Why the South Lost the Civil War

Why the South Lost the Civil War Although the reasons for the defeat of the Confederacy in the American Civil War are debated just as energetically as the causes of the war, the answer to the question, â€Å"Why did the South lose the war?† was actually answered a long time ago. Three Reasons of the Union Victory Some years after the war ended, Confederate General George Pickett – who was actually a much better officer than his being the namesake of the famously doomed Pickett’s Charge at the Battle of Gettysburg might suggest – was asked why he thought the South lost, to which he replied, â€Å"I think the Yanks might have had something to do with it.† The Confederacy did not lose the Civil War, the Union beat them, and it was not until the very last few months of the war that it was at all clear that they would. CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR The reasons for the Union victory are usually described as advantages in three areas: resources, strategy, and performance on the battlefield. While it is true that the North ultimately bested the South in all three, these advantages were for much of the war either not as great as they appear now, or were not well-applied; and the forces of the Confederacy had some considerable advantages of their own. Reason 1: Resources Confederate General Robert E. Lee certainly thought the disparity of resources between the North and South was to blame for the Confederate defeat; after surrendering the Army of Northern Virginia at Appomattox on April 10, 1865, he explained in his farewell address to his soldiers, â€Å"After four years’ arduous service, marked by unsurpassed courage and fortitude, declared Lee, the Army of Northern Virginia has been compelled to yield to overwhelming numbers and resources.† That was a bit of an understatement; the Union had two-and-a-half times the population of the South, had a vastly superior road and rail network, and when the war began, was producing over 90 percent of the country’s iron and very nearly all of its weapons, industrial advantages that only increased significantly as the war progressed. The Confederacy relied almost entirely on trade with Europe and the Northern states for industrial goods; for example, there was only one factory in the south – the Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond, Virginia – that was capable of producing large weapons, iron plating for ships, and heavy locomotive components. Nonetheless, the South managed to keep itself supplied for much longer than the differences in capabilities suggest it should have. While the Union blockade of the Confederacy – helped immensely by the capture of important ports such as New Orleans, Mobile, and Wilmington – did almost completely stop the flow of material from other countries after 1862, illicit trade with the North through the border states of Kentucky, Missouri, and Maryland was harder to stop, and kept a trickle of much-needed supplies flowing right up to the very end of the war. Reason 2: Strategy One aspect of the Confederate defeat that is debatable is the degree to which the strategy by which they pursued the war was imposed on them by political realities versus how much of it was the result of poor decision-making. All the South had to do was defend itself; the onus was on the North to ‘take back’ the rebellious part of the country. The Confederacy, however, comprised a huge territory, nearly 750,000 square miles. Some Southern military leaders, most notably General Joseph E. Johnston, advocated what in hindsight probably would have been a sound defensive strategy: giving up territory to defend key places like the major cities and doing most of the fighting with the North using guerrilla forces. The prevailing view, however, was that recognition of the Confederate States of America by other countries like England and France (and the desperately needed military assistance that would have come with it) was only possible if the South could demonstrate that it was a legitimate nation that could defend itself. That meant facing the Union forces in conventional fashion, defending the entire Confederate territory, and taking the fight to the Union where possible; this was the strategy preferred by Confederate leader Jefferson Davis (who unlike his Union counterpart Abraham Lincoln had extensive military experience) and General Lee. The unavoidable problem with the Southern strategic situation is that the initiative lay entirely with the North; Union forces could strike wherever it seemed most advantageous to do so, and the Confederate forces would largely be limited to reacting to it. To be fair, they did so magnificently more often than not. Lee’s repeated offensive-defensive campaigns in response to Union invasions of Virginia stymied the North – and almost ended the war in mid-1864 – until the final few months of the conflict, and even in the face of the brilliant war of maneuver conducted by Union generals Grant, Sherman, and George Thomas in the West, Confederate leaders like Johnston, Braxton Bragg (a general to whom history has, quite unfairly, not been kind), and Nathan Bedford Forrest presented a formidable challenge and delayed the eventual Southern defeat. Reason 3: Performance on the Battlefield One of the obvious reasons the Civil War was the most savage conflict ever fought by American soldiers is that from the highest generals to the lowest privates in the ranks, the two forces were so evenly matched in terms of talent and motivation, even if the advantage of numbers went to the Union. Most of the leaders on both sides had trained and served together in the pre-war Army; many were brothers-in-arms as young officers in the Mexican War 20 years earlier. The conventional view that â€Å"Southerners made better soldiers† because most of them were farmers, handy with weapons and horses and used to rough living, overlooks the fact that an overwhelming number of Union troops were from the farming states in the upper Midwest. For example, the famed â€Å"Iron Brigade† of the Army of the Potomac, one of the most-feared units in either army, and one of the few who could claim to have defeated the equally-renowned Stonewall Jackson was made up entirely of men from Wisc onsin, Michigan, and Indiana. The advantage to the Union on the battlefield largely came about because of its superiority in firepower and numbers, but also because Southern leaders made a few more bad decisions at wrong times than their Union foes. Lee’s two invasions of the North – which ended in the horrific battles of Antietam and Gettysburg – were unnecessary and costly strategic mistakes, compounded by a number of uncharacteristic errors during both campaigns. Likewise in the West, General Bragg’s outstanding victory at Chickamauga was wasted when he failed to follow up on it, allowing Grant to come to the rescue and eventually defeat Bragg at Chattanooga. Could the Confederacy have won the Civil War? The weight of evidence tips the balance towards the answer, â€Å"Probably not.† Yet the question is still interesting and worth discussing, even after 150 years. WHEN IS MILITARY FORCE JUSTIFIED? An excellent, detailed history of the Civil War can be found in James M. McPherson’s 1988 book, Battle Cry of Freedom, which explains the Civil War in-depth from the end of the Mexican War in 1847 to the tragic assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1865.

Privacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Privacy - Essay Example Numerous information of a person can exist in an infinite period leading to unfavorable actions on the side of agencies that enforce law, potential employers together with agencies that offer credit facilities (Becker & Becker, 2008). She puts across that some companies and institution can gain access to individual information and uses it against them basing on religion, ethnicity or race. People who discover that their personal information may be accessed, have a lot of pressure to conform. When most people feel afraid that their personal information can be accessed, they reduce their capability to induce change in the society (Tucker, 2006). This indicates that privacy matters affect more than the wrong doers do. Debora also argues that people have a right to reject giving their personal information. Those that give their information indeed forfeit this right (Werhane & Freeman, 2011). She says that in the current society it is almost impossible to live without providing your personal information. For instance, one cannot use a computer if he cannot provide personal information, use credit card, get health insurance or even get a driver’s license or benefit from any government program (Gabelman, 2005). This is because the information is stored in the databases. She observes that there are many reasons why people should reject giving their personal information though it can cause serious inconveniences (Canto-Sperber, 2004). People can embrace the new developments of computers without fear of dangers that arise by using passwords and keywords to protect their personal information. Croissant, J. & Restivo, S. (2007). Albany Conflicts of Interest and Industry-Funded Research: Chasing Norms for Professional Practicein the Academy.† In Degrees of Compromise: Institutional Interests and AcademicValues. NY: SUNY

Preliminary Analysis of Cost and Budgetary Information Systems Essay - 1

Preliminary Analysis of Cost and Budgetary Information Systems - Essay Example More than often, organizations ensure that an analysis of varied product cost and budgetary control methodologies and systems are carried out. This is because, the introduction of a suitable cost and budgetary information systems allows for effective planning for the future, controlling of present activities, and an evaluation of the past performance within an organization. Considerably, the choice of a suitable cost and budgetary information systems allows for planned action, coordination, and optimum use of resources as it defines responsibilities. †¢ Product costs include the cost estimates that are based on material, labor and machine process that influence decisions made by management. It is either based on activity-based costing or traditional based costing (Kaplan & Anderson, 2007). †¢ Activity-based costing is adopted from the conventional costing system and it assumes that activities act as fundamental cost objects because cause costs and cost objects are known to create demand for activities. †¢ Traditional based costing utilizes costs based on a single, volume-based cost driver, it assumes that product causes cost because; it assigns the overhead costs to products based on relative usage of direct labor. †¢ It is recommendable for the management of Worplestrop Partnership to adopt the activity-based costing control method because it ensures efficient maximization of profits as it allocates costs to key cost drives (Kaplan & Anderson, 2007). †¢ It is also decisive for the management to prepare budgetary control tools ranging from long-term to short-term, all functional budget estimates and both functional and flexible budget to control costs used in products (Weygandt, Kimmel & Kieso, 2009). More than often, the levels of decision-making are classified as operational, tactical and strategic levels. Nonetheless, decisions made at each level play an important role in product costing and budgetary control, as relevant information is transmitted in order to make an organization successful.