>one of the lowest loss rates (relative to what he inflicted)

File: USGrant.jpg (145KB, 686x385px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 686x385px

>one of the lowest loss rates (relative to what he inflicted) of any commander in the war
>got the nickname "Unconditional Surrender" for his habit of capturing entire armies, which no other commander managed (he did it 3 times)
>unfazed by Lee's hyper-aggressive tactics, doggedly pursued and eventually outmaneuvered him
I don't even know what people think could've been done better. The Overland Campaign was costly yeah, he misjudged Cold Harbor, but he backed Lee into a corner, then managed to sneak around him and would've taken Petersburg and Richmond in June of 1864 if Baldy Smith hadn't fucked up his orders. As it was he still ensured the eventual Confederate defeat, and after the 10 month siege he finished the job cleanly. And his overall strategy was highly effective. Plus, he pulled it off while drunk half the time (if you believe rumors spread by his rivals) which counts for something.

Not saying Lee wasn't a great leader who deserves a lot of the veneration he gets, he kept the Confederate cause alive far longer than it would've gone otherwise. (A fact which I'm sure caused him some very mixed feelings after the war.) And his army was far weaker by early 1864 than it had been earlier in the war, with lesser commanders, though the soldiers themselves were grizzled veterans and had an edge on the green Union kids, in addition to the advantage of being on defense. But I'd rate Grant just as highly as a commander, he saw the situation very clearly, didn't fuck up and took the initiative, what more can you ask for?

He also kicked the Jews out of the area he commanded in 1862 for doing illegal trading lol