I hear what you're saying.  The Wilderness campaign and the final battles of the war were not military genius type stuff, but it was Grant's understanding that to win the north must lock horns with the confederate army where ever it could and not let go - high casualties on both sides in a war of attrition that the South could not win.  But it was what needed to win and he did it.  If you look at his Western campaign leading to Vicksburg he was, in my opinion, as imaginative as he was dogged and aggressive.  Cutting through swampland to bypass fortified points in the Mississippi and constantly pushing south through difficult terrain, and then crossing the river and coming at Vicksburg from the east was very skillful.  I've never heard Patton or MacArthur criticized for having more resources than the Germans and Japanese.   In my view, if Grant had been in command of the Army of the Potomac at Bull Run, Fredericksburg, Antietam, Chancellorsville, etc where McClellan, Burnside, Hooker, Pope all flamed out, the war would have gone very differently.     

He did lack imagination, and as he knew the North had greater resources he wasn't afraid to attack as he also knew his men would be replaced. This made him victorious to be certain, but it didn't make him a great general in my opinion. Most Southern generals knew early on that a war with the North was a losing prospect for the same reasons Grant had. When war came, those Southern leaders had to rely on the training they had from West Point, VMI, etc... as well as their service in the Mexican War to engage the North and they did so quite successfully. If you look at the amount of battles fought which was an estimated 370, the North won 195 and the South 129 with 46 accepted draws. Since the North was the greater power in both men and materials, most would award a draw to the loser, or in this case the South. Numbers like these reflect the poor leadership in the Union Armies which was often plagued with political appointees and other mitigating factors. Yes, the North won the war, and yes Grant was overall the architect of that, but he was no Jackson, Lee, Forrest, or Cleburne when it came to leadership, strategy, and tactics. He just carried a bigger stick. The other thing I would give him was that he did know, thanks largely in part to Sherman, that he must prosecute the war fully and brutally to bring it to an end and that philosophy carried us through WWII. Sadly it wasn't applied in Korea and Vietnam.      Scott

I have just found a small period reference to Lt J.E. Bowen online, for a pre-war fatal boat accident, along famous Jack Valentine Woolams, Chief Experimental Test Pilot, Bell Aircraft Corporation and Lt. Camp. : "On 10 February 1939, Lieutenant Woolams was one of three Air Corps officers thrown into the waters of Cross Lake, near Shreveport, Louisiana, when the boat, owned by Woolams, capsized in 4 foot (1.2 meters) waves. Woolams and Lieutenant J.E. Bowen were rescued after 4 hours in the water, but the third man, Lieutenant Wilbur D. Camp, died of exposure" Not sure it is the same person, or how he ended up in CC Moseley's aviation school. If someone with better investigative skills and tools wants to help. I will greatly appreciate it. Thank you in advance for your time and valuable help. Vellocino 

Hi fellow members, I was lucky to obtain the early Moseley's presentation pilot wing to JE Bowen recently.  I share with you the rest of the pictures in the local auction. Hope you enjoy! Thank you. Vellocino 

I love the story about when Lincoln heard that Grant had a drinking problem from those who wish to diminish his success in the West to which Lincoln replied something to the effect, and I'm paraphrasing, "we should find out what kind of whiskey he drinks and give some to our other generals" - the point being Grant always attacked.  I've always admired Grant as a great general who is not given his due.  He understood that the Union had greater resources and needed to bring that to bear if it was to defeat the confederacy.   Many people don't like him or believe he lacked imagination.  

Yes…Canadian item for their Navy……copying the USN color scheme…based on aircraft support elements….I think.  I just recognize and know NSNs.

Obituary from  NYT  for CDR Albert Moritz USN (1860-1941),  medal group posted earlier by his  great-grandson who owns the medal group.   https://www.nytimes.com/1941/01/17/archives/commander-moritz-retired-naval-officer-cited-for-saving-168-lives.html

Here's some random material on the Carabao medal along with pix of the one I have,   #1770 issued to CDR (later RADM)  Walter S. Crosley.   Based on a rough eyeballing of the roster,  Army medals outnumber Navy about 10 to 1.      

Authentic US issue jungle boots. They've been around the block a few times (!).    Are they worth anything?

I'd like any info y'all can provide on this cartridge belt. The buckles on the reverse side have two rows of imprints as follows: "Patented," then "Mills" inside a line drawing of a cartridge, then "Jan 29 '01" "July 16 '07" is under the above patented, and "May 18 '15" is under the above Jan 29 '01   Also, if you can tell me an approximate value, I'd appreciate that, too.