Thoughts on McClellan

I have, like so many of you--according to your blogs, have had some problems with the way McClellan handled himself throughout the war. It seemed as if so many times the war may have ended sooner if only McClellan had followed through with his orders. He seemed so full of pride, which got in the way of the end result. But, as I read the rest of the book I had a bit of a change of heart. On both sides of this great war many leaders had to be replaced because they wouldn't carry out their orders in a timely manner, or they would retreat because of a fear that the other side had more man power. I pondered on this, but as I continued to read the devastating numbers of deaths after each battle, I wondered if I too wouldn't be a leader that would be apprehensive to lead my men into a battle that would be that cause of so much loss of life. I can't imagine how hard it would be, as a leader, to see a battle field full of wounded and dead soldiers that you were responsible for--that had to do something to a person's psyche. I believe it takes a special person to be able to set aside the causalities of war, in the hopes of the outcome being what you want--Lee and Grant being the perfect examples. Yes, I think McClellan was wrong, he was prideful, stubborn and probably prolonged the war. But, he wasn't alone in having to be relieved of his position because he may have been scared of what might happen. Apparently, his men loved him.