If he was a great leader why fight a battle you know you can’t win and lose so many lives, especially since Lee knew he would be eventually defeated. The situation at Appomattox was surely grim, but as has been noted, Lee had viewed the South’s situation in the same grim terms for anywhere from twenty to five months prior to 9 April 1865 (p. 332). Finally, Nolan concludes that the facts of the war cast serious doubt that Lee’s command efforts are really
General George B. McClellan: A Critical Analysis There is perhaps no other military leader connected with the American Civil War that created so much interest and caused so much controversy as George B. McClellan. His ability to organize and build a military was among the best in history. However, his ability to lead and fight has always been seriously questioned. Because his legacy was so widespread, we will look at and compare the timeframe from his appointment to General of the Army of the Potomac/General in Chief to his relief from command by President Lincoln. The authors we will compare are; James McPherson, Stuart Sifakis, and Ethan S. Rafuse.
Ulysses S. Grant – A Misjudged Leader I choose Ulysses S. Grant, because I think he was a real piece of American history. I hope you learn as I have how important he was, and find the things he has done as interesting as I have. He was a man a lot of people have misunderstood, and have said a lot of different things about his personality, from being a drunk to a horrible leader. I have in fact; found this not to be true. He was the most celebrated, famous, and respected American in his generation.
The North with all the industrial business had a total different way of life and can see how they totally disagreed with the way slaves were being used and treated. As said in political objective section Lincoln wanted a military victory prior to announcing the emancipation proclamation because he knew it would cause many more problems. Lincoln’s impatience and no military experience did render him from making better decisions which could have ended the war earlier and with less deaths and injuries. With the north controlling most of the railroads and weapons they had a huge advantage over the south, if he could have been a little more patient and trained his men properly could also have ended this much earlier. With the number of personnel the rebels had vs union was little to none, they held off the north by smart tactics of well-trained officers.
AP US History 12 August 2012 Courage in The Killer Angels The book The Killer Angels, written by Michael Shaara, is about the American Civil War, but comes with a twist. Instead of using only historical facts, Michael portrays each character as he sees fit. With this said, many of the characters he chooses play major roles in the Civil War, such as Robert E. Lee, Longstreet, Grant, and Chamberlain. However, one specific section of the book strikes me as the most courage's. In the book, Chamberlain and his battalion make up the rear of the Union, and are defending the Union from any possible attacks by the Confederates.
The Civil War was ravaging the country, and hundreds of thousands were already dead. Lincoln’s speech addressed the nation at a critical time, and was exactly what the people needed to hear. Lincoln comforts and inspires the people with his last line, “[L]et us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne this battle, and for his widow, and his orphan…” This statement of determination gives the people hope for a brighter future, and faith in the man who will bring it to them. The Second Inaugural is chock-full of exemplary rhetorical strategies that greatly add to the effectiveness of the speech. Lincoln persuades and assures the people that the Confederates are malicious rebels, bent on, “making war,” and, “destroying the nation.” He does this by referring to the Confederates only as “insurgents,” and giving them an aura of wickedness by saying, “Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish.” This cunning use of diction and antithesis, using “make war” in reference to the Confederates and “accept war” in relation to the Union, puts all the blame of the war on the Confederates.
Common sense by Thomas Paine Paine says that there has never been a better time to fight for independence, as the colonies have never been more united and are full of soldiers who have fought in the recent French and Indian war. But Paine's most powerful argument against reconciliation deals with the toll this conflict is taking on the colonies. Moreover, this clever man then labels people of America “sufferers” and “grievously oppressed,” immediately assuring all common citizens that he was sympathetic toward their collective plight. Paine expresses his focus on ideas, not men, and thus establishes his relative intent to focus objectively. The world is your destiny.
People have been trying to understand the cause of WW1 since the war ended. Many historians and experts have come up with huge possible solutions and explanations. However, the question of guilt is a very controversial and sensitive one, and at some point every answer seems unsatisfactory. First, the alliance system certainly played a very important role, but does not entirely explain the outbreak of the war alone. It was a base for other causes that finally lead to war.
The following essay will discuss these issues in detail plus other factors such as the leaderships on both sides and the aid of foreign support. The leadership of both parties is an important factor to consider why the civil war turned out the way it did. Many historians argue that Abraham Lincoln was a far better leader than his opposite counterpart Jefferson Davis. The Vice president of the Confederate, Alexander Stephens, had described Jefferson as being ‘weak, timid, petulant, peerish and obstinate’[1]. He also blamed Davis for ‘all that went wrong’ [2]during the war.
The generals in the North were not as qualified as the ones in the South, the North had McClellan, for instance who was a excellent general but did not have the power in him to send his men out to battle when he should have. As time went on the Northern generals learned from their mistakes and more importantly from their enemy generals of the South. In the beginning of the war the strategies that were used by the generals of the North were very unsuccessful, and as time went on they obtained information on new strategies that would later help them win the war. Another reason why the North was victorious was because of their strong navy. This Navy knew how to get knocked down and return to it's feet and finish it's job.