Columbia Southern Military Strategy & Union Army from 1861 to 1862 Questions

User Generated

anaplpcvpur

Writing

Description

Question 1

Discuss the military strategy and intended outcomes of the Union Army from 1861 to the end of 1862. How successful was this strategy?

Your response should be a minimum of 500 words.

Question 2

The South was not in an economic position to wage a successful war. Thoroughly explain why they were not, and judge if you think this had an impact on the overall course of the war. Your answer should include a comparison of the economic situations and motivations of the Northern and Southern armies, and it should describe the South's ability to benefit from a defensive position.

Your response should be a minimum of 500 words.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Question 1 Discuss Winfield Scott's campaign to capture Mexico City. How did his campaign impact the war? Why have some historians and military leaders viewed his campaign as one of the finest in the annals of American warfare? Your response must be a minimum of 500 words. Question 2 Discuss the Battle of New Orleans and Andrew Jackson's role in the campaign and battle. Why was Jackson successful? What impact did the battle have on the war? What impact did the battle have on U.S. politics? Your response must be a minimum of 500 words. Question 1 Discuss the military strategy and intended outcomes of the Union Army from 1861 to the end of 1862. How successful was this strategy? Your response should be a minimum of 500 words. Question 2 The South was not in an economic position to wage a successful war. Thoroughly explain why they were not, and judge if you think this had an impact on the overall course of the war. Your answer should include a comparison of the economic situations and motivations of the Northern and Southern armies, and it should describe the South's ability to benefit from a defensive position. Your response should be a minimum of 500 words. UNIT IV STUDY GUIDE The Civil War 1861-1862 Course Learning Outcomes for Unit IV Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to: 5. Describe the strengths of the U.S. military during major military encounters. 5.1 Explain the intended outcome of the Union's strategic plan. 5.2 Describe the South's ability to benefit from a defensive position in the early conflict. 6. Examine the environment experienced by the enlisted colonial or U.S. soldier. 6.1 Describe the motivations that supported the causes of the Northern and Southern armies. 6.2 Compare the economic situations between the Northern and Southern armies. Course/Unit Learning Outcomes 5.1 5.2 6.1 6.2 Learning Activity Chapter 6; Unit Lesson; Assessment Chapter 6; Unit Lesson; Assessment Chapter 6; Unit Lesson; Assessment Chapter 6; Unit Lesson; Assessment Reading Assignment Chapter 6: The Civil War, 1861-1862 Unit Lesson The politics of the 1850s led to great changes in the political structure of the United States. The 1860 election of Abraham Lincoln, who was not supported enough in Southern states to even be present on many ballots, was a call for revolution to many. Less than year later, the nation would be armed and divided against itself in what would become a devastating conflict—one that would eventually take the lives of over 600,000 Americans. While the United States had proven itself a formidable military power, there was a great deal of uncertainty on both sides. Traditionally, the South, which was largely still a frontier region, maintained many of the traditions that had built a strong militia in past wars, including the nurturing and training of many U.S. military leaders and soldiers. The North, however, was the heart of military technology, industry, and politics. Each would require significant action to prepare a successful strategy against the other. Despite the call to maintain state sovereignty, the southern secession created a large central government on both sides of the conflict in order to mobilize and maintain an army of the size as would be required. Nothing less than an intense, prolonged fight would settle the conflict. There could be no compromise because the objectives of each side denied any such possibility (Millett, Maslowski, & Feis, 2012). The North fought for preservation of the Union and for emancipation of slaves while the South fought for independence and the preservation of their peculiar institution, including economic, social, and political differences from their northern neighbors. Torn by the Civil War, the United States stood on unequal ground. The North had a greater population, an increase demand in industry, railroad development, greater overall infrastructure, and most importantly, more money. While lacking these important elements to war, the South had the advantage of fighting for what they believed were their liberties, thus uniting Southern people in a way the North could not. The men who would shape the war and thus the history of the nation began to emerge. Some men such as Winfield Scott and Richard Johnson would put the welfare of the nation above that of their states and serve the Union (Millett et al., 2012). The South also had the good fortune of keeping a number of excellent commanders, including HY 2000, American Military History I 1 several who had extensive experience and trained at military-style academies, such as West Point, who would resign their posts and serve the Confederacy. Since the creation of the first American political parties, the question of federal versus state power had plagued the country. In the end, however, commanders could not overcome the geographic and demographic disadvantages the South faced. Going into the early war, the news of such disadvantages would ironically prove to be one of the Confederacy’s strengths as