad). Lee was and will always be admired & respected, the South couldn't have asked for a better commander in the field, but he, like all leaders, made some big mistakes and unfortunately for Lee, he made those mistakes at the worst time.
Robert E. Lee may he rest in peace is one of the best generals in modern history imo. He was the Hannibal Barca of Dixie. His tactical brilliance and strong bond with his men is far beyond far greater than many. Greetings from Turkey
I don't know about all that. Personally if I had to go with American generals, I think Patton could run circles around Lee. Heck, Schwarzkof even pulled off an almost bloodless(For NATO, anyway) invasion against one of the largest ground armies on the planet in the 90's, and got it done on a timetable that would have had a German commander circa 1939 spinning dizzy. Lee had a boatload of charisma, and I feel that's where a great deal of the cult of personality comes from. Militarily, his earlier successes were a mixture of a woefully incompetent opponent and the use of an aggressively defensive campaign. He wasn't really able to win the major battles of the war because of a rather poor rapport with his command staff and inflexibility when it came to situations outside of what he knew(Hence Gettysburg, where he doomed the Confederacy over little more than rhetoric instead of keeping to his original strategic goals.). That's just my opinion, anyway.
You're comparing two very different times and types of warfare and tactics. Napoleonic tactics was the wartime tactics of the Civil War. In WW2 it modern warfare and to a large effect fought in urban areas. I do agree with you that Lee did come up against incompetent Generals at the beginning of the war but it doesn't change the fact that he was outgunned and outnumbered most of the time. Aside from captured/desertion rates Lee inflicted more causalities on the Army of the Potomac during the war than he received, even against Grant. By the time the U.S went into Europe in late '43 to mid '44 the Nazi empire was a shadow of it's former self. The Russians had pushed back the Nazis several hundred miles and the Nazis had lost Northern Africa and Italy within a year. For the most part they were on the run playing defense when the situation arose. Lee and the army of Northern Virginia did the same from early 1864 onward as well.
In case you didn't notice Lee never outnumbered his opponent in any major battle yet won most of them, it takes skill to do that. I'm not glorifying Lee, i'm simply giving credit where its due. If it was Hood, Bragg or Johnston commanding The Army of Northern Virginia I doubt the South would of lasted as long as it did. Perhaps Longstreet would of made a better leader? Who knows? You can't really compare tactics and technology used 150+ years ago to WW2 or to the Vietnam either as they are two completely different types of warfare and eras. Never said the U.S wasn't involved in the North Africa and Italian Campaigns. However by the time the U.S got involved there was a lot that had happened. Partisans/rebels in Italy had done a lot of the work and in Africa the British were rapidly closing in and killing Nazis. My entire point was you shouldn't compare tactics and generals in 100 year time gaps because the technology changes and with that warfare/tactics. You wouldn't compare a General today in Iraq to a WW1 General now would you? Trench warfare to desert/urban warfare is completely different. Much like dropping bombs out of airplanes in Vietnam is a hell of a lot different than fighting in lines in the Civil War. Different styles different times...
Hannibal Barca was the greatest general of any age, constantly fighting with inferior supply lines, fewer troops, poorer weapons and armor, in enemy territory. He out-thought every general he faced. He was a genius-level tactician and strategist. The elites who ruled his homeland refused to send him reinforcements, so he had to make do with his ever-dwindling manpower. His troops were a mishmash of nations that were hostile to Rome and all spoke different languages. He regularly defeated expert Roman armies that were two and even three times the size of his. He slept in a common officer's tent and fought at the front of his army, with his men. He battled the Romans for ten years in their own territory, and was finally defeated when the Romans--who knew they could never win against him in a straight-up battle--used their superior economy and bribed the leader of the entire left flank cavalry of his army--to switch sides in the middle of the battle at Zama. It was the only battle he ever lost. Robert E. Lee. was a U.S. colonel who betrayed his oath to the United States Constitution by taking up arms against it. He was an able and usually brilliant commander, and treated his men with honor. But he was a traitor to the United States, there's no getting around that--and he was definitely no Hannibal Barca.
"I want this to be the final battle..." "We must rest now, and retire to fight another day...and there will be another day..." Heartbreaking words. This was the last time the Army of Northern Virginia would take offensive campaign. After this moment Lee changed strategy from seeking a decisive battle that might precipitate a negotiated peace...to a strategy of entrenchment and attrition which would exhaust the Union and precipitate a negotiated peace. Lee was a great General...a man who combined the art of maneuver with a shrewd understanding of the investment in blood necessary to achieve victory...a killer on the battlefield. To hear him have to acknowledge the failure of his plans and the requirement to adopt an even bloodier strategy with little to no hope of success... ...it breaks the heart. But, as Sherman remarked, it was a 'bad cause' to be fighting for. I'm glad Lee lost.
“Never let them see you run, you hear? Never let the, see you run.” Such pride that man had for his troops. It saddens me that his memory is being tarnished today to score cheap political points.
Contemporary politics and trend-chasers wear themselves out in time. I think a proper memory of Lee and his men as they were-not saints, not demons, but men of their time- will win out in the end.
@@morgant.dulaman8733 Well here in Virginia we spoke loudly for sanity this past November 2nd so you are probably right. Governor Klan robes is going to be out the door.
@@totallynotalpharius2283 No more then the Patriots betrayed their oaths to the King of England, Oddly the only difference it seems in whether some one is a hero or a patriot is whether they win.
Pickett's charge was a serious mistake, but Lee did not make the mistake Burnside and Hood made at Fredericksburg and Franklin respectively by trying again, and again.
No cause he prerty much lost half his army at little round top and picketts charge and had nothing left to send that wasnt wounded exausted or demorilized... And if grant was in charge and not meade....lee woulld have never escaped
The failure of Pickett's Charge if anybody bothers to check the eyewitness testimonies of what actually transpired was a failure of logistics and lack of supplies bring support for the Left Flank of the attack when do Union reserves came in and flanked the charge add these reserves and the flanking move been defeated by the artillery That was supposed to be employed the charge would be mostly successful whether they could have held the position is up to history
@@scottaznavourian5791 probably still would have. Meade's army was almost as beat up as Lee's and really in no condition for pursuit. Only Sedgwick's sixth corps was still in fighting shape by the end of the third day on the Union side, but it had been broken up to reinforce other parts of the line. Lee was only about 15-20 miles away from very defensible positions and could have entrenched if Meade pursued him, if the Union tried to assault him with their half mangled army their victory could have easily been reversed. Though most of Lee's army was spent Anderson and Rhodes' divisions were still strong enough to hold defensive positions.
I've always felt so bad for General Lee in this clip. He lost a lot of good and brave men in that charge and for a man who loved the Army as much as he did, it must have felt close to losing a lot of friends and loved ones. I'm sure it also became all too clear to the South that there wasn't going to be a CSA and it was only a matter of time.
I agree with your sentiment, but have to disagree with your message. I don't think the South truly lost their spirit in believing the war was winnable until Sherman's march. I'm not sure what the decisive battle during that operation was, but until then the South still fought very bravely and believed they could win. After Sherman's march the South became dispersed.
