July 13th is the birthday of Nathan Bedford Forrest, one of the South's greatest generals and a great American hero.

I recently completed a good biography on Forrest [That Devil Forrest by John Allan Wyeth] which left me with an even greater appreciation for the man as a leader and natural warrior. I have no doubts that many readers are more knowledgeable about Forrest, I nevertheless wanted to share one important theme that emerged for me.

The tactics and practices of Forrest, Lee and others should stand as a clarion signal to modern Southerners, but unfortunately, many who profess to follow The Charge and the instruction to "emulate their virtues" seem to completely miss the message and how it should be applied in today's Heritage wars. More on this in a moment.

I read in some WBTS magazine some five or six years ago an article whose primary thesis was that Southern leaders failed to adjust tactics to the technology of the 1860s and in that failure, they lost the war by attrition. In other words, the Napoleonic tactics taught at West Point before the war did not take into account the capabilities of the then-modern rifle with rifled barrels.

Napoleonic tactics were based on smooth-bore muskets which had very limited accuracy past 100 yards. To make a long thesis short, the author suggested that the key to winning at that time was to always fight on the defensive, to entice the enemy's infantry to attack your entrenched forces. He listed a number of examples of Lee attacking entrenched U.S. positions and taking excessive losses of manpower. At the time, this premise seemed to have some merit, though I knew that Southern troops were always under-fed and lacked the supply capabilities to carry on protracted waiting games.

Basic principles of warfare, I later came to understand, show that the "stay on defense" strategy simply didn't and couldn't work.

A year or so later, I read a book on Gettysburg, Last Chance for Victory - Robert E. Lee and the Gettysburg Campaign by Scott Bowden and Bill Ward. Bowden and Ward make a very convincing case that an offensive into the North was necessary and that Lee made all the rights moves at Gettysburg, but his subordinates failed to carry out their orders. They suggest that the only thing Lee should have done differently was to personally take over command of the troops when he saw that subordinate generals were not carrying out his orders in a timely manner. But I digress...

Bowden and Ward also lay out Lee's background and training and point out that he knew that an outnumbered force MUST go on the offensive and hold the initiative. When outnumbered, the only way to gain the advantage is to go on the offensive. Lee knew that to remain in his trenches in Virginia meant certain defeat due to lack of food and attrition by disease.

Forrest also knew these basic truths, though he had virtually no formal education, military or otherwise. He knew instinctively that offense and bluff were the ONLY way to win. The story of Forrest's military career is replete with examples where despite being outnumbered and under equipped, his daring and offensive outlook won many battles that should have been won by the enemy.

Many Confederate victories were won despite being outnumbered by effectively gaining the advantage and the initiative by going on offense. Lee and Forrest proved this time after time and it's why enemy commanders feared forces led by these men.

I am convinced that if the South had one or two (three would have been nice) more generals like Forrest, the outcome of the war would have been much different. Not only was Forrest a brilliant tactician and leader whose men would follow him anywhere, he also was very resourceful at stealing the supplies and horses he needed from the enemy. John S. Mosby was an effective cavalry fighter in the East (mostly guerilla tactics behind enemy lines), but the addition of a few more Forrest-like leaders would have made all the difference.

Alas, if there were such leaders, they died before gaining the opportunity to prove themselves or went unrecognized for some reason. Forrest was wounded a number of times, he lead many charges personally and had twenty-nine horses shot out from under him.

The lessons imparted from the tactics of Forrest and Lee should be obvious for modern Southerners. We cannot win the Heritage wars by remaining on the defense. Hunkering down behind our entrenchments, the enemy has outflanked us and they're routing us by rolling up our "rears" in more than one sense.