Well said!
I would also offer that the early sucesses of Lee/Jackson occured when they were on the defensive. They also occured when they faced seriously inferior generals. The North had nearly ALL the bad ones. Who else but McClellan could find Lees orders, indicating he had divided his forces, and be happy that he came away with a "draw"? Lee KNEW McClellan would delay, and that delay was the edge Lee needed to get his troops together--in the nick of time. Poor old Burnside---fighting for hours to get across that stupid bridge, ignoring fords and other alternatives, and then just as he drives the confederates, has the luck to have Jackson((?) arrive from Harpers Ferry, and immediatley on his flank. Then the Union leadership rewarded Burnside with command of the whole army which he delayed into defeat and slaughter at Fredricksburg.

I agree with you that Lee and Jackson were perhaps the two best generals ever in the USA. But, seriously, how good did they have to be against McClellan, Hooker, Burnside, etc.
Don't EVEN mention that commander of the 5th Corps (?) at G-Burg, who named himself the savior of the battle, but should have been court marshalled for incompetence. Too bad that he only lost his leg!

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags