1. The outbreak of the Civil War was inevitable because war was the only course of action. Once the South seceded, Lincoln had no choice but to go to war. Decades of trying to reach a compromise of the slavery issue had done no good, and it was clear that negotiations with the South at this point were impossible. To ensure the preservation of the Union, Lincoln needed to put down the rebellious states with force. The South seceded because the election of Lincoln would mean the end of slavery for them, as Lincoln was an anti-slavery Republican. The South, who viewed slavery as a way of life, did not want to see slavery abolished so they withdrew from the Union and formed their own nation.
2. The Confederacy lacked the manpower of the Union (had 9 million people compared to the Union’s 22.5 million people), the industrial capability of the Union (Union had an intricate railroad system coupled with an existing strong manufacturing base with 1.3 million workers compared to the South’s 110,000 workers), and it lacked a navy as strong as the Unions. The lack of an effective navy would prove costly as it would prevent other nations from helping the South in anyway possible. The North also had high morale since they were going in thinking it would be a quick fight. But the South also had high morale. They were fighting in familiar territory and were defending (which strategically speaking is easier than attacking). The South also had a more superior army, with most of their officers being West Point and other military academy attendees. The South also had history on its side, as typically rebellious factions of nations usually gain their independence.
3. The material advantages that the North possessed were more men, more railroads, and more factories. This would allow them to be more efficient and productive in terms of supplying the troops. The South better trained army, a stable food supply, and a friendly geography (rivers that would assist in transportation and familiar fighting ground).
4. Yes, because your capacity to wage war usually decides whether you will win or lose. It does not matter whether you have superior troops, the fact of the matter is that if they are not supplied well they will not fight well. Also, lacking in manpower is a huge disadvantage because sheer numbers almost always wins the fight. A common example is the Russian army versus the German army in World War II. The Germans were undoubtedly better trained and experienced, but they lacked the manpower and supply of the Russians, and in the end, they fell.
5. The South high morale and military supremacy in terms of skill clearly benefited them as they won many of the early battles of the war. However, the Northern industrial machine slowly woke up and its soldiers also slowly became more experienced so in the end, the North was superior because they too had battlefield experience but they also had more resources and supply. Thus, it can be said that the advantages of the South going into the Civil War only served them well in the short term while the advantages of the North going into the Civil War served them well in the long term.
2. The Confederacy lacked the manpower of the Union (had 9 million people compared to the Union’s 22.5 million people), the industrial capability of the Union (Union had an intricate railroad system coupled with an existing strong manufacturing base with 1.3 million workers compared to the South’s 110,000 workers), and it lacked a navy as strong as the Unions. The lack of an effective navy would prove costly as it would prevent other nations from helping the South in anyway possible. The North also had high morale since they were going in thinking it would be a quick fight. But the South also had high morale. They were fighting in familiar territory and were defending (which strategically speaking is easier than attacking). The South also had a more superior army, with most of their officers being West Point and other military academy attendees. The South also had history on its side, as typically rebellious factions of nations usually gain their independence.
3. The material advantages that the North possessed were more men, more railroads, and more factories. This would allow them to be more efficient and productive in terms of supplying the troops. The South better trained army, a stable food supply, and a friendly geography (rivers that would assist in transportation and familiar fighting ground).
4. Yes, because your capacity to wage war usually decides whether you will win or lose. It does not matter whether you have superior troops, the fact of the matter is that if they are not supplied well they will not fight well. Also, lacking in manpower is a huge disadvantage because sheer numbers almost always wins the fight. A common example is the Russian army versus the German army in World War II. The Germans were undoubtedly better trained and experienced, but they lacked the manpower and supply of the Russians, and in the end, they fell.
5. The South high morale and military supremacy in terms of skill clearly benefited them as they won many of the early battles of the war. However, the Northern industrial machine slowly woke up and its soldiers also slowly became more experienced so in the end, the North was superior because they too had battlefield experience but they also had more resources and supply. Thus, it can be said that the advantages of the South going into the Civil War only served them well in the short term while the advantages of the North going into the Civil War served them well in the long term.
No comments:
Post a Comment