Discuss how to get a Union surrender in Peninsula Campaign

67th Tigers

Banned
My god, what has become of my thread? 67th Tigers, this argument contributes nothing to the original point of discussion. Why don't you take it elsewhere?

The real question is what did the "usual suspects" (Usertron2020, Fiver and even Tegytsgurb put in a guest appearance, with the usual agenda not to argue the point, but to argue I am wrong) add to Snake Featherstone's argument with me. I've simply corrected an elementary mistake SF made, and the proper response should have been "opps, my bad" and then the thread would continue.

In posts 31 and 37 SF suggested the Army of the Potomac was not vulnerable because it moved it's base to Harrison's Landing before the Seven Days. It is a nonsense based off one source which is obviously wrong, but serves to shut down further debate. SF still has not conceded his mistake, and him and the usual suspects have thrown up a lot of strawmans and ad hominum attacks trying to obfuscate the error.

You'll find this happens a lot on American Civil War threads. It is still divisive 150 years after the event. With Americans (and I'm not one) they generally take it as allegorical to their current politics, and so genuine historical debate is stiffled.
 
The real question is what did the "usual suspects" (Usertron2020, Fiver and even Tegytsgurb put in a guest appearance, with the usual agenda not to argue the point, but to argue I am wrong) add to Snake Featherstone's argument with me. I've simply corrected an elementary mistake SF made, and the proper response should have been "opps, my bad" and then the thread would continue.

In posts 31 and 37 SF suggested the Army of the Potomac was not vulnerable because it moved it's base to Harrison's Landing before the Seven Days. It is a nonsense based off one source which is obviously wrong, but serves to shut down further debate. SF still has not conceded his mistake, and him and the usual suspects have thrown up a lot of strawmans and ad hominum attacks trying to obfuscate the error.

You'll find this happens a lot on American Civil War threads. It is still divisive 150 years after the event. With Americans (and I'm not one) they generally take it as allegorical to their current politics, and so genuine historical debate is stiffled.

Sigh, one more time-I have provided sources both secondary and primary to indicate this happened, you said I was delusional and making it up. That's the course and cause of the "argument" which is you trolling to "defend" McClellan in a fashion even his apologists in a real sense would cringe at. I provided four secondary sources, primary sources from both the Confederate and Union sides, your only refuge was personal attacks and crying that I didn't provide the sources I kept providing.

I take it you do concede Stuart's Ride influenced McClellan's change of base and the campaign was the result of Lee repeatedly fumbling his chances to hit the Union army in the midst of such a retreat, yes?

I provided evidence, to which your only response was opinion. Leave it alone, 67th, I don't think you want me to point again to all the posts where I gave you exactly what you asked for, as you won't accept it any more now than you did then.

For that matter, what changed your mind from this quote, here, post number 114 of the "Could McClellan have won the Civil War" thread?:

McClellan already knew his position was untenable before the Seven Days. He simply didn't have the troops (i.e. 1st Corps) to cover the required frontage in order to secure his lines of communication despite Lincoln's disengeneous promsies to the contrary. Even before he learned of Lee's turning movement on his communications he was planning to shift his base of operations onto the James.

When Lee struck, McClellan executed the shift, achieving his objectives (keeping the Army of the Potomac intact and shifting to a secure base) whilst denying Lee his (cut the Federal line of communication and destroy McClellan's army).


According to you in this thread he did not know his position was untenable and he had no worries about his communications, given in your own words in this thread in the first bit of this "discussion" you said this:

Okay, let me be plain. We all make mistakes. You have invented a change of base from the York River to the James. If you then, when challenged said "opps, my mistake" then you'd have some credibility. You have instead invented some bastardised version of the Seven Days Battle movement occuring weeks earlier, followed by it being repeated in the seven days.


Can I discuss with the 67th Tigers of 2010 as opposed to the one of 2011-2?
 
Last edited:

67th Tigers

Banned

Contingency plan =/= something already happened.

McClellan reported the following to Stanton on the "ride around":

Head-quarters, Army of the Potomac
June 14, 11 a.m. 1862

Hon E.M. Stanton
Sec. of War

A rebel force of Cavalry and Artillery variously estimated at from one to five thousand came around our right flank last evening, attacked and drove in a picket guard of two squadrons of Cavalry stationed at Old Church. Thence proceeded to a landing three miles above White House whence they burned two forage schooners and destroyed some wagons. Thence they struck the Rail Road at Tunstalls station - fired a train of cars killing five or six.

They then met a force of Infantry which I sent down to meet them, where they ran off.

I have several Cavalry detachments out after them and hope to punish them. No damage has been done to the Rail Road.

Geo. B. McClellan
Major General

There is no hint of any "panicked move to the James".

However, there had previously been consideration of movement to the James, but this was stopped with Stanton's communique of 18th May informing him to extend northwards to link up with 1st Corps (see Rafuse, McClellan's War, 213-4, and see Reed, Combined Operations in the Civil War, chapter 6). However, it seems to have already been discounted by McClellan on the 17th following the failure of Monitor and Galena to break the Drewry's Bluff defences.

Note we are talking about a period a month before Stuart's ride. Some seven weeks before the Seven Days Battles. It was an option, but one already discounted due to circumstance despite it being a better position.

At no point did McClellan make any move to change base until the Seven Days Battles. It was considered beforehand (and discounted, obviously), and it was his contingency plan if flanked. However, events happened as they happened.
 
You said I invented the same change of base you called brilliant in your own words. Until you're willing to admit that your claim I invented what all reputable, academically and intellectually honest historians say happened was false I'll keep asking you to concede that I did not in fact invent the movement to the James, but that this was an action taken by McClellan in reaction to Stuart's Ride. Did McClellan or did he not make a change of base in this campaign?
 

67th Tigers

Banned
You said I invented the same change of base you called brilliant in your own words. Until you're willing to admit that your claim I invented what all reputable, academically and intellectually honest historians say happened was false I'll keep asking you to concede that I did not in fact invent the movement to the James, but that this was an action taken by McClellan in reaction to Stuart's Ride. Did McClellan or did he not make a change of base in this campaign?

McClellan's change of base was in response to the collapse of the Federal line at Gaines Mill, not Stuart's Ride. It was a contingency planned for months before.

That he was planning on sending a detachment to the James to reduce Drewry's Bluff from the landward side is a known:

"Circumstances force me to begin my attack some distance from the James River - in a few days I hope to gain such a position as to enable me to place a force above Ball's & Drewry's Bluffs, so that we can remove the obstructions & place ourselves in communication with you so that you can cooperate in the final attack." - McClellan to Rodgers, 6pm, 24th June 1862

That is what you (or rather one source you've used) have confused with a "change of base".
 
McClellan's change of base was in response to the collapse of the Federal line at Gaines Mill, not Stuart's Ride. It was a contingency planned for months before.

That he was planning on sending a detachment to the James to reduce Drewry's Bluff from the landward side is a known:

"Circumstances force me to begin my attack some distance from the James River - in a few days I hope to gain such a position as to enable me to place a force above Ball's & Drewry's Bluffs, so that we can remove the obstructions & place ourselves in communication with you so that you can cooperate in the final attack." - McClellan to Rodgers, 6pm, 24th June 1862

That is what you (or rather one source you've used) have confused with a "change of base".

So you admit that there was a change of base and that I did not in fact invent it, yes or no? Will you apologize for the blatant insult in claiming I invented a change of base out of whole cloth, yes or no?
 

67th Tigers

Banned
So you admit that there was a change of base and that I did not in fact invent it, yes or no? Will you apologize for the blatant insult in claiming I invented a change of base out of whole cloth, yes or no?

You are changing your story.

The change of base was in response to the loss of White House after the Battle of Gaines Mill, not some weeks earlier after Stuart's rather ineffective cavalry raid. This is the fact of the matter.
 
You are changing your story.

The change of base was in response to the loss of White House after the Battle of Gaines Mill, not some weeks earlier after Stuart's rather ineffective cavalry raid. This is the fact of the matter.

No, the four citations and the primary sources I provided indicated it was Stuart's Raid around McClellan's entire army that motivated his shift. And I still expect your apology for saying "You have invented a change of base to the James" when you yourself conceded the change of base existed, though you persist in dismissing the repeated citations I've provided and the ones you provide nothing of, nor the context those citations appear in. :rolleyes:
 

67th Tigers

Banned
No, the four citations and the primary sources I provided indicated it was Stuart's Raid around McClellan's entire army that motivated his shift. And I still expect your apology for saying "You have invented a change of base to the James" when you yourself conceded the change of base existed, though you persist in dismissing the repeated citations I've provided and the ones you provide nothing of, nor the context those citations appear in. :rolleyes:

What "four sources"?

If I may quote you. Your first source was http://americancivilwar.com/campaigns/Peninsula_Campaign.html which you quoted as:

"At this point McClellan yielded the initiative to Lee. With his line of communications to White House, his supply base on the York River, cut and with the James River open to the U.S. Navy, the Union commander decided to shift his base to Harrison’s Landing on the south side of the peninsula. His rear areas had been particularly shaky since Confederate cavalry under Brig. Gen. J. E. B. Stuart had ridden completely around the Union Army in a daring raid in early June. The intricate retreat to the James, which involved 90,000 men, the artillery train, 3,100 wagons, and 2,500 head of cattle, began on the night of June 27 and was accomplished by using two roads. Lee tried to hinder the movement but was held off by Federal rear guards at Savage Station on June 29 and at Frayser’s Farm (Glendale) on the last day of the month.. "

The bolded part is mine. Your first source says he started to change base on the night of the 27th June.

Your second source, http://www.almc.army.mil/alog/issues/Marapr96/ms809.htm says:

"McClellan began relocating his supply operation and shifting his tactical focus south of the Chickahominy River within a week of Stuart's raid. On 18 June, he ordered 800,000 rations shifted from White House to the James River. Colonel Ingalls, in charge of the White House depot, dispatched several loads of forage and provisions to the James on 23 June. Canal-boat and barge floating wharves on the York River were broken apart. Four hundred transports began shifting cargo from White House to the James.
In the meantime, Johnston had been wounded and replaced by Robert E. Lee as the Confederate commander. Lee counterattacked McClellan's army on 26 June, intent on driving the Union invaders away from Richmond. The ensuing Confederate offensive lasted until 1 July and became known as the Seven Days' Battles.
While struggling to repulse the attacking Confederates, McClellan began shifting his actual base of operations to Harrison's Landing on the James on the morning of 27 June. Contrabands were evacuated to Fortress Monroe on canal boats. Supplies not needed by the forces north of the Chickahominy during the switch of fronts were retrograded by wagon and rail to White House.
Van Vliet shipped supplies by wagon and rail to Savage's Station so advancing troops could resupply en route to Harrison's Landing. They destroyed excess stocks. Supplies at Orchard Station and Despatch Station were sent on to Savage's Station as well, and excess stocks were evacuated to White House. Some 2,500 cattle were herded across the Peninsula to the James.
Transports evacuated hundreds of sick and wounded. Cavalry screened the hospital while litters and ambulances evacuated the wounded. Gunboats (the Commodore Barney, Currituck, and others) stationed around the port complex at White House provided additional security. Commissary stores were evacuated by transports; the sutlers' supplies were looted by departing Union soldiers and advancing Confederates. Buildings, including White House itself, and rows of tents were fired with whiskey-soaked hay. Ammunition dumps that could not be evacuated were blown up-the sounds convinced Confederate leaders that a full-scale Union retreat was in progress. Three locomotives and a hundred railcars were also burned. When all was done, Colonel Ingalls, now deputy quartermaster for the Army of the Potomac, and his staff boarded the transport Circassian and sailed to Fortress Monroe.
Following the Union retreat after the battle of Gaines' Mill on 27 June, wagoneers loaded all the supplies possible at Savage's Station for retrograde; the rest were destroyed. Meanwhile, Stuart arrived at White House in time to see the last gunboat leaving and nine barges, five destroyed locomotives, trains of railcars, and rows of tents burning.
Lee and his chief subordinate, Major General Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson, were both convinced after the main battle that McClellan would hold his lines of communication with White House. Stuart therefore ordered Brigadier General Richard S. Ewell's cavalry to attack White House. The cavalrymen saw fully loaded trains being run into the river with engines at full steam to avoid being captured by the Confederates. The finale of the entire operation was, fittingly, unusual: Stuart's horse artillery traded shots with the Union gunboat Marblehead at the very end of the evacuation from White House. "

Again, the bolded part is mine and says he started to change base on the night of the 27th after the Battle of Gaines Mill. The movement of supplies from his base at White House onto ships was not a reaction to Stuart, but preparation to detach a force to take Balls and Drewrys Bluffs.