Aleks The Deplorable " To be a good soldier, you must love the army; To be a good Commander, you must be willing to order the death of the thing you love." --Robert E. Lee
If it is true then it is very extraordinary. You would never hear a general in today’s army admitting to the enlisted troops that he had made a mistake. Not happening.
Lee didn't admit it to enlisted troops after the battle. He admitted it to Jefferson Davis in a letter explaining his actions. He apologized about its effects to the cause and to Davis personally...but thought himself justified in taking the risk. After all, the frontal attack after a flank attack had failed had worked at Chancellorsville not weeks earlier in forcing the Union army to withdraw.
@@dclark142002 There is truth to that, but there are accounts that General Lee did say as he passed his soldiers that it was His fault, whether he was saying it to the soldiers or to himself is debatable.
It's a powerful scene and expresses one truth: Lee did indeed believe that his army was invincible at that point and that sheer strength of will was enough to overcome all odds. And he was wrong.
It wasn't just strength of will alone he thought was enough, but if he and his generals gave his men a fighting chance, the men through strength of will and with divine providence would win the field. It had happened a number of times before in recent months, either by achieving victory or avoiding abject defeat.
Lee failed. He was a strategic mastermind, yet he forced his troops to certain death. The battle even continued for 2 more years! My takeaway is that the south never really stood a chance, but Lee was so good he made them think they were invincible.
The rebels did reach the high water mark but could not hold . The fighting was so vicious the road between the fences was ankle deep. Used buck shot like giant shot guns tear a man in half.
Even if he did choose to side against our Federal Union, I still think he was one of the greatest generals that America was ever blessed with. The only other general who I respect as much as Robert E Lee is General U.S. Grant.
Grant was an Alcoholic bum who kept slaves long after Lee freed his . Only reason Grant won was the manpower to draw from was much bigger and the industrial might of the North . Patton was a great general .
Hard to imagine many leaders today saying publicly "It's all my fault" when things fall apart.
That's because Lee is a real leader. True leaders take the credit if things go well and the blame if things go bad no matter how hard it is.
Lee was a good engineer and manager of disparate personalities but far from flawless as a strategist or tactician. The failure at Pickett's Charge was not unforeseeable as Malvern Hill had taken place almost exactly a year earlier with similar results. He was good on the defensive but no better than many others including George Thomas.
Al M He certainly would have done a whole lot better if he stuck with fighting a defensive campaign like he did before. Another thing that really would have helped him out was if General Jackson didn't die.
Have you read Foote's series?
I have not no. Why?
Years later, Eisenhower followed his example and wrote a speech for if the D-Day landings had failed, placing all of the blame on himself while still congratulating his soldiers on their bravery. Thankfully he never gave it, but he was willing to, and that's what matters.
Unless I am mistaken, General Dwight D. Eisenhower had a picture of General Robert E. Lee in his headquarters.
He also called Gen. Robert E. Lee "The most beloved General in all of American history."
It's crazy to think that President's and Generals have these kinds of speeches written just in case something like this happens. There was even a speech that was written in case the original moon landing was unsuccessful, and how the astronauts were all dead. Who knows how many other speeches like this were written, and what the worst case scenario was?
It goes to show that he believed in something other than self promotion.
TimesNewLogan It’s a shame he ran a post war death camp which cost the lives of millions of German POWs and Refugees.
Documentation Slave Where?
"Let us reform and hit em again, I know we can do it."
They were like children that couldn't stand the thought of letting their father down. I think they KNEW they couldn't go through that slaughter again, but God, in that moment, they would've tried for their General.
He knew how to inspire loyalty.
That's stupidity.
@@jamesbutler8821 no that's called bravery, something that the world needs more of these days
@@rickeyhall9994 No, it was fucking suicide. Bravery, would be telling your leader to fuck himself and if he thinks charging superior numbers and superior firepower in the center is such a good idea when you have been trounced trying it on the flanks then his ass needs to be in front, leading the charge. Risking your life and career against a superior who is delusional, that is bravery.
No, that’s called insanity. To do the same thing and expect different results is called insanity. No matter what rank you are in the military, you must question your leader’s command, or else they will never see any error and will never grow as a leader until the damage is already done.
@@Unchainedful Oh I agree. I admire the conviction, but another charge was nothing short of a suicide mission. Lee was right to order a withdraw, it was the only way of salvaging this.
One of Martin Sheen's finest performances ever and happens to be in one of the greatest Civil War battle movies.
"greatest civil war movies" Sheen himself said it was far too long...The film itself was almost like a documentary explaining everything....So interesting in that reguard....But as entertainment....Not the best by a long shot
@@DavidDragonetti-t3qDepends what kinda person you are because I love hearing about the tactics, failed commands and reckless generals.
@@daviddragonetti8181 Yes have got to agree with you their I love glory. I would say glory should have a remake but Hollywood butchers everything nowadays.
@@DavidDragonetti-t3q I guess for those with minute attention spans...
To hear a leader admit his fault in public is almost impossible. It speaks volumes about the personality of this great legend ....
A legend who led a rebellion against his country for the cause of slavery …
What legend? A man who owned slaves is a legend? A man who fought for evil to maintain evil. All I see is an old, cruel general who should’ve been shot along with the rest of them
R.E.LEE WAS THE REAL DEAL... FOUR YEARS AT WEST POINT AND NEVER GOT A DEMERIT..HIS FRIENDS CALLED HIM"THE MARBLE MAN...
@@coolcat5714 People were more loyal to their home states than the union at large in those days. He was against secession and was apathetic about whether slavery continued or not, but he fought for the south anyway because he didn’t want to be ordered to fight his own state and out of a sense duty to his state; his people.
He was no saint, but he wasn’t a monster either. He was a man who did what he thought was right at the time.
After the war, he became a strong advocate for reconciliation between the north and the south. Famously, he told a widow of one of his slain men to put aside her bitterness and to raise her son as an American.
Lee is one of the finest men the states have ever produced.
@@coolcat5714 as stated by user “the night watcher”, General Lee, fought for the south because he didn’t want to nor could he believe it right to betray his fellow Virginians by fighting against them, he fought for his state as did everyone then. Besides that, Even if his beliefs are completely wrong, I had rather see a man who is willing to stand up for, fight, and even die for what he believes to be right, than a man who cares more about his personal safety, and public approval than he does about his values and virtues.
It's a fact that when General Lee apologized to his men and began to order their withdrawal from the field of battle that several of the surrounding soldiers actually requested to reform and attack again. After literally walking through hell and back they were willing to charge again. I'm not sure if any commander in all of history had the love, respect and admiration of his men than General Lee
yeah well, he didn't deserve it. Those men died for nothing. They died because of his pride.
Alexander, Caesar, Genghis, Hannibal, Eisenhower, Macarthur, Spartacus, Colonel Kurtz, those his situation got kind of dark at the end lol
It was his fault, Lee was the commanding General. Thing is I'm not convinced he could have done much differently that would have gained a different result, especially once the Federals got well situated on the high ground. The idea the ANV could have pulled out of a major attack the first day and redeploy towards Washington DC sounds like a good idea, but from all I've read such a maneuver would have been very difficult to execute in the best of circumstances. Meade certainly would have been made sure the circumstances were most difficult.
Perhaps Longstreet could have slid to the right as Hood requested on the 2nd day, but they had trouble coordinating the attack as it was laid out...extending the lines further probably would have made matters worse...meanwhile the Union had shorter distances to move troops to counter Confederate movement . All day long the Federals were able to maneuver reinforcements exactly where they were needed at exactly the right moment. If the rebels had tried to slide right I do believe the Federals would have quickly reacted to counter it as they had all day. The result would have been the same...bloodied than it already was but still the same.
The 3rd Day shouldn't have happened. The ANV should have left the field to the Army of the Potomac while they still had Pickets Division in good shape. There was nothing to be gained from a frontal attack against a brutally strong Union center commanded by a very competent General Hancock. Maybe had General Jackson been available to General Lee at the beginning of Gettysburg, things might have been different. But Stonewall wasn't there, and his absence was a huge factor in this.
@greghampton9346 well put and I agree. The loss of Jackson was catastrophic for Lee and the ANV. I'm quite sure Gettysburg would have been a completely different battle had Jackson there.
As it was, even a well executed maneuver to the right would have only made the battle even bloodier.
The cavalry debacle and the lack of screening around the army certainly didn't help, though I'm not sure Stuart was wholly to blame there.
I will say that had Jackson been there, victory was more than likely under his command. Following a victory in Pennsylvania and perhaps a subsequent march on Washington would have resulted in European assistance from Britain and France
Mustafa Kemal was a general that ordered "I'm not ordering you to attack, I'm ordering you to die." and his soldiers gladly followed the order against an enemy that had dreadnaughts supporting them, ammo and superior numbers.
This was Lee's finest moment, he made a mistake, took the blame for it and still had the respect of the men who served under him. That's the kind of man every boy should want to be......
Darth Belal A war where I pity both sides, even more so with the grays.
Lee was a great man and though I am no soldier and not a reb myself, I salute him :')
+Darth Belal That was the measure of General Lee, humility, & the love & respect he had for his men, & they for him.
Wellington said many things about his men, some horrible, some grudgingly appreciative, but the most important was that he respected them, & they him, after all, he beat every French General sent against him, & finally, Napoleon himself.
If Lee had the resources & manpower of the North, It would be the Confederate States of America to this very day.
But whoever won, they would have still been to greatest of Allies to us in the UK.
+Brianboru88 No argument there. I could see if the Confederacy had won, then General Lee making a great President one day.
+Darth Belal I grew up wanting to be Sherman- a winner.
I love Civil War history, and great acting, this is a perfect mixture!
This next to "Gods And Generals" is one of my favorites.
Why did "Gods and Generals" got such a low rating?
+kfir levy Not too sure myself really.
Too long winded. The final release was over 3 hours. Several scenes should have been cut. Still, there were many good moments. The director Ron Maxwell should have been reined in.
kfir levy Joe Smith is right. Too preachy, not as balanced, and aside from Stephen Lang and Jeff Daniels, the acting left much to be desired (especially, sad to say, Robert Duvall as General Lee)
One of Martin Sheen's greatest performances.
How come Martin Sheen did not receive an Academy Award nomination for this role, one of his best. I thought he brought Robert E. Lee to life.
I was very surprised to find out General Kemper survived his “mortal wound”. I was under the misconception for years that he died at Gettysburg. I only found out recently that he survived.
The movie should have included him the coda explaining that he lived.
General Kemper's mortal wound took 32 years to kill him, apparently.
Apparently the bullet got within a hair's breadth of cutting open the femoral artery and thus couldn't be removed (surgery on a major artery not being the kind of thing that was survivable back in those days), that's why everybody figured it was going to kill him. Quite a few people (including Kemper himself, probably) were rather surprised that it didn't.
Kemper, who incidentally didn't look anything like Royce Applegate (he had a very long and very thick black beard, for one thing, and was probably a good 70 lbs lighter) had to be left behind when Lee withdrew and fell into Union hands. It's said his cheerful demeanor while in the hospital endeared him to the initially hostile nurses.
I like how Kemper is not thinking of himself and doesn't ask for help but rather asks Lee to look out for his men who made the charge. That's being selfless. It touched me somehow the way he collapsed onto the cot after asking that of Lee.
@@dardalion3199 Agreed--that line is as good in its way as Lee saying, "This was all my fault."
I think of Lee every time I take the blame for something.
Blaming Hillary?
why would you take the blame
Lmao same
@@870Rem12gauge She Blames the Shit she did in Benghazi on a stupid TH-cam Video.
@@foolslayer9416 and you know this how?
Lee was respected in the North even after the war. That should tell you what kind of leader he was. Even his enemies respected him, even pardoned him.
That was in large part due to Grant, Johnson wanted to drag Lee and other Confederate leaders into trials, Grant refused to comply based on the surrender agreement signed at Appatomox courthouse (spelling might be off there)
Pickett hated Lee for the rest of his life, there was a reason why Longstreet would not give the order to attack, leaving it to Col. Alexander
That's what most of these admirers of Lee fail to acknowledge, Longstreet knew, Alexander figured it out and others at the battle saw the fallacy in this attack. I don't romanticize anything about the Confederacy. They took up arms against our Nation to preserve slavery, there is nothing noble on that endeavor.
Peace
I think Lee hated himself even more.
@@Cuffski Alright, chill out bro. I fully agree that the war happened from slavery, but just dumping a bunch of dudes who never even owned slaves themselves and claiming it was a one-dimensional war makes you sound silly.
@@TheSwedishAssassin You are correct. Like so many things in our history, the real truth is seldom known - both the good and bad. There is absolutely no possibility that any of us today can fully understand that war, why men fought it on each side or refused to fight it at all. Sure, there are books and movies and such, but those always come with a touch of blemish from the creator of the work. It cannot be helped. That war was far from being about a singular problem.
@@charlesrutherford4785 Wise. It's a balance, knowing that the South seceded because Lincoln, a staunch abolitionist, was elected, but many of the masses just didn't see themselves as one nation, but as separate states being dominated by what should not exist as a federal government
This scene is great not just for its emotion, but it's also historically accurate. When Lee says "I thought we were invincible," that's the actual historiographical explanation for Pickett's Charge.
His spies had also given him bad information as they had told him that the union line was weakest in the center. In reality it had been reinforced the night before.
@bryanstillman2125 please cite a reference for what you claim
@@jimrichardson3078 I guess the obvious escapes you
@@gruntforever7437 No, I guess you simply don't have a good one
@@jimrichardson3078 you are not worth the effort to correct such a stupid comment
"Let us hit em again sir! Let us reform and hit em again, I know we can do it!" That's balls right there.
that is the bravest thing I've ever withnessed
Thin line between courage and stupidity.
Many of the southern forces had roots that went back to Ireland and Scotland. They were loyal to fault to their captains. Their fathers and grandfathers had stuck it out with Washington, they would stick it out with Lee until he sent them home. They could do nothing less.
The balls? They wouldn't have done it. They were broken from Gettysburg on.
More likely shellshock and lack of ability to tell when you're beaten. If they had tried again, they would have ended the war two years earlier by completely destroying the Army of Northern Virginia. One man's bravado doesn't speak for the broken men who streamed back from the horror that was Pickett's Charge.
He even offered his resignation which was refused. When I first read the events at Appomatox i almost cried. Lee was willing to give his life for his men's lives and freedom. Lucky for him Grant offered generous terms but the fact he was ready to die for his men.. such courage for an officer. throughout history, Officers sacrifice their men for their lives. Lee broke that chain.
@Doug Bevins ................i dont know to much about this sir,but you dont have to disrrespect someone to prove your point,it only shows how are you as a human being,maybe jacob is rigth or maybe you,but that donts change the fact that the people who fougth in the american civil war deserve respect,be confederate,be union,it donts matter,plus if we go with your point of view grant was a alcoholic,and abraham a traitor to his own people,but thats not the point here,the point is that for whatever reasons they had to figth,be lee,be grant,we must respect them and honor them.
Doug Bevins Lee was willing to give up his life for his men at The courthouse. It’s well documented in Grants memoirs.
"General Lee, to the rear!" (soldiers scolding Lee for putting himself on the front line during the overland campaign.) The historical record validates your point, sir.
@Doug Bevins your just some Pathetic Leftist pig
@Daniel Stetson ha someone who gets it these Leftists are freaking Pathetic
"let us reform and hit em again!" That's the Southern spirit
fervent people
They would not even have come over half the distance, weakened as they were.
Fredricksburg; that's the Northern spirit.
Not knowing when to quit, and learn that they lost.
ClearlyCaribbeanReb Ok, I’ll shut up. But as soon as you leave I’m gonna start talking again.
It hasnt happened too often in history that a leader admitted that it was his fault.
This is a great scene in an awesome movie! General Lee told his troops it was his fault. It shows what a great Commanding General he was. Martin Sheen did an amazing job acting as General Lee. He should have received an Academy Award.
100% with you there. But Pacino won it for "Scent of a Woman". Martin Sheen wasn't even nominated.
Could you imagine having a leader so beloved that even after he gave you an order that failed you would basically be like “no it want you we can charge harder bro let us try again!”?
It’s absolutely incredible the amount of loyalty and admiration the troops had for General Lee. Even after facing death and defeat they were willing to go at it again. Lee had the humility to admit his mistakes in fromt of them all and maintain good order amongst his men who shouldve been demoralized after that.
Ron Maxwell did a fantastic job as director. The dialogue and scenes were perfect.
90% of the dialogue is taken from the book The Killer Angels.
@@Jermster_91 Aint that better then other movies "based off the book"?
Lee, like many other generals, made huge mistakes; but unlike most, he took the blame for them.
Now that's soldiering.
A fellow Sharpe enjoyer? A true gentleman of taste!
@caedmonnoeske3931 You are yourself a gentleman. ^^
You can call me the biggest liberal or left leaning guy or whatever you want, but Lee's men telling him that he's not responsible for Pickett's Charge never fails to bring me to tears.
Obscure Alex I’m a republican, and if sent back in time, I would wear the blue, even knowing the dangers.
But I always held Lee in respect, especially after I first watched this movie. He was the prime example of what every American General, let alone every type of commander should be.
He took responsibility when he realized he had wronged, not blame it on somebody else.
He may have been fighting for the wrong side, but his words were that of a good leader.
Traitor
@@JCDenton3 ?
Idk if you will read this, but while the confederates beliefs and reason for fighting the war was reprehensible they were also human. And Lee was human and took human responsibility. i dont think its wrong to cry here. the loss of life was staggering. Political leaning doesnt mean sht when we are all humans. Again their reasons for fighting the war were EVIL, they are still human.
The beloved general of all time
Even though he was a Confederate, that doesn’t make him any less of a leader. A man who is willing to admit failure and stand before his men and admit his mistake is a man of integrity and worth of emulation.
It is SUICIDE to charge across an open field with FENCES to slow you down even before you get to your objective. The north had CANNONS pointed directly at that field. What do you think was going to happen ? To this day, you DO NOT cross and open area unless you "own the ground".
@@jameshollen9723 I’m not disagreeing that the action was absolutely stupid and foolish, but at least he was willing to admit to the failure and took responsibility. Too many leaders (political and military) these days make huge mistakes it yet don’t take the same responsibility and blame it on others and say they were actually right.
I consider myself a Northerner and a fan of Lincoln. However, Robert E. Lee is one of my favorite people to learn about. Hes one of my role models. God Bless Robert E. Lee!
You know, Lee was unapologetically racist after the war, publicly opposing blacks receiving the right to vote.
+STONE WARRIOR OF LIBERTY
oh look, another russian troll
bud, don't use random caps like that, it makes you a lot more obvious
stupid slav. lol
Doctor Doom omg you are flat out lying. Why do you willingly lie to yourself. Lee was widely known for being kind to slaves and believed that the institution of slavery must end. Its so sad that so many of you leftists willingly lie to yourselves. So sad. Talking straight out of your ass.
Doctor Doom wow ur a dumbass
@@CognizantCheddar That was there time back then. Just like the old testament of the bible where you were allowed to have slaves and sell your daughter. Guess even god was a dick too.
Best movie ever made
Lo vi en castellano y se me hizo un nudo en la garganta... Tremenda escena de Robert E. Lee, era un líder, con todas sus letras.
Canon's maybe out of the range?!?
General Lee had done his absolute best. With the resources and men at his disposal he was always having the disadvantage against the numerically superior and better supplied Union.
By reaching the high water mark at Gettysburg, it is a testament to his impeccable leadership and tactical genius to make it that far
No. He did not. He made huge blunders. The strategy the Army was attempting to operate under, the only one that offered the hope of victory against a numerically superior and better equipped foe was to sit on advantageous ground and do exactly to the Union what the Union was about to do to the Confederates at Gettysburg. When Lees army failed to occupy the advantageous ground on Day 1, he ignored this valid strategy, and let events take their course....hoping that the Union army at some point would break first; as they had in other campaigns. This was not his best. We knows this because we know that the strategy he set out with was a good strategy because its traditionally how armies have won throughout all of history against superior foes; it worked a few days later for the Union.
@@Dadecorban
I’m sorry but like- were you there? Are you a general now? Do you understand field tactics? No? Okay- hush please no one cares :)
@@V1nce_man Yes
Esta serie merece umas 10 estatuetas da academia
Simplesmente divina com atuações de atores q deveriam ficar eternizados para sempre
It's a damn shame that Lee lost so many brave and valiant men in this battle. I feel even more sorry for General Pickett because those were all his men who died.
I can only imagine how crushed the Rebs were after that day. The realization that there would be no CSA and it was only a matter of time before they've lost it all.
Amazingly, the war was still not lost at this point. Different outcomes at Chattanooga, Tennessee Valley and most importantly the Wilderness would have brought a Lincoln defeat at the ballot box and a negotiated settlement.
It is an extraordinarily good thing that they lost. Can you imagine what a viable CSA would have meant for mankind? I am still amazed by the sympathy that this evil society still garners to this day.
@@eqmoz yeah… It is stunning and disheartening. Especially considering that most of the ancestors of the posters wouldn’t have owned slaves and were considered white trash at best by the planter class. We can’t 100 percent blame individuals because our country taught a completely false version of history, perhaps one of the few times in world history that the losers wrote the narrative. But yes people should try to educate themselves.
@@eqmozhat it would've meant for the world? Brasil had slavery until 1888 and it hadn't brought any terrors to the world, neither would've surviving Confederacy, today it would've been just another country, probably poorer than average, with slavery long in thepast
@@johnny_thunder_3024
I mean slavery doesn’t dictate economic success in the far future- as you mentioned Brazil as an example, they’re a shitty country but not because of money issues. Hell by your logic the United States should be poor because after the civil war slavery was abolished so that means we shouldn’t be a world leader in economics- oh wait we are :/
GOD BLESS MY AWESOME FRIEND MOCTESUMA ESPARZA. I AM SO VERY PROUD OF YOU AND SO VERY HAPPY FOR YOU MR. ESPARZA. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH.
"it's my fault, I thought that we were invincible"
Yup
it doesnt make any sense....earlier he said, and I paraphrase, a leader must let go and risk loosing all he holds dear....thats the trap....I suspect he had to know he could not win.....for he was such a supposedly smart man.....but his honor blinded him...
@@jamesb3843 and there is the great trap. When you attack you must hold nothing back. You must commit yourself totally. It makes sense in the context of a war that should never have been in some sense sadly
@@jamesb3843 He was telling the truth, he bought into his own hype and that of his men and is now horrified at what happened because of it
Lee believed in his mythical men like Stuar, and thought he would win because he had a divine mantle that supported him (those were different times)
All men that fought on both sides are considered U.S. veterans by law. There should be no removal or desecration of any statues, grave sites, etc. whether they were members of the Confederate or Union armies. Many of the senior officers of the Confederate Army had served with distinction in the U.S. Army before the war, that service should be remembered.
This alone puts General Lee on a level with Eisenhower in my book. No other generals that I know of were willing to admit their failures.
from a strategic standpoint perhaps,... but would Lee ever admit the failures of what the Confederacy was fighting for? That I am not so sure of.
@@k1productions87 I'm not sure he could bear to express it and look one of his men in the eye if he ever did.
american generals i would say otherwise many generals have admitted their failures
@@k1productions87 “If Virginia stands by the old Union, so will I. But if she secedes (though I do not believe in secession as a constitutional right, nor that there is sufficient cause for revolution), then I will follow my native State with my sword, and, if need be, with my life.” Robert E. Lee.
He not only would, he did.
What a great man general Lee was. Rest in peace
Except for the fact that in the end, he was a traitor to the United States, and he continued to speak ill of Black people even after his "country" lost the war. He was unreformed. This is what happens when evil bestirs such arrogance in man.
Gen. Lee without a doubt, one of America's finest generals, ever. "I't's my fault".
If they had taken cemetery hill things could have gone in Lee's favor. Also if Jackson didnt die. A lot of things were not going Lee's way and he was too drunk on success to see it.
@@GuyFromTheSouth Lee was not drunk on success. He was tired and unlucky.
Love Longstreet's line when he is addressing Pickett's Brigade Commanders: "All the men who have died in this war are with you here today. I believe this battle will decide the fate of our country."
You know you have culture when every time you see this it’s breaks your heart.
it shouldn't break your heart to see crybaby confederates in a defeated state
Even in defeat, you can't stop men like these.
As a northerner I revere General Lee, this Is what true leader does.
What a brave leaders and those soldiers.
Kemper survived his wounds but was later captured in September of 1863 and exchanged for a Union general. He commanded reserve units for the rest of the war.
I know a lot of the movie is fiction but it was so well written and acted. I think it really conveyed the emotions of the battle
In retirement, Dwight Eisenhower hosted British general Bernard Montgomery at his home in Gettysburg. Eisenhower gave Montgomery a personal tour of the Gettysburg battlefield and they discussed the tactics of both sides. Reportedly, they agreed that given the policies in effect for World War II, today both the Union commander and Confederate commander, Meade and Lee, would have been dismissed by their respective governments after Gettysburg. Lee's invasion of the North was a bloody failure. However, Meade failed to follow up his costly victory, allowing the Confederates to escape back into Virginia.
the northern army was pretty torn apart itself
Were there fresh Union regiments available for pursuit? Why risk a potential loss by ambush, when you can just take the win? Not like the South was ever gonna recover from this loss at Gettysburg.
Big talk from Monty.
The guy who planned and commanded Operartion Market Garden.
And then declared it was a success.
@@nicholasmuro1742 Agreed. Montgomery was a blundering fool.
@@nocturnalrecluse1216
Overrated narcissist.
I like blundering fool better tho.
Every time General Kemper ask that "full justice be done for his men" I get choked up. Of course this whole movie is an emotionally wrenching experience.
Just like after the charge of the Light Brigade, lets have another crack at em. Great general and brave lads.
The Light Brigade did not deserve its Commanding Officer. Cardigan should have been cashiered for what his did to his men.
" it is all my fault" ...when people ask why we southerners Revere Lee... that's why... it's called leadership...he even tried to resign his commission... Jefferson Davis wouldn't let him...
They've been through seven kinds of hell, and they're willing to do it AGAIN, if he would but give the word?
Alonzo Branson
That’s how much they loved Lee. They would kick down the gates of Hell for him and for their homes. And Lee likewise was willing to die for his men.
old granny.....
As far as they were concerned, they had failed Lee.
@@ReformedSooner24 they would have fought ol scratch himself, and laid hell in ruins, for Robert Edward Lee, if Marse Robert had asked them to! Big G and his boy JC would have needed to find a new place to send bad folks to!
That bit- may have been a trifle exaggerated. One of Lee's own officers writing home said that "(Gettysburg) exactly cancelled out Fredericksburg- Lee seems to have become as weak (presumeably, in thinking) as Burnside."
@ravenclaw67 I have read that he also stopped to speak to a wounded Northern soldier and prayed for his speedy recovery. A better leader of soldiers you would be hard pressed to find.
When Lee looked at the Northern Soldiers laid out on Mayres Heights at Fredericksburg it effected him the rest of his life. He was trying to fight hopefully the last battle of the war at Gettysburg. He was so tired of the rivers of blood of the soldiers on both sides. Joshua Chamberlain was a fine man on the Union Side. He respected the Southern Soldier. He quoted Julius Ceasar's speech to his troops before they crossed the Rubicon to war with their own countrymen while waiting their turn to cross the Rappahannock at Fredericksburg. He also wrote how he was amazed at the Southern Soldier's ability to out March them starving. Barefooted and their clothes falling off because they were dying of starvation but still fought like demons. He started the Salute of the Southern Soldier's while they Surrendered. He was asked why he did it. He said they are our countrymen again and they fought well.
Lee never called the north the enemy he alwas called them those people.
The Man even from a Yankee Amen
wonderful acting in this movie...Sheen's performance as Lee was tops...Robert Duvall played lee in the next movie and as good an actor as he is still did not come up to par with this performance...Excellent
I've seen this movie so many times. It always stuck with me the moment that Confederate soldier yelled out "Hail Mothra!" 1:51
Mothra of course had been wounded in a battle with Godzilla the previous week. The absence of Mothra was instrumental in the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg, but the soldiers of the Confederacy never lost faith in their Kaiju.
General Lee.....What a true character. Contrasting the scum bags we typically encounter as ‘leaders’ and ‘bosses’.....
@Brad Watson well said
he was a traitor to his nation
@@thewkovacs316 he stuck with his state, his homeland, his community, and his family. He was the opposite of a traitor. A traitor would have betrayed his friends, family, and state
@@TvConfusionn if you think like this...then you have the mind of a racist seditionist
Lee= TRAITOR
RE LEE was a man of honor.
the most beloved general in history of warfare
Even though Lee and his men fought for a flawed cause (slavery), I still must admit to being in awe of the courage of these men who fought overwhelming odds. Such courage and strength is need today to fight our current enemies.
Throwing ones self against firmly cemented enemies and never really crushing them in the open is madness, not courage. Lee would have struck better if he went for Washington or at least the Potomac river, not drive into Pennsylvania where he would have little support
I Guess the Founding Fathers, fought for a lost cause too. Slavery was practised, in all 13 Colonies then. The North did away with it, only because it wasn't profitable for them, not some noble humane reason.
Lee didn't fight for slavery. Your moral self-righteousness is unwarranted here.
Even though a large part of the political background of the CSA did focus on slavery, the others are right. Lee fought mostly for his homeland of Virginia. He would have followed it whether it seceded or not. He fought mostly for home, family and loyalty to state.
The soldiers would have had a myriad of reasons for fighting. Some for slavery (although a lot of sources I have seen indicate this is a pretty small minority, at least as far as they disclosed).
Some for state's rights.
Some for money
Some because they were drafted
Some for honor
The list of reasons is truly massive
@@ChargingStag The same could be said for the Union. There were a small handful fighting to end slavery but most Union soldiers didn't care about it. In fact when emancipation came many were worried about losing their jobs to former slaves. White supremacy was also very common in the North. Most saw it as a patriotic duty and honor to serve their country. Many felt the Union needed to be saved.
Happily general kemper did recover from his wound...and in fact survived the war, become an informal advisor to president Grant of all people...
Lee is without a doubt one of the finest soldiers and most remarkable people that the U.S. ever produced.
‘Tis a shame he was a traitor and fought to keep an entire race oppressed and enslaved...
Charles Brooks He didn’t fight to do that, he chose to not lead the army that would fight his family and state.
@@King_Stannis_Baratheon It's in most of the articles of secession of every confederate state. They left to maintain the institution of slavery. Look it up. Just because Jefferson Davis started writing books to backtrack on it after the war, and those books were held up by southern historians, doesn't make it true.
IndianaBones I’m talking about Robert E Lee, the individual man. Not a state, dummy. Nice copy and paste though.
@@rikk319 95% of them didn't own slaves, my ancestors came from Ireland they were separated from their family members they didn't know where they would end up when they were conscripted off the boats to fight and die for their right to be Americans they were also segregated and put to forced labor by the union. The union made the ports for slaves to arrive in the south of course after they were done with them building their industry in the north further more on that, the sheer amount of slaves that were being poured on the ports was actually un wanted by many southerners. The south had no industry except cotton, they thought the world of that stuff because that's all they had and peanuts the wood was too dry for industry in the south, thus an entire half the country relied on agriculture. So now it's 1861 and the north is done with their slaves and they've successfully forced the burden of it on the south and basically blame us for slavery as a whole, even though there was only 4 years of slavery during the war supposedly about ending it, compared to 100 years of slavery and they get all the glory for "freeing them", jinxed you they didn't end slavery in 1865 they were still using slaves in Delaware and Philadelphia and it was federally taxed, don't believe me look it up, it ended in 1901 and even still black people were being completely randomly picked off the streets and put in chain gangs, all federally taxed. almost like slavery is still here but only your government can do it, Look up the 13th amendment it basically says that. Anyways the war to most people who have a passion for it don't hold these political boundaries like you they know their ancestor fought for the grey so they honor them just like northerners honor their dead it's called human decency. They're dead now destroying their graves their monuments and their memories are only steps backwards and no progression just wasting time to piss someone else off.
Even though the charge was a colossal mistake, Lee’s and the Army’s spirit was still high. Pretty much the end of beginning with 2.5 more long years to go!
Nos that's a noble man
Antonio Dorado amen. To. That
Absolutely spot on performance by Martin Sheen. General Robert Eustis Lee may be the best American (yes, American) General Officer the United States ever turned out.
Gazzara5 - Because he was a General, not President. His job was to execute military objectives. The Executive branch of the CS government was supposed to support that and the CS legislature was supposed to fund it.
Traitors dont get that honor
@@bernardwilson9519 I wouldn't consider him a traitor since he was loyal to his homestate. If his state joined the Union, he would fight for the Union. Of course they didn't so that's why he fought for the Confederacy.
I know his stuff is taught at War College and heard those apologist teachers spout that drivel off too..I dont think a traitor deserves any of that....Old Granny did some remarkable things though
There is only one problem with this scene. If this did indeed happen (too lazy to research right now) Lee would have dismounted and took a knee by his General’s side, even if for a brief moment.
General James Kemper actually survived the battle and the war. He lived for many years, but never fully recovered from his wounds received at Gettysburg.
Tragic as the Civil War was, there "were" Good people on both sides.
there were no good people in the confederacy
@@analtubegut66 There is a difference between being misguided and being a bad person. Most truly believed they were fighting for States' Rights against rule of an oppressive central government.
@@analtubegut66 yeah there was, as there is in every war since the beginning of time on every side. Get off your fake woke throne.
Never let them See you run.
I've walked that battlefield. Pickett's charge was pure madness and the price the south paid for having Robert E. Lee in command. The stone wall is called "the high water mark" of the confederacy in the Civil War. Lee was right when he told the returning survivors "It is all my fault." It was, all his fault. Longstreet knew it was a suicide mission and was so overcome with grief before the charge that he couldn't even speak the order to attack. What a tragedy for our nation with so many good men sacrificed on both sides.
This is all true; Lee was not himself since his heart attacks.
But how different could things have turned out if J.E.B. Stuart's Cavalry had attacked the rear of the Union position?
George Custer and the Michigan Cavalry defeated them on their flanking maneuver leaving Pickett to attack alone.
Buford, Custer, Chamberlain, the 1st Minnesota..... so many miracles
Happenstance on both sides. I'm not calling the slaughter of men on either side a miracle.
Custer was the co-leader of the Union cavalry, along with General Gregg, and repulsed Stuart's cavalry, but Farnsworth's Union cavalry attack on the right flank of Lee's army was also repulsed. Overall, a shit-ton of fighting and dying on the third day.
It actually wasn't madness. Today's current battlefield is different from that of 1863, due in large to Camp Colt back in 1917. By July 3rd the Federal Reserves had already been committed, and they were drastically short on ammunition for the artillery; Meade actually ordered Hancock to cease firing before the attack to conserve said ammo. Further, the advance was not one over open ground the entire way, it only was so for the last 500 yards. The chief reasons for the failure were thus not on Lee, but Pickett and Longstreet:
1) Both generals commanded from the rear, with Longstreet in particular being petulant he didn't get his way. This had drastic effects on the battlefield as the attack became disoriented and began to shift its focus in an oblique attack that resulted in their flanks getting exposed to the artillery. Had Pickett been on the field with his men, this could've been avoided.
2) The attack stopped at about 100-75 yards from the wall and they began firing into it instead of keeping their momentum up, creating a reverse Fredericksburg. Again, had Pickett been on the field, this wouldn't have happened. Stannard's brigade had their flank in the air and they could've been crushed, cracking the whole line.
3) Longstreet, due to the threat at South Cavalry Field, withheld several units Lee had initially slated for the attack. Had he released more of these, I have no doubt they would've swamped Hancock.
Commit neckrope. I find alot of you people who judge Picketts Charge act like Lee did some tenno haika banzai suicidal shit based off movies like this, there was a strategy behind it. We never saw most of it. All we saw of his strategy was an attack on the hills. Ever thought of where JEB Staurts cavalry was once they rejoined the army? The Union line was in a fishhook, henceforth it looked like a J < (that arrow sort of points at where picketts men hit them. The top of the J was the hills where the 20th maine etc. made their stands, but JEB Stuarts cavalry was to move behind it and flank the forces being assualted by Pickett. They were actually held off by an outnumbered force of Custer's Cavalry. Besides that the Artillery unlike in this movie was ill represented. There were HUNDREDS of guns firing for a good long while but the issue was the commander had miscalculated the bombardment and they had different fuses because the supplies from Richmond were off. 90% Of the confederate bombardment missed. Imagine if they fried that union position and had confederate cavalry on their ass? those billy yanks would of ran up the line down the hook and into the confederate troops resting there haha.
@@swampmanactual7392 That is an interesting analysis. I'm not aware of Stannard's brigade being vulnerable. But Meade had anticipated an attack on the center and the North had far more shells than the South to fire. Lee had (2) far, far better options staring him right in the face, but he had some sort of tunnel vision that prevented him from seeing the wisdom of them. A) Longstreet's plain common sense idea to put the CSA between Washington and AOP. This was Lincoln's worst nightmare and had instructed Meade to do anything to prevent this. Had Lee done so Meade would have HAD to put himself in an unfavorable position to dislodge Lee. (I see many who love, admire and respect RE Lee refuse to admit the simple brilliance of doing this because they can't bring themselves to say anything bad about RE Lee) I love, admire & respect RE Lee but facts are facts and it is not mutually exclusive to have great admiration for someone and also to recognize they had flaws.
Or B) Take Big Round Top. The position commanded the entire battlefield, Lee rejected this because he said the hill was too steep to take. It was much steeper than Little Round Top but was 'takeable'. Col. William C. Oates commanding the Alabama 15th Regiment (the regiment that would later that day take on the 20th Maine commanded by Lt Col. Joshua Chamberlain) actually took it on the morning of the 2nd day, it was lightly defended by the North, but still difficult to take because it was such a strong position. Col. Oates once at the summit surveyed the entire battlefield and immediately knew it was the key to victory. Unfortunately, shortly afterward, he got orders to abandon BRT and attack LRT. He seriously considered disobeying the order, he felt with 1500 well armed men he could hold off the entire Union army in that position. He also knew he could get cannon up there and rain shells down on every single union position. The cannons would have to be taken apart and pulled up with mules but it was doable. Eventually he decided to obey orders and moved off the position. Later that day, after fighting all morning and successfully taking BRT, without any water for his men, they had to attack the 20th Maine and still almost took that position.
Even on the 3rd day it was argued to Lee to take BRT but he rejected it.
It was Lee's worst 2 days in the field, he got sucked into fighting a tactical battle where the enemy had all the natural advantages (Like Hitler @ Stalingrad).
Lee was and will always be admired & respected, the South couldn't have asked for a better commander in the field, but he, like all leaders, made some big mistakes and unfortunately for Lee, he made those mistakes at the worst time.
When will we learn that war isn't the answer to humanity's problems.
Sometimes it is the only answer.
Robert E. Lee may he rest in peace is one of the best generals in modern history imo. He was the Hannibal Barca of Dixie. His tactical brilliance and strong bond with his men is far beyond far greater than many. Greetings from Turkey
I don't know about all that. Personally if I had to go with American generals, I think Patton could run circles around Lee. Heck, Schwarzkof even pulled off an almost bloodless(For NATO, anyway) invasion against one of the largest ground armies on the planet in the 90's, and got it done on a timetable that would have had a German commander circa 1939 spinning dizzy.
Lee had a boatload of charisma, and I feel that's where a great deal of the cult of personality comes from. Militarily, his earlier successes were a mixture of a woefully incompetent opponent and the use of an aggressively defensive campaign. He wasn't really able to win the major battles of the war because of a rather poor rapport with his command staff and inflexibility when it came to situations outside of what he knew(Hence Gettysburg, where he doomed the Confederacy over little more than rhetoric instead of keeping to his original strategic goals.).
That's just my opinion, anyway.
You're comparing two very different times and types of warfare and tactics. Napoleonic tactics was the wartime tactics of the Civil War. In WW2 it modern warfare and to a large effect fought in urban areas. I do agree with you that Lee did come up against incompetent Generals at the beginning of the war but it doesn't change the fact that he was outgunned and outnumbered most of the time. Aside from captured/desertion rates Lee inflicted more causalities on the Army of the Potomac during the war than he received, even against Grant. By the time the U.S went into Europe in late '43 to mid '44 the Nazi empire was a shadow of it's former self. The Russians had pushed back the Nazis several hundred miles and the Nazis had lost Northern Africa and Italy within a year. For the most part they were on the run playing defense when the situation arose. Lee and the army of Northern Virginia did the same from early 1864 onward as well.
In case you didn't notice Lee never outnumbered his opponent in any major battle yet won most of them, it takes skill to do that. I'm not glorifying Lee, i'm simply giving credit where its due. If it was Hood, Bragg or Johnston commanding The Army of Northern Virginia I doubt the South would of lasted as long as it did. Perhaps Longstreet would of made a better leader? Who knows? You can't really compare tactics and technology used 150+ years ago to WW2 or to the Vietnam either as they are two completely different types of warfare and eras. Never said the U.S wasn't involved in the North Africa and Italian Campaigns. However by the time the U.S got involved there was a lot that had happened. Partisans/rebels in Italy had done a lot of the work and in Africa the British were rapidly closing in and killing Nazis. My entire point was you shouldn't compare tactics and generals in 100 year time gaps because the technology changes and with that warfare/tactics. You wouldn't compare a General today in Iraq to a WW1 General now would you? Trench warfare to desert/urban warfare is completely different. Much like dropping bombs out of airplanes in Vietnam is a hell of a lot different than fighting in lines in the Civil War. Different styles different times...
Hannibal Barca was the greatest general of any age, constantly fighting with inferior supply lines, fewer troops, poorer weapons and armor, in enemy territory. He out-thought every general he faced. He was a genius-level tactician and strategist. The elites who ruled his homeland refused to send him reinforcements, so he had to make do with his ever-dwindling manpower. His troops were a mishmash of nations that were hostile to Rome and all spoke different languages. He regularly defeated expert Roman armies that were two and even three times the size of his. He slept in a common officer's tent and fought at the front of his army, with his men.
He battled the Romans for ten years in their own territory, and was finally defeated when the Romans--who knew they could never win against him in a straight-up battle--used their superior economy and bribed the leader of the entire left flank cavalry of his army--to switch sides in the middle of the battle at Zama. It was the only battle he ever lost.
Robert E. Lee. was a U.S. colonel who betrayed his oath to the United States Constitution by taking up arms against it. He was an able and usually brilliant commander, and treated his men with honor. But he was a traitor to the United States, there's no getting around that--and he was definitely no Hannibal Barca.
he was a great leader brillant man close tactics he was stunning he had a sense of defence
and manuvuer hard to find
Robert E Lee: I thought we were invincible...
"I want this to be the final battle..."
"We must rest now, and retire to fight another day...and there will be another day..."
Heartbreaking words. This was the last time the Army of Northern Virginia would take offensive campaign. After this moment Lee changed strategy from seeking a decisive battle that might precipitate a negotiated peace...to a strategy of entrenchment and attrition which would exhaust the Union and precipitate a negotiated peace.
Lee was a great General...a man who combined the art of maneuver with a shrewd understanding of the investment in blood necessary to achieve victory...a killer on the battlefield. To hear him have to acknowledge the failure of his plans and the requirement to adopt an even bloodier strategy with little to no hope of success...
...it breaks the heart.
But, as Sherman remarked, it was a 'bad cause' to be fighting for. I'm glad Lee lost.
for slaves and Unionists if it was a bad cause
Such wonderful acting
God bless you General Lee God bless you Sir.
War always kills the best men.
@ravenclaw67
totally agree, Shelby Foote called it his very best hour.
LEE WAS A LIVING LEGEND IN HIS OWN TIME....
“Never let them see you run, you hear? Never let the, see you run.” Such pride that man had for his troops. It saddens me that his memory is being tarnished today to score cheap political points.
Contemporary politics and trend-chasers wear themselves out in time. I think a proper memory of Lee and his men as they were-not saints, not demons, but men of their time- will win out in the end.
@@morgant.dulaman8733 Well here in Virginia we spoke loudly for sanity this past November 2nd so you are probably right. Governor Klan robes is going to be out the door.
His memory is being tarnished because he betrayed his country in order to keep slavery going.
He betrayed his oath to his country
@@totallynotalpharius2283 No more then the Patriots betrayed their oaths to the King of England, Oddly the only difference it seems in whether some one is a hero or a patriot is whether they win.
"They would charge into hell for that old man "....R.E Lee is my hero, always will be my hero.
Tough not to get misty when you watch this.
Confederates. The definition of courage against overwhelming odds,.
Kemper actually survived his wound
"Never fight uphill, me boys!"
Pickett's charge was a serious mistake, but Lee did not make the mistake Burnside and Hood made at Fredericksburg and Franklin respectively by trying again, and again.
No cause he prerty much lost half his army at little round top and picketts charge and had nothing left to send that wasnt wounded exausted or demorilized... And if grant was in charge and not meade....lee woulld have never escaped
@@scottaznavourian5791 If....If
The failure of Pickett's Charge if anybody bothers to check the eyewitness testimonies of what actually transpired was a failure of logistics and lack of supplies bring support for the Left Flank of the attack when do Union reserves came in and flanked the charge add these reserves and the flanking move been defeated by the artillery That was supposed to be employed the charge would be mostly successful whether they could have held the position is up to history
@@scottaznavourian5791 probably still would have. Meade's army was almost as beat up as Lee's and really in no condition for pursuit. Only Sedgwick's sixth corps was still in fighting shape by the end of the third day on the Union side, but it had been broken up to reinforce other parts of the line. Lee was only about 15-20 miles away from very defensible positions and could have entrenched if Meade pursued him, if the Union tried to assault him with their half mangled army their victory could have easily been reversed. Though most of Lee's army was spent Anderson and Rhodes' divisions were still strong enough to hold defensive positions.
Gen. Lee Bravest and greatest!
I mean, he lost though
I've always felt so bad for General Lee in this clip. He lost a lot of good and brave men in that charge and for a man who loved the Army as much as he did, it must have felt close to losing a lot of friends and loved ones. I'm sure it also became all too clear to the South that there wasn't going to be a CSA and it was only a matter of time.
I agree with your sentiment, but have to disagree with your message. I don't think the South truly lost their spirit in believing the war was winnable until Sherman's march. I'm not sure what the decisive battle during that operation was, but until then the South still fought very bravely and believed they could win. After Sherman's march the South became dispersed.
Aleks The Deplorable " To be a good soldier, you must love the army; To be a good Commander, you must be willing to order the death of the thing you love." --Robert E. Lee
"That old man had my division slaughtered"
Pickett's last words
If it is true then it is very extraordinary. You would never hear a general in today’s army admitting to the enlisted troops that he had made a mistake. Not happening.
Lee didn't admit it to enlisted troops after the battle. He admitted it to Jefferson Davis in a letter explaining his actions.
He apologized about its effects to the cause and to Davis personally...but thought himself justified in taking the risk.
After all, the frontal attack after a flank attack had failed had worked at Chancellorsville not weeks earlier in forcing the Union army to withdraw.
@@dclark142002 There is truth to that, but there are accounts that General Lee did say as he passed his soldiers that it was His fault, whether he was saying it to the soldiers or to himself is debatable.
It's a powerful scene and expresses one truth: Lee did indeed believe that his army was invincible at that point and that sheer strength of will was enough to overcome all odds. And he was wrong.
It wasn't just strength of will alone he thought was enough, but if he and his generals gave his men a fighting chance, the men through strength of will and with divine providence would win the field. It had happened a number of times before in recent months, either by achieving victory or avoiding abject defeat.
Absolutely.
Lee did not blame the defeat on Putin or "greedy" oil company executives. Imagine that.
Kemper actually survived that wound, and the war: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_L._Kemper
Those dudes got blown to bits.
In case anybody is wondering if General Kemper survives is injury:
We lives, becomes the 37th Governor of Virginia in 1874!!!.
Well like pickett said....'jimmys only here for the votes'
@@scottaznavourian5791 bwahahaha!!!
"Any man who judges another's bravery by the end result...is himself a coward."
- Me
You just hear dixie in the background
General Lee, gave these battered souls a meaning, a cause.
What a scene.
Lee failed. He was a strategic mastermind, yet he forced his troops to certain death. The battle even continued for 2 more years! My takeaway is that the south never really stood a chance, but Lee was so good he made them think they were invincible.
They had a good chance early in the war
The rebels did reach the high water mark but could not hold . The fighting was so vicious the road between the fences was ankle deep. Used buck shot like giant shot guns tear a man in half.
Even if he did choose to side against our Federal Union, I still think he was one of the greatest generals that America was ever blessed with. The only other general who I respect as much as Robert E Lee is General U.S. Grant.
Iron Dragon 1990 Robert chamberlain
Grant was an Alcoholic bum who kept slaves long after Lee freed his . Only reason Grant won was the manpower to draw from was much bigger and the industrial might of the North . Patton was a great general .