Analysis Of Retreat To Victory

1057 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: a paragraph for battle of yorktown

When one thinks about the American Civil War (1861-1864), the question at hand begs questioning: what could the Confederacy have done to win the war? Ideally, according to Robert G. Tanner in his book Retreat to Victory? the idea that the south might have won had it used a different strategy might be impossible to answer. That being said, Tanner argues amongst many theories which have developed over what the Confederacy could have done to win the Civil War, the strategy commonly referred to as Fabian would not be a prosperous endeavor for the Confederacy due to the southern geography, people and through the Confederacy’s generals. The ideas presented in Tanner’s book deserve recognition on the basis that the author’s thesis is addressing a …show more content…

Chiefly, Tanner uses Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson to show how Confederate troop support of a Fabian strategy could not survive in the south. For example, Tanner makes it a point of emphasis to describe the situation with the Shenandoah Valley campaign. Waged by Jackson, the Confederate army was forced to make multiple deep retreats and battle-avoidance strategies, leaving the troops with mass hunger and the spread of disease. This shows how even when the Confederacy implemented a Fabian strategy, which was instituted at certain points by the high command, the Confederacy still suffered tremendously, resulting in a huge toll on what really wins wars: …show more content…

looks at the hypothetical response to how the Confederacy could have won the Civil War. By looking at the geography of the southern half of the United States, the slaves and the generals of the Confederacy, Tanner is able to show through evidence and historical examples why a Fabian strategy could not have given the Confederacy the victory they so desired. Although Tanner’s thesis does seem unorthodox due to how the author doesn’t introduce any new, revolutionary ideas on how the Confederacy could have won the war, Tanner’s analysis is well done because the author allows the reader to suppose what could have changed United States history while at the same time showing the audience why the case presented cannot

Show More
Related

  • Why the South Could Not Win the Civil War

    518 Words  | 2 Pages

    The right military strategy is the key to a war. In order for the South to win the war, they would have needed to apply what is now called a blitzkrieg strategy. This would have been a quick decisive attack on the North to follow up its early victories of Manassas in the East and at Wilson's Creek and Lexington in the West.

    Read More

  • The Battle of Gettysburg Analysis

    1961 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Confederate Army was very successful in the South.... ... middle of paper ... ... Gettysburg: A Study in Command.

    Read More

  • Principles of Maneuver, Offensive and Surprise

    981 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Valley Campaign of the Shenandoah Valley of 23 March to 9 June 1862 saw the rise of the Confederate Major General (MG) Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. The Shenandoah Valley campaign allowed for MG Jackson to incorporate the principles of maneuver, offensive and surprise operations (US Army Center of Military History, 2012) through the use of his cavalry and foot soldiers.

    Read More

  • Comparing The North And The South In Michael Shaara's The Killer Angels

    651 Words  | 2 Pages

    Nevertheless, an attitude they show is their cause for engaging in the war. On page 110, Lee describes, “With every step of a soldier, with every tick of the clock, the army was gaining safety, closer to victory, closer to the dream of independence.” His words reveal that their reason for coming was to gain their long overdue independence. Without a cause worth fighting for on each side, the war would have no fuel or reason to continue. In like manner, another attitude of the South was their admiration for their commander general. On page 251, Longstreet proclaims, “Colonel, let me explain something. The secret of General Lee is that men love him and follow him with faith in him. That’s one secret.” I believe this clarifies that the bond of brotherhood and respect for each other in this army would allow for these soldiers to follow their leader blindly. The overwhelming amount of faith and trust among the Army of the Northern Virginia is inspiring. The Confederates prove in these appearances that they do indeed have an important cause that they are willing to die

    Read More

  • Dialectic of the Union Blockade during the Civil War

    1869 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Civil War in the United States from 1861 to 1865 serves as a dark reminder of how disjointed a nation can become over issues that persistently cause heated debate among party factions. Most students that have taken courses in American history understand the disadvantage possessed by the Confederate States of America as they fought against the powerful Union army for what they perceived as a necessary institution of slavery. Historians have debated over the effectiveness of the blockade and if it was important in creating the failures faced by the Confederate States of America. This debate has generated the contested question of “Did the Union blockade succeed in the American Civil War?” The blockade, whether considered a success or an absolute failure on the part of the Union, holds grand significance in the history of the United States. The increased development in the Union’s naval department correlates directly with the necessity of possessing ships that could withstand the threat of blockade running.

    Read More

  • What They Fought For by James McPherson's

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Union Army was able to match the intensity of the Confederacy, with the similar practice of dedication until death and patriotism, but for different reasons. The Union soldiers’s lifestyles and families did not surround the war to the extent of the Confederates; yet, their heritage and prosperity relied heavily on it. Union soldiers had to save what their ancestors fought for, democracy. “Our (Union soldiers) Fathers made this country, we, their children are to save it” (McPherson, 29). These soldiers understood that a depleted group of countries rather than one unified one could not flourish; “it is essential that but one Government shall exercise authority from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific” (Ledger, 1861).