Your third source, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA328181 says:

"Though several of McClellan's division commanders recommended a thrust towards Richmond
through the Confederate weak right flank, he ordered his army to fall back towards a newly
established base of operations on the James River to gain the protection of Union gunboats.
Lee attempted to pursue, but a series of uncoordinated but successful independent delaying
actions by Union corps commanders allowed the supply trains to escape. The Union forces
then established strong defensive positions on Malvern Hill and shattered piecemeal
Confederate assaults. Despite inflicting heavy casualties, McClellan ordered the rest of his
army to move to the new base at Harrison's Landing. Following a stalemate there, Union
forces subsequently withdrew by ship to Washington."

This paper is terrible. There are no references backing up your quote. More to the point, it does not even touch on your argument and so must be ignored.

You repeat this with Miller, giving a quote that does not even touch on the subject in hand. You then quote McClellan:

"I decided then to carry into effect the long-considered plan of abandoning the Pamunkey and taking up the line of the James.
the necessary orders were given for the defense of the depots at the White House to the last moment and its final destruction and abandonment; it was also ordered that all possible stores should be pushed to the front while communications were open. "

Which agrees completely with my position and does not in the slightest support your position.

etc.

You're engaging in argumentum verbosum, amongst other fallacies. None of your quotes actually support your argument that McClellan changed base weeks before Gaines Mill. You simply have no case.
 
At the ramparts

Here we go...;)

The real question is

The opening four words of every talking head on television when they want to avoid answering the question they've just been asked so they can commence with their talking points.

67th Tigers said:
what did the "usual suspects" (Usertron2020, Fiver and even Tegytsgurb put in a guest appearance,

Being called a "usual suspect" by the most notorious non-banned ACW Troll on the forum is I consider a genuine AH.com Red Badge of Courage. The nice thing to remember is that the original origin of that term (in the public's mind) referred to Anti-Nazis living in 1941 Morocco.:D

67th Tigers said:
with the usual agenda not to argue the point, but to argue I am wrong(1))

Physician, HEAL THYSELF!
1) You're describing yourself versus everyone else, mister!

67th Tigers said:
add to Snake Featherstone's argument with me.(2)

(2) I won't speak for others, but I noted that even when I agreed with you, you didn't like the way I did. I spent most of my time trying to convince SF he was wasting his time, as anyone is wasting their time, trying to disagree with you. Because you will never ever admit an error (or apologize yourself) that establishes one of your long held conclusions (of course, you don't HAVE opinions, you just KNOW).

67th Tigers said:
I've simply corrected an elementary mistake SF made, and the proper response should have been "opps, my bad" and then the thread would continue.

Except the mistake was, as you said, elementary. But once corrected, did not fundamentally change the thrust of what he was trying to say.

67th Tigers said:
In posts 31 and 37 SF suggested the Army of the Potomac was not vulnerable because it moved it's base to Harrison's Landing before the Seven Days.

A name error you corrected and he conceded, but did not change the circumstances in which the AotP ultimately found itself in.

67th Tigers said:
It is a nonsense based off one source which is obviously wrong, but serves to shut down further debate.(3)

3) Mr. Chips, FOR THE I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES YOU'VE BEEN TOLD THIS, THIS IS NOT YOUR CLASSROOM! You don't get to determine when further debate gets shut down.

67th Tigers said:
SF still has not conceded his mistake

Yes, he has. You just keep trying to get him to say that his one error of geographical identification is absolute proof that he doesn't know what he's talking about at all.

67th Tigers said:
and him and the usual suspects have thrown up a lot of strawmans and ad hominum attacks trying to obfuscate the error.

I'll say this much. You've taught me an awful lot about what the terms "strawman" and "ad hominem" actually mean. And don't mean. Mostly the latter. And its been my experience that when you've run out of arrows in your quiver, you turn to ascribing others with your own tactics.

A 67th Tigers calling something a "strawman" means someone has just provided an excellent example to prove their point, so 67th Tigers says "That's a strawman!" End of response. No need to directly answer the point the person has just made. And I've never seen anyone launch as many Ad Hominems as you per capita while drawing the fewest warnings.

