Thursday, October 17, 2013

This will only hurt for a minute...

After Fort Sumter when the Union Army began to mobilize, the general consensus was that the US Civil War would be quick--violent, but fast.  Yet in hindsight, we know that the war was anything but  quick--from General McClellan's hesitancy, to bloody battles with high casualty rates but little to no forward momentum.  Plus, it was a constant struggle to adequately staff, clothe, feed and arm each army.

What do you see as the major setbacks in the early stages of the Civil War?  Evaluate the military leadership of the Confederacy versus the sheer lack thereof in the Union.  Why did Lincoln struggle so much to find an adequate military leader?

12 comments:

  1. Well there were multiple set backs in the early stages of the Civil War, but the
    Confederacy had a motive to fight, and they had no trouble finding people to fight. But on the other hand the union had a tough time finding people that were motivated and willing to fight. So from the start if the north had the motivation of the south this would of been a lot quicker then it actually was. But General Lee of the Confederacy was a amazing general possibly one of the greatest. He was a big reason as to why they stood toe to toe with the Union and most of the time why they were winning. While Lincoln had a tough time finding a general that could lead the Union. So he went from general to general every time a plan was not successful.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There was a big difference in the attitudes both sides had to the war. Like Chandler said the south was more pumped about the war. First of all because they had such a high population of slaves willing to fight to prove that they are meaningful members of the country and also because it was kind of them who pushed for this to happen. It was more so the actions of the south that acted as a catalyst for the war like the fact that they succeeded. In the existing army that America had a lot of the leaders and those with experience were from the south therefore there's no question as why the confederacy's military was so much more effective than that of the union. This lack of man power also accounts for the troubles Lincoln faced finding a sufficient leader. In the south they had tons of people to pick from and rely on whereas in the union there weren't as many experienced people volunteering to help.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Confederates and the Union had completely different ways of going about things. The Confederates had more than enough people willing to fight for them, they had a strong general, and the South simply had the drive to succeed. As for the North, the union had a hard time collecting people that wanted to fight in the war. Along with that, Lincoln continuously switched generals and simply lacked the prior knowledge that the south possessed.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One of the Union army's early setbacks was General McClellan's defeat is his peninsular campaign. However, as we learned in the text, he lost fewer soldiers than other generals, he was expected to meet exaggerated expectations from the news papers, and all the northern news papers ran a slander campaign against him because he was running against Lincoln. So the largest setback in the North was actually the news papers that mislead the people into thinking that the South would keel over after only one decisive battle. The South had different problems, they had a smaller, weaker army with less supplies. So General Lee used similar tactics to the Revolutionary army that had been in the same predicament.
    The generals of the Union army, as I said before, had to deal with the public's expectation of a short and easy war. So they were not able to fight the Confederates as they saw fit, and so the war dragged on until the public realized its folly and accepted that the Civil War would not be a short war. On the other hand, the Confederate army was led by the extremely competent General Lee. However it had been his first time leading an army, so people who didn't understand his worthwhile plan argued that he should be replaced.

    ReplyDelete
  5. the north lacked in purpose and organization through the begining of the war and lost key battles such as bulls run. but the north had the supplies and man power to do so everything the south had the north had double. the problem was southern men were highly trained as the south was the main truing ground for american troops and was the leading producers of generals. the north lacked a major general for a long time in the beginning of the war because the wanted and needed the services of Robert e lee. once the north organinised its massive force it forced its way through the south.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Like everyone else said, the Confederates came into the war more energetically and willing. In the early stages of the war the Confederates won the first battle, and the Union realized that the war would be a lot longer and bloodier than they expected. The Confederates had the determination needed to fight, and they supported the war more, whereas it was harder to find soldiers for the Union. In the beginning, the Union's military leaders were not adequate. For example, General George McClellan disagreed greatly with Lincoln and that caused problems. In comparison, General Robert E. Lee, of the Confederate army, was a great leader and he led many victorious battles. However, in the end, Ulysses S. Grant became general for the Union, led the army to victory, and became president.

    ReplyDelete
  7. there were a lot of setbacks in the beginning of the civil war. the confederates came out strong and this was hard for the north to handle. The north wasnt expecting this so it made it harder for the north to fight back. The north had no organization, which made it easier for the south to take the lead and come out stronger than the north. The confederates were the underdogs in this war and no one expected them to come out strong, so the north wasn't as prepared as they should have been. Lincoln struggled to find a good military leader because lincoln himself was not a good military leader and didnt really know what to look for in a good leader.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Confederacy and The Union had a significant difference in their situations and attitude for Civil War. The North had an expectation that the Civil War would be a very quick war and that South would surrender shortly. However, South had a totally different attitude towards Civil War. Because slavery was South's main source of income for their economy, South was very passionate about going on war with the North. Plus, the Confederacy had a much more stronger and better army. The fact that South was led by General Lee examplifies the point. However, on the other hand, North did not have many guys to choose from and most generals hired tended to lack experiance and skills.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree it's everyone else about that fact that the south came into the war with much more energy and had a better and higher chance of winning, they had to fight and they were much much more organized than the north because the south was the one who really wanted this separation and wanted it to happen. the planned it quickly and not to mention the south had a larger population than the north did due to the amount of slaves in the south. The north was on favor to win and so when the war first started it was surprising that the south has the upperhand.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think that Lincoln was faced with an impossible task to find a new general that would live up to the reputation of Robert E. Lee. One of the reasons why Lee left the Union was because he did not want to go against Virginia. Overall the south was fighting to keep their way of life (slavery), but the north was fighting for just more then slavery, human rights too. Lincoln had a really hard time looking for a new general because he could never find one as good as Lee. It was hard for Lincoln to find someone to replace Lee but in the end the North ended up winning anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  11. General McClellan's defeat in his peninsular campaign was one of the setback of the early stage of the civil war. He was expected to meet the high expectation from the newspaper which was a mislead. The newspaper in the North slandered the campaign because he was against Lincoln. The South, although, had a passionate attitude to fight in this war, their army was smaller and the supplies was shorter than the North. The problem for the Union Army was that they thought that the War would end really shortly. And the public wanted to end the war but it was not easy for the North to accomplish their wish.

    ReplyDelete
  12. One of the biggest advantages of the South was that they were the ones that started the war; that means they were motivated and passionate to fight and they were willing to give a 100% of them to win the war and above all defend their way of life and their way of thinking. The north instead, didn't have people motivated, some people were scared and others simply didn't want to risk their lives in the Civil War, that's why Lincoln struggled so much to find people for the army and a leader.
    The Confederacy instead had one of the greatest leaders that the U.S have ever known, Robert E. Lee, he was very loyal to his troops and put always so much effort on everything he did. In fact, Lincoln asked him to switch armies and go to the Union with him but he refused because he didn't want to be against Virginia. Lincoln tried then to find a leader as good as Lee but he had a really hard time, because no one seemed to be so motivated and so loyal as him.
    It was very painful for the Union though because they had much better materials and a better army in terms of services, weapons and all, but they lacked of volunteers and of a good leader even though they won the war... but that was the reason why the war wasn't as quick as they though and as it could have been if Lincoln had found a good leader and members for the army quicker.

    ReplyDelete