StudentShare
Contact Us
Sign In / Sign Up for FREE
Search
Go to advanced search...
Free

Military Leadership in the Union Armies - Term Paper Example

Cite this document
Summary
This term paper "Military Leadership in the Union Armies" discusses the great mobilization of the American people that was the Civil War between two American parties. Twenty-five states from the north defended the federal government and formed a military party called the Union…
Download full paper File format: .doc, available for editing
GRAB THE BEST PAPER93.1% of users find it useful
Military Leadership in the Union Armies
Read Text Preview

Extract of sample "Military Leadership in the Union Armies"

? “Military Leadership in the Union Armies” During the US Civil War Era of December 03, Military Leadership in the Union Armies The first dispute that experienced the great mobilization of the American people was the Civil War between two American parties. Twenty five states from north defended the federal government and formed a military party called the Union. The other eleven slave states from south declared their secession from the United States and formed the Confederate States of America named the Confederacy. The battle continued for four years from year 1861 to 1865 and then ended with the surrender of the Confederate and outlawed slavery throughout the Country.1 Union party was served by more than 2.2 million military men, whereas approx 1.4 million people fought from Confederate side. The military personnel had gained professional military education and worked under the leadership of officers from diverse backgrounds. These military officers were professionally trained West Pointers, businesses persons and political officials. Initially confederate had strong leadership, but Union had led by poor commanders. Later on, Union replaced such officials and employed adept and potential military men who had command experience, thereby brought victory to the Union.2 This paper analyzes battlefield strategy and leadership of Military officials in Union Army which led the forces to defeat Confederate men. The US Civil War never faced shortfall of enthusiasm because many young people wanted to join the army in 1861. All these people volunteered because they were excited to fight in defense of the Union military force, in anticipation of quick promotions as lead by their experience. The trouble created in the process of volunteering was a severe lack of leadership, planning and organization at the loftiest levels.3 The American Civil War supplied a multitude of commanders and sensible comparison amid battle conditions and issues. The Union military army had a specific requirement for efficacious armed combat commanders during the Civil War and those commanders and officers were essentially needed to be specifically educated and well trained to lead the people in war which would in turn defend and uphold the new nation. This unique need was realized and understood by government and politicians, so they made efforts for military training.4 Though, all military leaders had not developed through gaining formal military education and training. Many cells of professional officials were formed by the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis and the United States Military Academy at West Point. These cells were comprised of professional military officers who had complete knowledge of military science so as to create an intense impact on the demeanor of the American Civil War. Throughout the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln was the President of United States and at the same time served as the Commander-in-Chief of the Union armed forces, the highest-ranking military officer .5 The military personnel had the authority to elect the junior officers, whereas the state governors nominated the senior officers, and the President Lincoln nominated the generals.6 The significant military leaders for the Union army included Ulysses S. Grant, William T. Sherman, George B. McClellan, George Meade, John C. Fremont, Ambrose Burnside, Joseph Hooker, Irvin McDowell, and Winfield Scott.7 This paper throws light especially on the role played by Generals George B. McClellan, Ulysses S. Grant, George Meade, and William T. Sherman. During the American Civil War, George Brinton McClellan was a major general. He served as the general-in-chief of the Union Army for a short period from November 1861 to March 1862, and coordinated the renowned Army of the Potomac. In the beginning of the war, McClellan’s attempts for raising a well-trained and devised army for the Union had been very important. Peninsula Campaign initiated by McClellan in 1862 got failed, as his army receded due to attacks by General Robert E. Lee's smaller Army of Northern Virginia. His campaign’s retreats were also resulted by an unrealized plan to capture the Confederate capital of Richmond. McClellan did not let Lee’s army to intrude in Maryland through horrible Battle of Antietam, but despite being larger in number, he could not avoid massive destruction caused by Lee’s attacks. Because of this, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln oppugned McClellan's leadership skills during battles. So, finally McClellan was removed first from the post of general-in-chief, and then from the Army of the Potomac. Lincoln underrated McClellan’s efforts as a leader by commenting that: "If he can't fight himself, he excels in making others ready to fight."8 Another official, George Meade was working as a captain and promoted to a command of Pennsylvania brigade to the Army of the Potomac under General George B. McClellan. Even though, George Meade was recently promoted to serve as a leader to his army, he defeated Confederate General Robert E. Lee at the Battle of Gettysburg by resisting Lee’s attacks and crashing Confederate army in 1863. However, he did not completely destroy Lee’s damped army, and this act of Meade was disliked by President Abraham Lincoln as after the battle, Lee’s army could attack Virginia again. For this criticism by Lincoln, Meade decided to resign from his post, but his resignation was refused rather he was raised from that command to serve as a Union general in 1863. During the Bristoe Station and Mine Run campaigns, Meade held his rank of general to his army, but these campaigns could not define his leadership clearly as he did not take any major decisions even having powers. By that time, General Ulysses S. Grant was appointed as Lieutenant General of Union Army, and Meade was accompanied by Grant throughout the campaigns during the war. The direct supervision of Grant dominated the efforts of Meade.9 Grant looked for to win control of the Mississippi Valley when the Civil War arrived at its peak. The first Union victory of strategic importance was Fort Donelson in Tennessee which was taken by Grant in February 1862. Grant refused to make compromises on conditions presented by the Confederate commander, by asking only for unconditioned and prompt surrender from Confederate Army officials without any terms. So the Confederates acted accordingly, and the Commander of Union Army Grant was promoted by President Lincoln to become the Major General of volunteers in 1863. General Grant's military leadership was questioned occasionally as the cutthroat and ruthless battles of the Civil War upheld. Some people even demanded Grant to be replaced, when the General fought one of the bloodiest battles in the West, at Shiloh. But the President Lincoln warded off such requests to remove Grant from the position by saying, "I can't spare this man — he fights."a Grant was determined to move ahead to victory with President Lincoln's backing. Under the General’s leadership, the central city on the Mississippi River, Vicksburg was captured and this move cut down the Confederacy in parts. The Union leaders attempted to break the Confederate Army hold on Chattanooga, Tennessee. Grant was appointed as General-in-Chief of the Union Army in March 1864 by President Lincoln. Sherman was directed to be a driving force through the South and also the Army of the Potomac was used by the Unions to trap General Lee's Army. The leaders of Union military army headed the efforts of the several Union troops across the United States of America from City Point, Virginia. The chief objective of this movement was to destroy General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. The last fights of the Civil War were approached as Sherman and Grant had proceeded further into the Confederate fastnesses.10 Under the leadership of Ulysses S. Grant, Union general William T. Sherman served to achieve Union victory in the Civil War. Sherman took a presumptuous move after invading and seizing Atlanta. To target the left over Confederate armies in the environing area was the major concern of Grant's strategic plan. But instead of following that very plan, Sherman decided to proceed from Atlanta to Savannah in order to smash the Confederacy completely. So acting upon his plan, Sherman and his sixty thousand troops moved to Georgia through marching for about a month over a distance of sixty miles, even without a supply route. The Union army was dwelt in the bounty of the Georgian countryside, which caused their destruction. Sherman was right to consider that by removing the Confederate from there, his army could establish the North's irresistible power which could further infer that the Confederate was not able to defend its own people and state. This move of marching to the Sea taken by Sherman is considered to be unexampled in entire war as it wholly finished the countryside by burning “bridges, railroads, factories, warehouses, barns, and plantations, taking or destroying food that could not be eaten by the troops”.11 By that time, President Lincoln had been eagerly desirous for the war to end so the President visited City Point and Grant's headquarters. There the President met with Grant and other military officers to talk about the last campaign into Petersburg and also the terms for reunifying the United States after the war. A War Council conference was arranged among the President Lincoln, General Grant, Sherman, and other central military leaders, at the end of March. In that conference, fight contrives to end the war were talked about. The Union military Force’s military strategy had been a main objective as General Lee at Petersburg was defeated. Ultimately, the Confederate leader Lee surrendered at Appomattox Court House. Letters from Union’s leader were sent which contained kind and acceptable conditions of surrender that aided to initiate the process of unifying the United States again after the war. These conditions importantly include generous provisions that foreclosed future visitations for high treason.12 Americans have always been curious and enamored about the Civil War as it is a unique war which an American military force fought with another American military force namely the Union and the Confederate. In most cases, it appears to be true that the more powerful and potent Army force usually wins, but generally the reason for this is the attrition by which more popular and stronger military forces deteriorate weaker forces. It is indicated that military leadership is about equal on both sides so the victory of the Union was not inevitable. Though, Union Army defeated the Confederate, but the only reason for this victory of Union military over the Confederate was Union’s competitive industrialization. Even it has been argued that the greatest weakness of the Union’s military force had been its poor leadership.13 Works Cited Alexander, Bevin. “How The South Could Have Won the Civil War” The Fatal Errors that led to Confederate Defeat. Cited 3 Dec 2011, from: http://bevinalexander.com/books/how-the-south could-have-won-intro.htm Boatner, Mark Mayo, III. “The Civil War Dictionary”. New York: McKay, (1959); revised (1988). Cited 3 Dec 2011 George G. Meade: Major General, Civil War Trust. (2011). [Available Online] Cited 3 Dec 2011; from: http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/biographies/george-meade.html Hickman, Kennedy., “People of the Civil War. Leading the Armies” (2011). [Available Online] Cited 3 Dec 2011, from: http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/americancivilwar/a/civilwarpeople.htm Jones, Howard., “Abraham Lincoln and a New Birth of Freedom: The Union and Slavery in the Diplomacy of the Civil War” (1999) p. 154. Cited 3 Dec 2011 McPherson, James M. Tried by War: Abraham Lincoln as Commander in Chief. New York: Penguin Press, (2008) p. 122. Cited 15 Dec 2011 Nevins, Allan. War for the Union: The Improvised War, 1861-1862 (1959) p. 235. Cited 3 Dec 2011 Rabstejnek, Carl V. “PREDICTING LEADERSHIP: West Point’s Civil War Legacy”. [Available Online] Cited 3 Dec 2011; from: http://www.houd.info/lanning.pdf Smithsonian Institution, Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery, Unit 3: Abolition and the Civil War (2011). [Available Online] Cited 3 Dec 2011; from: http://www.npg.si.edu/edu/brush/guide/unit3/union.html Ulysses S. Grant. The Hero of the Civil War, [Available Online] Cited 3 Dec 2011; from: http://www.nps.gov/history/logcabin/html/usg2.html Endnotes Read More
Cite this document
  • APA
  • MLA
  • CHICAGO
(“Military Leadership in the Union Armies Term Paper”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/history/1438780-military-leadership-in-the-union-armies
(Military Leadership in the Union Armies Term Paper)
https://studentshare.org/history/1438780-military-leadership-in-the-union-armies.
“Military Leadership in the Union Armies Term Paper”, n.d. https://studentshare.org/history/1438780-military-leadership-in-the-union-armies.
  • Cited: 0 times

