English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Was lincoln's leadership the reason for the end of the civil war?

2007-12-27 15:49:08 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities History

7 answers

Lincoln was the 'Commander in Chief'. Decisions made by him which can be historically evaluated as successful, and successful decisions made by those he chose as military leaders linked him directly and/or indirectly to the inevitable conclusion of the War Between The States. True, his initial choices were poor (i.e.: McClellan) and he waited patiently for far too long before making changes, but ultimately, he finally made the right choices and the war was brought to a close. One cannot discount his efforts with the populace though. His 'Gettysburgh Address' and the 'Emanicipation Proclamation' were not military actions, but nonetheless, they contributed to a change in mindset and morale, both in the armed forces, and in the civilian population, as well.

2007-12-27 16:16:22 · answer #1 · answered by John Mc 6 · 0 0

Lincoln's leadership is one but here are other reasons too. North have way more than South in soldiers and equipment, the only thing South have are good military generals like Lee and Stonewall Jackson. Confederates actually won quite a few battles early on because the poor military leadership of North but thing would change as Southern army not that big would attempt to invade north and try to savage a victory to crush North's will as they met with the Unions at Gettysburgh and that would turn everything around as South lost alot of irreplaceable units on that 3 or 4 hard days of battle. Some would say earlier battle where Confederates cant capitalized was one of the reason Union was still fighting but i think Gettysburgh is the turning point. South werent build for long war due to lack of resources so if is battle of the strength they wont win and didnt.They did try to get British involved but cant. Gettyburgh should of been the end of war if General Meade from Union decided to chase Lee rather than held back to refresh his units. Later general of Union was the reason North won, Grant was able to cut Conferates in half by winning battles along the mississippi river and Sherman's total war tactic took the will out of South by burning corps, destorying factories and raw materals.

2007-12-27 16:04:19 · answer #2 · answered by Ming P 5 · 0 0

The North was losing the war unless something drastic was done. Europe was sitting this one out. The French had just suffered through their own revolution and were experiencing their first taste of freedom. They agreed to help the North only on the agreement that Lincoln would free the slaves in the South. So Lincoln produced his 'Emanicipation Proclamation', France entered the war by providing a naval blockade of southern ports, thus ending the supply route for southern war materials and causing the end of the War Between the States

2007-12-28 02:09:38 · answer #3 · answered by John 2 · 0 1

Lincoln chose US Grant. Grant was ready to lose as many soldiers as it took to win the battle. He was a butcher. But, he and Sherman brought the South under heel. Lack of European support for the Confederacy was equally or more important to the eventual surrender of Lee and Johnston as any actions of Lincoln.

2007-12-27 15:59:03 · answer #4 · answered by La Belle Dame Sans Merci 6 · 0 0

Lincoln's and Grant's. Leadership is what makes the difference.

2007-12-27 15:59:12 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. Bodhisattva 6 · 1 0

Abraham Lincoln did start up the warfare through fact he hated slavery. Abraham Lincoln Lincoln, Abraham (1809-sixty 5), US President and American civil warfare chief. His election develop into the proximate clarification for the conflict and his political comments formed it. He develop into adamant that slavery develop into no longer the venture, yet particularly no remember if his imaginative and prescient of a unified continental empire could be triumphant over his warring parties' classic perception in a loose association of sovereign states. fortress Sumter controlled the port of Charleston and symbolized his dedication to value lists and financial autarky, bitterly adversarial by employing the loose-paying for and advertising South. by employing intentionally scary hostilities there, he known that most of the ‘larger 8’ slave states could secede or, like Kentucky, Missouri, and Maryland, undertake a adversarial neutrality through fact of his coverage. The length, fee, and ferocity of the warfare can be attributed oftentimes to him. He defined the conflict as between the u . s . and traitorous persons wherein the states had no status, through fact to do in any different case could admit that the Union develop into no longer perpetual and that secession develop into constitutional. There would desire to be no peace negotiations, no compromise, in simple terms unconditional renounce to a lawful police action. Lincoln's place predicated the grinding, arduous warfare it develop into to develop into and from the outset, even whilst maximum believed in a instant result, he applied the ‘Anaconda Plan’ devised by employing military commander Scott for the sluggish suffocation of secession by employing sea and river. He develop into an ‘unintentional’ president, almost unknown nationally till now 1860 and elected with in simple terms forty in keeping with cent of the widespread vote through fact the Democrat social gathering cut up. a approaches from being the unquestioned chief of his very own social gathering, he develop right into a compromise candidate, predicted to be ruled by employing powerful cabinet individuals and congressional leaders. His loss of a private political base compelled many undesirable compromises on him, possibly the main detrimental being the appointment of the corrupt Cameron, owed a favour from the Republican convention, as his first warfare secretary. yet interior a 300 and sixty 5 days he had replaced him with the fanatically trustworthy Stanton and by employing countless means he progressively extra something to heel.

2016-11-25 21:41:25 · answer #6 · answered by schiavone 4 · 0 0

president

2007-12-27 15:56:25 · answer #7 · answered by Autumn 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers