Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have we ever gotten the straight story on Grant's drinking? .
There were people who saw Grant drink during the war but no relaible stories of his being drunk. And he was certainly never drunk when work was at hand.
Grant's chief of staff Rawlins, from Galena, was always concerned about Grant's drinking and played the mother hen and sought to have Mrs. Grant around when things were slow, which wasn't often when Grant had his way.
A newsman from Chicago, Caddawallader I think his name was, published a story after Grant's death of a binge he'd seen Grant on during the siege of Vicksburg, when Grant had little to do. The story is amusing and recounts a drunken Grant going for a midnight ride on Cincinnati, a particularly large, fractious and fast horse that was Grant's favorite. (Grant was considered by many the finest horseman in the army and loved fast, hard to handle horses). Anyway the story is funny but most historians discount it.
Heh. If there's nothing to do, have them paint rocks. Bored infantrymen are very dangerous.
Have we ever gotten the straight story on Grant's drinking? That it was the talk of the country is not news, of course, but I have read it asserted that it was mainly a problem he had in his earlier Army days (in which he did not exactly cover himself with glory). My understanding is that in the CW he barely drank at all. It's too bad the famous quote by Lincoln (you've heard of it, but for the general benefit: "Then for heaven's sake, find out what it is he drinks, and make the rest of them drink some too!") is probably apocryphal, because it would be so choice.
Grant's drinking, throughout his life, was tied to boredom. When he was with his family, when he was engaged in a campaign, he drank not at all. When he was isolated and had nothing to do, he sometimes turned to the bottle.
His aid, Colonel Rawlings, appointed himself to be Grant's guard against falling off the wagon, and masking the event should it happen. There was a time between campaigns when Grant apparently got rip roaring drunk aboard a riverboat, but those who witnessed it kept it to themselves until well after the war.
It was observed by those who had been around Grant when he was drinking, that his problem wasn't so much that he drank too much, it was his inability to hold even a little. One drink and he was fine, two and he was sloppy, slurry and distracted. Three and he was losing his balance.
So, the evidence leaves us with a picture that drinking was never truly a serious problem for Grant during the war. There is no incident recorded which suggests he ever neglected duties or made important decisions while under the influence. His political enemies and military rivals liked to circulate rumors whenever possible so as to undermine Grant, but rumors are all they were.
Yeah, I've seen the remains of the canal. I think old Sam was just keeping some of the boys busy while he worked things out; in any event Vicksburg was gonna have to fall.
.
That is pretty much what Grant wrote in his memoirs. He claimed that he never had any faith in any of the exotic engineering attempts, but that such projects served to keep the troops busy and inactive troops typically developed morale problems.
Of course that may just be what he decided in his mind after those engineering attempts failed. Grant was open to innovative, high tech solutions. It was Grant who overrode Mead and approved the Petersburg mining which led to the Crater battle. Before that it was Grant who had faith that the engineers could construct a viable pontoon bridge across the James, despite no pontoon bridge of close to equal length having ever been built before. I think maybe Grant thought something could come from one of those digging projects at Vicksburg.
Grant's drinking, throughout his life, was tied to boredom. When he was with his family, when he was engaged in a campaign, he drank not at all. When he was isolated and had nothing to do, he sometimes turned to the bottle.
Heh. I can understand that completely.
Thanks for the sensible picture of the known reality of Grant's drinking. By comparison, I'm betting there were far worse souses in both armies. I'd guess Ledlie would pretty much have to wear that label tattooed on his forehead (which he would hardly have felt given the amount of liquid anesthetic--not to say liquid courage--he took on at Peterburg).
If severe alcoholism disqualified someone as a military leader, then Sam Houston would have never been allowed anywhere near an army. The Cherokee name given to him by the tribe with whom he lived for a year translated as "Big Drunk." One of Houston's more memorable multi day monster benders took place during the height of the war in March of 1836.
If severe alcoholism disqualifed a person from political leadership, then Winston Churchill who began each day with a bath and a fishbowl sized brandy, would have spent his days as history prof.
And if controlled substance addiction disqualified people from the arts.....we wouldn't have much art.
If severe alcoholism disqualified someone as a military leader, then Sam Houston would have never been allowed anywhere near an army. The Cherokee name given to him by the tribe with whom he lived for a year translated as "Big Drunk." One of Houston's more memorable multi day monster benders took place during the height of the war in March of 1836.
If severe alcoholism disqualifed a person from political leadership, then Winston Churchill who began each day with a bath and a fishbowl sized brandy, would have spent his days as history prof.
And if controlled substance addiction disqualified people from the arts.....we wouldn't have much art.
Well, Churchill loved to nurture his reputation as a heavy drinker. But the reality of it was that he could nurse a glass for hours and hours.
I'm very disappointed by the lack of criticism of my post!If we felt truly threatened by German armor,we could have gotten the M26 Pershing to the battlefield in greater numbers much faster,upgunned to the 17pdr(77mm)or 90mm faster when it proved that the upgunned 76mm Sherman wasn't a world beater versus armor,Ike was banking on this weapon and it dissapointed severely.I believe it represents the one time in WW2 when the US made a decision for quantity over quality and thus larger casualties in the armored forces,lets see if THAT gets us started!
The US 76mm gun firing HVAP(Hyper Velocity Armor Piercing ammo)penetrates 132mm of armor at 1,000 meters. The 76mm firing the standard M62 APC round cannot penetrate the Panther frontally at any range, even pointblank. Needless to say, neither can the 75mm armed Shermans. Since the vast majority of the anti-armor ammunition provided to Shermans was APC rather than HVAP, there is a belief that the gun was not capable of killing a Panther. Actually the problem was the decisions made in ammunition distribution. The M-18 tank destroyer was armed with the same 76mm gun, but was typically provided with more of the HVAP ammo. the Panther's frontal upper hull is 80mm thick, lower 60mm, turent 100mm. HVAP could and did kill Panthers at frontal attacks, but the main weakness of the Panther tank was its much thinner (40–50 mm thick) side armor. The thinner side armor was necessary to keep the tank's overall weight within reasonable bounds, but it made the Panther vulnerable to attacks from the side and rear by most Allied and Soviet tank and anti-tank guns. The Panzerkampfwagen V "Panther" series of heavy tanks was a "heavy" tank, while the Sherman was a "medium" tank. It was what it was. The Panthers had the capability to destroy Shermans fairly easily due to their thinner armor. Talk to anyone who fought in a Sherman and they would tell you how to kill a Panther easily(even with APC ammo). Hit it from the side or right near the engine and the tank would be killed.
The Sherman proved a relatively inexpensive, very good battlefield reliability, easy to maintain and perhaps most importantly, an easy to produce combat system that more or less won the ground war for the Allies through sheer numbers. It was seen that the tank would have to be able to pass over the old bridges and roadways of Europe and Africa for it to stay relevant in any offensive movement. It wasn't a case of quantity over quality. The tank was very reliable. The designers looked at where the tank would be fighting and they decided on a medium tank that was fast, reliable and able to get around Europe easily. If it wasn't for Eisenhower giving Monty the fuel supplies Patton needed he would have pushed the Germans all the way back to Berlin with his own Blitzkrieg. Much of this offensive through France was with the Sherman. It was a fast attack that never allowed the Germans the chance to establish a defensive until Patton had to slow the offensive. His Shermans were very good at killing German tanks. In many of the tank battles that happened the Shermans killed high numbers of German tanks. During the Lorraine campaign in September 1944, the German 5th Panzer Corps massed the largest concentration of German tanks seen since the battles at Caen and Mortain in July 1944. This counterattack force included over 300 tanks, with the majority being new Panther tanks.
Their opponet was the 4th Armoured Division, knwon as "Patton's Best", a well trained, well-led division which had become battle hardened since the fighting for Coutances in July 1944. From 19 to 22 September 1944, the 4th Armored Division broke the back of the German counteroffensive near Arracourt, destroying 107 tanks and 30 assault guns for the loss of only 14 M4 tanks and 7 M5A1 light tanks.
Two of the new panzer brigades were wiped out in the fighting, and by the end of the fighting for Arracourt, the 4th Armored Division had destroyed 285 German tanks and armoured vehicles for the loss of 25 medium tanks and 7 tank destroyers.
The M-18 tank destroyer was armed with the same 76mm gun, but was typically provided with more of the HVAP ammo.
The M18, now that was a jackrabbit. Able to function almost like an open-topped armored car with a respectable tank main gun on it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
