How Did The Confederacy's Failure To Win The Civil War

There were two main problems with the South's initial war strategy meant to protect the entire Confederacy; firstly it required the dispersal of forces to maintain a perimeter defense, and secondly it required the establishment of independent and self-sufficient military districts. The dispersal of its forces created a weak perimeter defense everywhere in the Confederacy, and not a single place from where the

This plan was never adopted mainly due to Winfield Scott’s lack of planning. His proposal for the blockade was not properly a strategy, despite the fact that it is often referred to by historians as one. It did not estimate the forces that would be needed to guard the 3000 or more miles of coastline in the seceded states.[5] Nor did it consider an allocation of resources, set out a time line, or even name points of particular concern. Due to this lack of planning, Lincoln was extremely skeptical of the plan’s possible success. It was because his doubt of the plan’s success that he chose to battle with the Confederacy in ground campaigns, rather than waiting for a slow strangulation of the Confederacy to occur.

A frequently, and sometimes hotly, discussed subject; the outcome of the American Civil War has fascinated historians for generations. Some argue that the North's economic advantages proved too much for the South, others that Southern strategy was faulty, offensive when it should have been defensive, and vice-versa. Internal division in the South is often referred to, and complaints made against Davis' somewhat makeshift, inexperienced, government. Doubts are sometimes raised over the commitment of Southerners to a cause many of them were half-hearted about. Many historians have argued that the South lost the will to fight long before defeat was inevitable. However, many of these criticisms could easily be applied to the North, had the

     Battles have been fought since the dawn of time. Weapons have gradually become more technological and sophisticated each and every time. People learn from their mistakes, as did the Indians in the late 1700s, as well as the Confederate troops from the Civil War. The Union was victorious in this war for freedom, and to this day, the north is more the heart of the country’s economy.

At the beginning of the war the Union thought it would be an easy, quick war. The Union leaders at this time had no actual plan for the war. General Scott saw this and came up with the Anaconda plan. Scott considered the war a strategy game, and would attack and penetrate the enemy 's forces without destroying all of their troops; focusing mainly on victory. At the beginning of the war Scott, unlike others, thought that the war would be over in more than two years. The war ended in four years. The term Anaconda plan came from Northern press trying to explain Scotts plan. Many people thought that Scotts plan was too passive and difficult. The Union’s effort in the civil war increased greatly on April 19, 1861. At this point Abraham Lincoln created a naval blockade, a system of ships that stops all imports and exports, on the Confederate coastline. This blockade stretched from the Rio Grande to the Chesapeake Bay. At this time Lincoln’s argument was that the Confederacy had no right to secede. Creating this blockade allowed the National warships to attack privateers. Privateers are privately owned and run warships. These ships were used to take the Union’s trade ships. Getting rid of the privateers meant that the Union could transport goods easier. Scott 's anaconda plan needed the Union’s army and navy to surround the Confederacy. After encompassing the Confederacy the army and navy would tighten in, and effectively strangle the South. This contained two

So, the war had begun, the Confederacy had their army, and everyone prepared for what they believed was going to be a short conflict. Four years later, they realized how

Many historians have tried to offer their ideology on the outcome of the Civil War. McPherson in his “American Victory, American Defeat” writes about what other historians have decreed their answers to why the Confederacy lost. He tells us the reasons that could not be the explanation for the loss, and explains the internal reasons but leaves the true cause of the loss untold. Freehling explains the defeat by discussing what could have been and then gives reasons to negate some of the cases that he states for the outcome of the Confederacy. Both McPherson and Freehling both agreed that there were other factors besides battles that needed to be looked at.

Beginning as a battle of army versus army, the war became a conflict of society against society. In this kind of war, the ability to mobilize economic resources, the effectiveness of political leadership, and a society’s willingness to keep up the fight despite setbacks, are as crucial to the outcome as success or failure on the battlefields. Unfortunately for the Southern planters, by the spring of 1865, the South was exhausted, and on April 9, Lee surrendered to Grant at Appomattox Court House, effectively ending the war.

INTRO: In spite of the fact that the Civil War was a period of racist beliefs and segregation, Newton Knight held solid to what he believed was correct. In his eyes, everyone was equal. He stood firm in beliefs for slaves by gathering and leading a huge rebellious group who were gathering to battle for what they all believed was right. It caused a huge conflict along with the already existing one due to the civil war, but it made a huge impact in the end. The arguments lead to the formation of the Free State of Jones where all slaves got to be distinctly equivalent and free, simply like every other person. Many were happy about this, and many were not. But Newton held strong in his opinions of what he thought was morally right. Even though

Why did the southern states believe they could win the civil war? The southern states, known as the Confederacy were very confident going into this war that they could successfully defend their rights' and their way of life. They had many reasons for being so confident. First, the southern leaders were sure the north was not going to have a full-scale military conflict. They thought that a compromise and peace agreement could be reached after a short period of fighting. Second, the south was going to fight a defensive war. Third, the southern lifestyle made them familiar with firearms and horseback riding. Therefore they would be better soldiers than the

The South was viewed by many in the United States and elsewhere as a robust, self-sufficient economy (Surdam, 2001, p. 1). It produced much of the world's supply of cotton and Texans bragged that their cattle could feed the world. What the South lacked in manufacturing was compensated for by the immense wealth produced from raw cotton, cattle, and corn exports. Obviously, the predictions that the South could survive a war with the North due to its economic self-sufficiency were wrong. This essay analyzes the possible reasons for the failure of the Confederacy to win the Civil War.

Economically the Union was very strong and greatly outweighed the South. President Lincoln, as the war had begun, quickly declared a blockade, as described earlier, against the main Confederate ports. This was supposed to be under an international treaty, that hadn’t been signed yet, which had created the controversial political issues for Lincoln. Fortunate enough for the Union, when war broke out the United States Navy was small like it’s army, and its ships were scattered around the oceans. Of the American ships that were in surrounding waters, ten were partially destroyed or destroyed to prevent them from going to the Confederates when Virginia seceded. If they did this would have taken the Norfolk naval base with it.

There were several reasons for the defeat of the Confederacy which included no industrial base, (Donald 1996, p. 99) inadequate transportation net (Donald, 1996, p. 99), and bickering among the generals (McPherson & Hogue, 2009, p. 365) etc., but the overriding factor was that the Confederacy never became a nation (Donald, 1996, p. 100). That is, they seceded because the Southern states believed they had the right as independent States to do so (Donald, 1996, p. 7). The South lost because they never stopped believing this. No state could depend on any other for full support of the war. The Governor of Georgia specifically prohibited his troops from fighting outside the state for many months. Many governors set limits on how many

As tensions between the North and the South rose on the issues of slavery and states’ rights, numerous compromises were proposed to ease the conflict. Such compromises included the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and the Crittenden Compromise. These compromises had intentions of defining where slavery was permitted and clarifying states’ rights. They were only temporary fixes to a more pressing issue. Between the Missouri Compromise and the Crittenden Compromise, a series of events changed the political atmosphere of the United States and prevented any more compromises on the institution of slavery from being passed.

From the onset of the war, the Union had its obvious advantages. They simply had large amounts of resources of which the South did not. "In all history, no nation of mere agriculturists ever made successful war against a nation of mechanics. You are bound to fail" --Union officer William Tecumseh Sherman to a Southern friend. Over 85 percent of the nation's industry and significant material resources were controlled by the North. The North was able to use take power of their economical advantages to produce military supplies, and replace damaged equipment more rapidly than the Confederacy. On top of that, forces for the field could be re-supplied rapidly because