    Read More

  • Why the Confederacy Lost the War

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    Each author agreed that the battles were not the only reason for the fall and death of the Confederacy. While battles were being fought on the battlefields, the home fronts were had their own battles to fight. McPherson discusses what he calls as the “internal conflict” thesis, which blames the uneasiness among the southerners. The government was being blamed. Southerners were opposing conscription, taxes, and habeus corpus. McPherson points out that these could not have been reasons for the loss. The same thing was happening in the North. Therefore this internal conflict with the home front government does not have a plausible role in why the South lost the war. If the North was fighting the same type of opposition at home, then shouldn’t the war have ended in a stalemate? Also, the non-slaveholding whites and the slaves were feeling alienated. Rich slaveholders who wanted to keep slave labor alive were fighting the war. The two alienated groups were fighting a war on the wrong side. The non-slaveholders opposed sec...

    Read More

  • Summary Of The Fate Of Their Country By W. Holt

    561 Words  | 2 Pages

    I felt like the author could clearly show the true contributing factors of the civil war. As an admirer of history, I could use utilize his book for references later on in my academic studies. The book is 127 pages chronicling the events that led to the civil war. Holt gives novices history readers a wonder firsthand look into the world of young America pre-civil war. His book brought out new ways to approach the study of pre-civil war events. The question whether the Civil War was inevitable or could have been derailed was answered in The Fate of Their Country. Holt places the spotlight on the behaviors Politicians and the many congressional compromises that unintendedly involved the actions of the residents of American. These factors at hand placed the Civil war as inevitable. Most of the politician’s views in The Fate of Their Country were egotistical and shortsighted which left gaps in American’s social future. To consider the subject of why, first we need to understand the contributing causes, America’s great expansion project, the Manifest Destiny the driving factor behind the loss of virtue and political discord.

    Read More

  • Why The North Won the Civil War

    1524 Words  | 4 Pages

    ... yet they strongly believed that they could be victorious. Despite numerous disadvantages, the South entered the war with some important advantages. The South adopted a strategy like that of George Washington in the American Revolution. The plan, known as attrition, called for a strategy of winning the war by avoiding losing. That is, the South did not have to match the North's resources, they only needed to avoid full-scale battles and prolong the war making it too costly for their opponents.

    Read More

  • Southern Pro-Slavery Rhetoric

    1613 Words  | 4 Pages

    Of all the areas with which the southerners contended, the socio-political arena was probably their strongest. It is in this area that they had history and law to support their assertions. With the recent exception of the British, the slave trade had been an integral part of the economies of many nations and the slaves were the labor by which many nations and empires attained greatness. Souther...

    Read More

  • Civil War: Inevitable or Avoidable

    1841 Words  | 4 Pages

    After thoroughly assessing past readings and additional research on the Civil War between the North and South, it was quite apparent that the war was inevitable. Opposed views on this would have probably argued that slavery was the only reason for the Civil War. Therefore suggesting it could have been avoided if a resolution was reached on the issue of slavery. Although there is accuracy in stating slavery led to the war, it wasn’t the only factor. Along with slavery, political issues with territorial expansion, there were also economic and social differences between North and South. These differences, being more than just one or two, gradually led to a war that was bound to happened one way or another.

    Read More

  • Book Analysis of Stephen W. Sears’ Landscape Turned Red

    963 Words  | 2 Pages

    Sears’ thesis is the Union could have won the war faster. McClellan was an incompetent commander and to take the initiative to attack an defeat the Confederate army. The Army of Northern Virginia, under...

    Read More

  • Why the Southern States Believed they Could Win the Civil War

    724 Words  | 2 Pages

    Why did the southern states believe they could win the civil war? The southern states, known as the Confederacy were very confident going into this war that they could successfully defend their rights' and their way of life. They had many reasons for being so confident. First, the southern leaders were sure the north was not going to have a full-scale military conflict. They thought that a compromise and peace agreement could be reached after a short period of fighting. Second, the south was going to fight a defensive war. Third, the southern lifestyle made them familiar with firearms and horseback riding. Therefore they would be better soldiers than the northerners. Fourth, the south had a great source of wealth in its cotton exports and felt they would be able to fund the war. Last, the south thought that France and Britain would come to its aid. The south didn't want to defeat the north they wanted a compromise. Therefore, the north would not have the authority to govern them. The south did not have to win the war, it just had to keep the north from winning. On March 7, 1861 Jefferson Davis selected John Forsyth, A. B. Roman, and Martin J. Crawford to represent the Confederacy in a meeting with Lincoln's administration. Not trying two overpower anyone, the Confederate leaders said they simply wanted to be left alone. The Confederates thought to defend its region from being taken over and to keep its armies from destruction they would have to fight a very well planned out defensive war. The Confederate armies did not have to invade the north to win that kind of war. They need only to endure long enough to force the north to the decision that th...

    Read More

  • Key Factors That Led to Union Victory in the Civil War

    2114 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and amongst themselves was extremely vital to the effectiveness of the Northern military forces. Had any one of these factors not been in place the outcome of the war could have been significantly different, and the United States as we know it today could be quite a different place to live.

    Read More

  • The Central Theme of Southern History by Ulrich B. Phillips

    1616 Words  | 4 Pages

    Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of fourteen elegantly written pages, Phillips advances his thesis with evidence from a variety of primary sources gleaned from his years of research. All of his reasoning and experience add weight to his distillation of Southern history into this one fairly simple idea, an idea so deceptively simple that it invites further study.

    Read More

More about Analysis Of Retreat To Victory

Open Document