underestimation of the Southern cause would quickly pin the Union from advancing and allow the South to take victory. While these early battles were often one sided, it was the length of the war (four years in total) that would lead to the South’s ultimate defeat. The Battle of Bull Run (Kurz & Allison, 1889) The first land battle of the Civil War occurred at Bull Run or what the Confederates called Manassas (Millett et al., 2012). This was fought at Manassas Junction on Bull Run Creek. Union General Irvin McDowell had never commanded troops before and was content to continue training and drilling his 35,000 men on the outskirts of Washington, D.C. McDowell’s battle plan almost worked to defeat the Confederates—except for a heroic stand by General Thomas J. Jackson who stood like a “stone wall” on Henry House Hill and drove back the Union troops. This first battle ended in Union troops streaming back into Washington in full retreat. The casualty figures for this first engagement were small compared to later tragic losses, but it set the tone and alarmed both sides that the conflict would become a long and bloody struggle. At Bull Run, the Union had 3,000 casualties and the South another 2,000 (Millett et al., 2012). On both sides, previous career soldiers with West Point resumes led the way. Perhaps the most famous was General Robert E. Lee who, after a solid record during the Mexican-American war and when leading the troops that captured John Brown in 1859 after his raid at Harper’s Ferry, refused the offer to command the Union army and returned to serve the Confederate cause after Virginia seceded from the Union. In all, there were 313 former regular army officers and over 300 navy officers that went over to serve for the South (Millett et al., 2012). However, this was a war unlike any the nation had previously seen. More than ever, popular support was a necessary factor in the war effort. This support was often gained by utilizing leaders who were not trained military commanders, and in the tradition of previously noncareer commanders such as Zachary Taylor and Andrew Jackson, men such as Benjamin Prentiss and Nathan Bedford Forrest admirably served their nation. Prentiss, with only previous militia experience but now a general for the Union, is credited with preserving a Union victory at Shiloh in 1862 in what was one of the deadliest battles of the war. Although he surrendered after heavy fighting at the “Hornet’s Nest,” he is credited with holding the Southern troop up long enough for General Grant to counterattack and win the battle. The South had Forrest who returned to his native Virginia and enlisted as a private in the Confederate Army with the mounted rifles and was to become one of the leading cavalry officers for the South. Another Union general of note was the youngest general in the Union army—referred to often as the “Boy General” who was to gain further fame in the West: General George Armstrong Custer (Millett et al., 2012). Benjamin Prentiss (Kbh3rd, 2005) It has been said that war is hell; this is never more obvious to the student of American military history than in the study of the Civil War. While many men served admirably, HY 2000, American Military History I 2 many others served with questionable distinction. Reputations were made and some men who would later mark American history not for their service but for their crimes— such as Frank and Jesse James—began their rise to fame on these battlefields. The James brothers along with their friend, Cole Younger, got their taste of lawlessness and thuggery riding with Quantrill’s Raiders in the Kansas-Missouri border war (Millett et al., 2012). This civil conflict encompassed all classes and thus the varied nature of human behavior can be viewed in its study. One strategic failure that would plague both sides was the inability of commanders, on multiple occasions, to pursue the enemy, thereby achieving actual tactical gains after winning a battle. This inability did not go unnoted; it led Lincoln to compare his state to one worse than hell. However, it is important to objectively look at what these leaders were faced with following such a win. Often, their remaining force was in no shape to launch a pursuit. They were exhausted men who rightfully needed time to recuperate. War must be examined not only in terms of strategy or the leaders who determined it but also in the face of the men who actually carried it out to better understand the limitations such commanders then faced (Millett et al., 2012). The two presidents, Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis, are also important to contrast. Davis was better prepared by previous positions to lead a country at war. He was a West Point graduate and former Secretary of War. However, the Southern ideology he Jefferson Davis fought to preserve would ultimately hinder his ability to wage a (Brady, n.d.) successful fight. He refused to enforce taxes or take control of the railroads (Millett et al., 2012). The South fought for states’ rights but was unable to pose an enduring threat partly because of their insistence on states’ rights and fear of providing full control to the central government. Lincoln, while inexperienced for leadership during war, had no qualms about using the materials and assets of the North to allow the North to wage war successfully. It was Lincoln’s steadfast and visionary leadership that held the North together. He was a superior politician who worked through problems he encountered in the Northeast and wanted to end the war with a peaceful compromise. It was Lincoln’s sense of purpose in preserving the Union—not just as a form of government but as a consensus of the future of freedom in America. The early battles, after initial Southern highlights, were often indecisive. Yet, as one realizes this is about to change because as noted by Davis himself, the South had exhausted much of its war-making ability by the end of 1862. In contrast, the North, after several embarrassing stumbles, most notably with inept military leadership, was just now reaching the height of its ability (Millett et al., 2012). The only chance the South stood to win was to ensure the Civil War was a short war, but as the end of 1862 loomed, it was obvious such a war would not occur. References Brady, M. (n.d.) President Jefferson Davis [Image]. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:President-Jefferson-Davis.jpg Kbh3rd. (2005, July 22). General Benjamin Prentiss [Image]. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:General_Benjamin_Prentiss.jpg Kurz & Allison. (1889). First Battle of Bull Run [Image]. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:First_Battle_of_Bull_Run_Kurz_%26_Allison.jpg Millett, A. R., Maslowski, P., & Feis, W. B. (2012). For the common defense: A military history of the United States from 1607 to 2012 (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press. HY 2000, American Military History I 3 Suggested Reading In order to access the following resources, click the links below: The link below will take you to a video segment about John Brown and Harper’s Ferry, which was referenced in the unit lesson. Burns, K. (Producer), & Burns, R. (Producer). (1990). The Civil War: Episode 1-The Cause (1861) [Video File]. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?auth=CAS&url=http://fod.infobase.com/PortalPla ylists.aspx?wID=273866&xtid=40977&loid=67535 The video below covers major battles and topics in the second year of the civil war. In particular, watch the following segments that relate to material in this unit:  “General George McClellan” (Segment 8) (02:40)  “Ironclads” (Segment 10) (03:18)  “Epic Battle of Ironclads” (Segment 11) (01:41)  “Peninsula Campaign” (Segment 13) (03:01)  “Life of the Average Soldier” (Segment 15) (04:08)  “Hornet's Nest” (Segment 18) (02:37)  “Battle of Shiloh” (Segment 19) (04:47)  “Union Naval Strategy” (Segment 23) (02:55)  “McClellan Moves on to Richmond” (Segment 26) (03:24) Burns, K. (Producer), & Burns, R. (Producer). (1990). The Civil War: Episode 2-A very bloody affair (1862). [Video File]. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?auth=CAS&url=http://fod.infobase.com/PortalPla ylists.aspx?wID=273866&xtid=40978 This article looks at the strategies used during the first year of the war. It gives examples of how the army and navy worked together during the war. Canfield, D. T. (2015). Opportunity lost: Combined operations and the development of Union military strategy, April 1861-April 1862. Journal of Military History, 79(3), 657-690. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc t=true&db=31h&AN=103453077&site=ehost-live&scope=site The article below discusses the defense of the southern town of Apalachicola, Florida during the Civil War. It is one example of how the South was defending its strongholds. Curenton, M. (2013). The southern defense of Apalachicola. Pensacola History Illustrated: A Journal of Pensacola & West Florida History, 3(2), 8-19. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc t=true&db=31h&AN=93668499&site=ehost-live&scope=site Fort Walton was a Southern Fort in Fort Walton Beach, Florida. The article below discusses this fort as well as some of the ships and vessels that went in and out of the fort. Rucker, B. R. (2013). Camp Walton in the Civil War, 1861-1862. Pensacola History Illustrated: A Journal of Pensacola & West Florida History, 3(2), 26-31. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc t=true&db=31h&AN=93668501&site=ehost-live&scope=site HY 2000, American Military History I 4 During the Civil War, the Brooklyn Navy yard served a very important purpose; many ships were built and repaired there. This article provides further information on that important part of the Northern military operations. Whyte, W. (2012). The Brooklyn Navy yard: The heart of the Union Anaconda. Northern Mariner / Le Marin du Nord, 22(4), 393-407. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc t=true&db=31h&AN=83697580&site=ehost-live&scope=site HY 2000, American Military History I 5
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Please check to see if you need anything modified

Running head: Union Army

1

Union Army

Student Name

Institutional Affiliation

Union Army

2

The military strategy and the intended outcomes of the Union Army
The onset of Abraham Lincoln's presidency sparked fear among the Southern
Confederates states. The ever increasing tariffs in their trades and restriction of the slave trade
were among the main reasons the Sothern's resulted in secession. Lincoln was determined to
keep the states from breaking away from the United States, and this was the beginning of the
1861 civil war.
Unlike the unionist, the confederates enjoyed a strong martial tradition of soldiers who
had trained in academies like citadel. They were well poised in handling horses and firearms.
The South fancied themselves in having a large pool of farmers who were the largest exporter of
cotton at the time. The unionist, however, were well known for their strong agricultural base
which exported food products to Europe and a large army.
The initial goal of the union front was to maintain the unity of the United States and
prevent the confederates from leaving the Union. They chose a more offensive strategy where
they invaded Virginia in the first battle of Bull Run. This battle turned futile to the unionist, and
they went ahead to attack other confederates territory. Abraham Lincoln, t...


Anonymous
Awesome! Perfect study aid.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags