The Union's Ability to Conduct Total Warfare and Confederate Defeat
The American War for Independence was a successful struggle of a smaller nation fighting a larger, more powerful force. However, in the case of the American Civil War, the larger more powerful Union defeated the southern Confederacy. The Union won the Civil War because the Confederacy could not sustain a war of attrition in the Napoleonic style that evolved into Total War. This paper will briefly explain what Napoleonic warfare is and examine the resources of the North and South. Then, the paper will develop how the Union used its advantages in resources and the use of Total War to defeat the Confederacy.
The American War for Independence, on the American side, was fought in a semi-guerrilla style. This means that battles were fought in the traditional European style and by guerrilla tactics. The guerrilla style includes undercover, clandestine, radical, and subversive tactics, in which men make raids, especially behind enemy lines. The traditional European style or Napoleonic style of warfare is based on two opposing armies meeting in battle and facing each other head on. Each side lines their men up in tremendous ranks and the conflicting armies march upon each other. It involves flanking, direct assaults, and other military tactics. The battle’s principle concept is that a general uses his artillery to soften up the enemy’s defenses, the infantry to fight, and the cavalry to raid and decimate the adversary. The American armies, during the Revolutionary War, used both these styles of warfare to defeat the greater military power of Great Britain. However, this doctrine of warfare was not used by the Confederacy when fighting the greater militar...
... middle of paper ...
...have won this battle and marched onto Washington D.C., then Southern Total Warfare could have been a possibility.
The dream that was the Confederate States of America never was realized. European style warfare lead to a great number of causalities on both sides of the Civil War. The North could sustain this damage and the Confederacy could not. As Southern numbers dwindled, the North delivered the final blow. The Union destroyed Southern morale and its economy. The Confederacy should have taken a better look at how the Union was formed in the first place. The American colonies won the Revolutionary War with a smaller number of men and materiel. It was not won with the doctrine of Napoleonic warfare, but that of semi-guerrilla tactics. Had the Confederate States of America used semi-guerrilla tactics, the outcome of the Civil War may have been different.
The North and South benefited in many different ways, and both sides would use dissimilar approaches. The Southerners were fighting for a way of life they believed in. Comparing the two, the North had an extensive amount of people which made it easier to establish armies. In the beginning, the Union army only consisted of 16,000 soldiers or less. Southerners deserted the army because they didn’t have the things they needed for fig...
Throughout the years, many people have been taught that the reason the Civil War happened, was to abolish slavery all through the United States. Although that is true, there were more reasons why the Civil War occurred.Referencing will be done on different articles and writers to support the findings of the authors. The article “Slavery, the Constitutional, and the Origins of the Civil War” by Paul Finkelman, discusses about the North (union) and the South (confederacy) and the disagreement of the territories following the constitutional laws regarding slavery, the article explores both sides of the territories and their beliefs of how the situation of slavery should have been dealt with. The article “The Economic Origins of the Civil War” by Marc Egnal, discusses the North’s (union) and the South’s (confederacy) economic situation that could have pushed the two territories to engage in war with one another. Finally, the last article “Politics, Ideology, and the Origins of the American Civil War” by Eric Foner, focuses on the Norths (union) and Souths (confederacy) views on politics and ideas of how each territory is ran and how they have affected the North and the South. These historians supplied specific and different explanations that explained what exactly caused the United States to enter into a Civil War. With the information provided by the authors, the evidence will lead us to the answer of what caused the Civil War.
“Their differing perceptions of the nature of war form the backbone of the difficult relationship between these two men.” Lee, an older soldier, values much of an offensive warfare approach, while Longstreet values a defensive warfare approach. Both men consistently argue about the best option for the Confederacy. However, “no matter how much he might disagree, Longstreet defers to Lee’s decisions.” In an argument as to who was right, none of the developed tactics provide clear evidence as to what was going to work, especially with a military of lesser men, considering the war in 1863. Although General Lee’s tactics did not work during the Battle of Gettysburg, there is no evidence that General Longstreet’s defensive strategy would have worked significantly better. Therefore, neither of the generals exceeded the other when it comes to military strategies, which rather debunks Shaara’s depiction of Longstreet’s advanced knowledge of modern warfare. Despite of the importance of the Battle of Gettysburg, often marked as the turning point of the war, General Longstreet should not obey an order that results in a significant loss of men that would be extremely difficult to replace at this time. Already limited by the amount of men still able to fight, pushing additional forces in an open battle would just nearly deplete the confederate soldiers completely, and
... to win war. The Union blockade of Charleston is when the enemy fleet took over the Charleston harbor. Sherman’s march through South Carolina was a path of destruction from ransacking people and homes to burning down buildings. When Sherman set fire to Columbia that marked the end of this gruesome war. After Sherman had set fire to the city, the Confederacy was in such despair over there lost town. This caused the Confederacy to finally surrender to the union. The Civil War was a very dark time in American history. One of the bloodiest wars this country has ever experienced. South Carolina was a big player during this war, from battles to their ports, and then the burning of the capitol. This war was a very traumatic time for Americans but in my opinion I believe that if this war hadn’t happened we wouldn’t be the strong, free willed and brave country we are today.
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.
The Civil War, beginning in 1861 and ending in 1865, was a notorious event in American history for many influential reasons. Among them was the war 's conclusive role in determining a united or divided American nation, its efforts to successfully abolish the slavery institution and bring victory to the northern states. This Civil War was first inspired by the unsettling differences that divided the northern and southern states over the power that resided in the hands of the national government to constrain slavery from taking place within the territories. There was only one victor in the Civil War. Due to the lack of resources, plethora of weaknesses, and disorganized leadership the Southern States possessed in comparison to the Northern States,
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).
Many historians have tried to offer their ideology on the outcome of the Civil War. McPherson in his “American Victory, American Defeat” writes about what other historians have decreed their answers to why the Confederacy lost. He tells us the reasons that could not be the explanation for the loss, and explains the internal reasons but leaves the true cause of the loss untold. Freehling explains the defeat by discussing what could have been and then gives reasons to negate some of the cases that he states for the outcome of the Confederacy. Both McPherson and Freehling both agreed that there were other factors besides battles that needed to be looked at.
Streich, Michael. "Northern Advantages in the Civil War." Suite. Strayer University, n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
The American Revolution and the Civil War have numerous similarities and differences even though they occurred almost 100 years apart. The American Revolution was a political upheaval during 1760’s and 1770’s, while the Civil War was a fight between a divided nation during the 1860’s regarding the subject of slavery. As Southerners held slaves captive and forced them to work against their will, the Colonists were held captive and forced to pay ridiculous taxes put in place by Britain. Similarities and differences from both the American Revolution and the Civil War can be seen through the cause of both wars, specific battles from each war, and the results of each war.
The Civil War began on April 12, 1861 at Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor when the Confederate army attacked Union soldiers and ended on May 9, 1865 with a Union Victory. There are many events, laws, and people that provoked the Civil War. The two most important causes are slavery and the expansion of the United States, causing an unbalance of free and slave states. This essay examines major events that initiated the war, starting from the Compromise of 1820 to the election of 1860, and proves how the Civil War was inevitable. After Thomas Jefferson, who served as president from 1801 to 1809, made the Louisiana Purchase on April 30, 1803, the U.S. gained 828 thousand square miles of territory from France.
Some people may argue that the war could have been avoided if The north would have just let the south secede from the united states. But the united states is supposed to be a democracy which lets the people in which power is vested in the people, who rule either directly or through freely elected representatives. So if the north would have let the south secede from the union then they would not have been letting the south have a voice in what they wanted. There allies would see this and not want to be associate anymore.This is why the argument is
The famous Battle of Gettysburg was fought July 1 to July 3 of 1863 in and around the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The battle proved to show the most casualties of the entire war and resulted in a crushing defeat of the Confederates. The Battle of Gettysburg is generally considered to be the turning point of the American Civil War. This paper will demonstrate the various reasons as to why the Confederates, led by General Robert E. Lee, were unsuccessful in the Battle of Gettysburg during their invasion of the north. General Lee’s over-confidence, the confederate army’s disorganization and failed coordination, and the shift of intelligence all contributed to the crushing defeat of the confederates at Gettysburg. Following his “flawless” battle at Chancellorsville, General Lee was instilled with absolute confidence in his men and failed to see any deficiencies in his army’s offensive capabilities. Lee was not only over-confident, but also knew less than his opponent during the most crucial stages of the battle. The final contributing factor as to why the confederates were defeated was Alexander’s failure to provide effective artillery bombardment and his failure to advise General Pickett not to make the charge after the ineffective bombardment.
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...
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.