67th Tigers said:
You'll find this happens a lot on American Civil War threads. It is still divisive 150 years after the event.

Mildly divisive. Don't be fooled by the nonsense on Fixed News and the internet. Unless you want to be, that is. I can't stop you.:p

67th Tigers said:
With Americans (and I'm not one(4)) they generally take it as allegorical to their current politics(5), and so genuine historical debate is stifled.(6)

4) We know. Had you been an American, you would have been bounced off as an Unreconstructed Confederate long ago. Lucky for you, being an Unreconstructed Rule Britannia Forever Briton won't get you into any trouble in the 21st century. Except in Argentina.:rolleyes:

5) The American Civil War defined us as a nation and a people. Its kind of hard to get away from something that is such a large part of us, even if many people don't know all the details. EVERYONE looks at their own nation's past through a modern prism, including America. Including England.

6) Hardly. The amount of open, genuine, sincere debate is enormous on the American Civil War. ESPECIALLY since 1960. Its historical revisionism that we have to watch out for. Like all those revisionists you swear by. Like Harsh? No, not like Harsh. Harsh was not the great historian you keep suggesting he was (at least I take it as your suggestion, as you don't go a month without invoking his name). He could have been. If only he had lived longer.:( And calling every historian you don't agree with a "hack". Worst of all, even the revisionists don't go far enough for YOUR OPINIONS, so you assert they have made conclusions that are actually your own, based on cherry-picked data put through a strainer of wishful thinking.

BTW? To close... Thanks for teaching me a new term:

Negationist Historian

To those reading who DON'T know the term, Google it. Its meaning is not completely obvious.
 
Oh for fuck's sake, citing the same passages you do but bolding different passages that undercut your own points, and again, when am I going to get an "I'm sorry" from you for claiming I invented the change of base to the James, which you said I did?

"At this point McClellan yielded the initiative to Lee. With his line of communications to White House, his supply base on the York River, cut and with the James River open to the U.S. Navy, the Union commander decided to shift his base to Harrison’s Landing on the south side of the peninsula. His rear areas had been particularly shaky since Confederate cavalry under Brig. Gen. J. E. B. Stuart had ridden completely around the Union Army in a daring raid in early June. The intricate retreat to the James, which involved 90,000 men, the artillery train, 3,100 wagons, and 2,500 head of cattle, began on the night of June 27 and was accomplished by using two roads. Lee tried to hinder the movement but was held off by Federal rear guards at Savage Station on June 29 and at Frayser’s Farm (Glendale) on the last day of the month.. "

And here:


"McClellan began relocating his supply operation and shifting his tactical focus south of the Chickahominy River within a week of Stuart's raid. On 18 June, he ordered 800,000 rations shifted from White House to the James River. Colonel Ingalls, in charge of the White House depot, dispatched several loads of forage and provisions to the James on 23 June. Canal-boat and barge floating wharves on the York River were broken apart. Four hundred transports began shifting cargo from White House to the James.
In the meantime, Johnston had been wounded and replaced by Robert E. Lee as the Confederate commander. Lee counterattacked McClellan's army on 26 June, intent on driving the Union invaders away from Richmond. The ensuing Confederate offensive lasted until 1 July and became known as the Seven Days' Battles.

While struggling to repulse the attacking Confederates, McClellan began shifting his actual base of operations to Harrison's Landing on the James on the morning of 27 June. Contrabands were evacuated to Fortress Monroe on canal boats. Supplies not needed by the forces north of the Chickahominy during the switch of fronts were retrograded by wagon and rail to White House.
Van Vliet shipped supplies by wagon and rail to Savage's Station so advancing troops could resupply en route to Harrison's Landing. They destroyed excess stocks. Supplies at Orchard Station and Despatch Station were sent on to Savage's Station as well, and excess stocks were evacuated to White House. Some 2,500 cattle were herded across the Peninsula to the James.
Transports evacuated hundreds of sick and wounded. Cavalry screened the hospital while litters and ambulances evacuated the wounded. Gunboats (the Commodore Barney, Currituck, and others) stationed around the port complex at White House provided additional security. Commissary stores were evacuated by transports; the sutlers' supplies were looted by departing Union soldiers and advancing Confederates. Buildings, including White House itself, and rows of tents were fired with whiskey-soaked hay. Ammunition dumps that could not be evacuated were blown up-the sounds convinced Confederate leaders that a full-scale Union retreat was in progress. Three locomotives and a hundred railcars were also burned. When all was done, Colonel Ingalls, now deputy quartermaster for the Army of the Potomac, and his staff boarded the transport Circassian and sailed to Fortress Monroe.
Following the Union retreat after the battle of Gaines' Mill on 27 June, wagoneers loaded all the supplies possible at Savage's Station for retrograde; the rest were destroyed. Meanwhile, Stuart arrived at White House in time to see the last gunboat leaving and nine barges, five destroyed locomotives, trains of railcars, and rows of tents burning.
Lee and his chief subordinate, Major General Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson, were both convinced after the main battle that McClellan would hold his lines of communication with White House. Stuart therefore ordered Brigadier General Richard S. Ewell's cavalry to attack White House. The cavalrymen saw fully loaded trains being run into the river with engines at full steam to avoid being captured by the Confederates. The finale of the entire operation was, fittingly, unusual: Stuart's horse artillery traded shots with the Union gunboat Marblehead at the very end of the evacuation from White House. "

And here:

GENERAL: Without waiting to receive the reports of all the subordinate commanders, I submit the following very brief narrative of the operations of this army since the 25th ultimo:
On the 24th of June I received information that appeared entitled to some credit, that General Jackson was at Frederick's Hall with his entire force, consisting of his own division, with those of Ewell and Whiting, and that his intention was to attack our right flank and rear, in order to cut off our communications with the White House and throw the right wing of the army into the Chickahominy. Fortunately I had a few days before provided against this contingency, by ordering a number of transports to the James River, loaded with commissary, quartermaster, and ordnance supplies. I therefore felt free to watch the enemy closely, wait events, and act according to circumstances, feeling sure that if cut off from the Pamunkey I could gain the James River for a new base. I placed General Stoneman in command of the cavalry on the right, intrusting to his charge the picket duty toward Hanover Court-House, to give the earliest possible information of an advance of the enemy from that direction.

This again says the exact opposite of what you claim it says.

Now, again, when are you going to say that you were wrong when you said and I repeat "
Okay, let me be plain. We all make mistakes. You have invented a change of base from the York River to the James. If you then, when challenged said "opps, my mistake" then you'd have some credibility. You have instead invented some bastardised version of the Seven Days Battle movement occuring weeks earlier, followed by it being repeated in the seven days.
"

Will you or will you not simply say "Yes, there was a change of base to the James and I made a mistake in saying you invented it?" It's a simple phrase, 67th, and I asked you to leave this alone instead of engaging in this Anatoly Fomenko nonsense again and again.
 
SF

Looking over my last post after reading the barrage of replies flying between you and 67, I see that the disagreements run even deeper than I thought. Apparently, he HAS accepted your apology about initially putting down the wrong hill name during a movement action. He just didn't say he did. But he did stop belaboring it. Or am I wrong on that?
 
SF

Looking over my last post after reading the barrage of replies flying between you and 67, I see that the disagreements run even deeper than I thought. Apparently, he HAS accepted your apology about initially putting down the wrong hill name during a movement action. He just didn't say he did. But he did stop belaboring it. Or am I wrong on that?

I believe this is accurate, yes. Now the debate's back to whether or not Stuart's Raid was the influencer of the move (as almost all analysis by real, as opposed to Anatoly Fomenko historians indicate) or whether or not the move was a reaction to Gaine's Mill. The move was far too well-organized to have been done on the spur of the moment as a reaction to contingent events. And in the event the move as it was organized ensured Lee's army floundered on a false premise all the way to Malvern Hill.
 
SF

Hmm... Regardless of all evidence to the contrary, regardless of all actions taken at the time, and all the judgements of history outside a few revisionists (and one negationist:rolleyes:), I don't really see how you can expect 67th Tigers not to say that everything that happened was ALL PART OF THE PLAN. That no matter what anyone else did, McClellan was ready for them. And if he wasn't it was all because of untrustworthy and unskilled subordinates, or the deliberate design of that bumbling, idiotic, drooling, simian, machiavellian, back-stabbing, evil genius:rolleyes: Abraham Lincoln!:eek:
 
Top