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Military Leadership in the Union Armies

The Cuba-Soviet Unions Relations

During the Second World War, both the union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) and America appeared to be on one side probably due to their common enemy, Nazi Germany2.... It is characterized by physical confrontations between the armies of the rival nations.... refineries refused to process Soviet union's oil.... refineries refused to process Soviet union's oil .... The difference between the foreign policies of the United States and the policies of Soviet union led to war3....
11 Pages (2750 words) Essay

Is the USA Still a Global Hegemonic Power

In the years immediately following the Second World War most analysts would have agreed that the Soviet union and the United States shared a “superpower” status which held the world in a state of uneasy balance that was given the name “The Cold War.... hellip; In the years since the second world war, there are countries which have demonstrated comparable population size (China and India) or economic strength (Japan, the European union if seen as a single unit, and rising “tiger economies”), or political and cultural influence (the European union) but Russia and the United States were key players in all of those dimensions....
14 Pages (3500 words) Essay

United States View on the Cold War

The Soviet union engaged in the war together with its satellite states.... However, the war reflected a competition between two superpowers that were the America and Soviet union.... Moreover, the American saw the war as a global confrontation between itself and the Soviet union.... According to the Americans, the war occurred because of having different views regarding a number of world issues with the Soviet union.... Moreover, the Americans viewed the cause of the war to be various political differences that existed between the country and the Soviet union....
6 Pages (1500 words) Research Paper

War and State Sovereignty

The political aspect of defining what war is, causes the primary philosophical difficulty, however once this is recognized, a description which arrests the clash of weapons, the condition of common tension and danger of aggression among groups, the approved pronouncement by a sovereign state, and so on can be looked upon to differentiate wars from insurgences and rebellions, combined fighting from personal fighting, metaphorical conflicts of values from real or threatened conflicts of arms....
10 Pages (2500 words) Essay

Ethics in the US Relations with Mujahideen

Williams (2013) explains that the invasion of Afghanistan by Soviet union occurred after 30 years of an end of… It is during these years that there was a major difference between the two superpowers, because of ideological differences.... That is, Soviet union supported communism, while the United States supported capitalism.... 33) asserts that the of the Soviet union to invade Afghanistan had a severe effect on the diplomatic relationship between the Soviets, and the United States, changing the complexion and nature of rivalry that existed between the two countries”....
11 Pages (2750 words) Research Paper

Cold War: Account for the Rise and Fall of Detente

He proves his opinion by the reason – the armies in the USA and the USSR were rapidly reducing before 1948 and after 1948 the number of people in both armies was increasing.... The government of the Soviet union spoke about the anticommunism character of American foreign policy.... hellip; NATO was the reply to the Soviet power in the military sphere in Europe.... The Soviet Army had much more military forces in European countries and that is why it was considered that the USSR was able to conquer Europe....
10 Pages (2500 words) Term Paper

The Cuba-Soviet Unions Relations

During the Second World War, both the union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) and America appeared to be on one side probably due to their common enemy, Nazi Germany2.... It is characterized by physical confrontations between the armies of the rival nations.... refineries refused to process Soviet union's oil1.... The Cold War refers to the relationship that America and the Soviet union had after World War II until the late 1980s....
11 Pages (2750 words) Coursework

Composition and Governance of the European Union

At first, the union was formed to regulate the coal and steel industries.... This was chiefly because steel had provided an avenue for the production and subsequent proliferation of firearms during the war, an incident that the proponents of the union wanted to alienate.... After the Second World War, the proponents of EU formation saw the need for the establishment of the union so as to create a unified Europe that would amicably solve their difference diplomatically....
8 Pages (2000 words) Case Study
sponsored ads
We use cookies to create the best experience for you. Keep on browsing if you are OK with that, or find out how to manage cookies.
Contact Us