The American civil (1861-1865) was majorly as a result of a decision by the slave-owning Southerners to secede or break away from the federal union that had been created by the US Constitution after its ratification. Their action has been described as arising out of fear that President Abraham Lincoln’s would put a restriction on their right to own slaves. Abraham himself, a Northern man, opposed the planned withdrawal and separation, maintaining its illegality. However, despite this opposition, the secession went on to result in one of the bloodiest and costly wars in the American history that involved both sides of the war taking advantage of the opportunities that it had over the other side of the war.
The civil war has been described as being akin to a second revolution mainly because, just like the first revolution in which Americans were fighting for their liberation from the British colonial rule, the war involved a confederate state fighting for its independence and the right to own slaves. Moreover, the war was seen being revolutionary because it represented a radical change in great American ideals and beliefs such as democracy, individual liberty and human rights (Ford, 2004, p. 116). Further, before the war, there are a number of compromises that postponed or delayed the war for some time. The first one was the Missouri Compromise of 1820 by Henry Clay which involved a careful balance between the number of Free States and slave states as a means to settle the slavery issue. Then there was the Compromise of 1850 whose ignition was sparked by the extension of the US territory westwards. The main issue here was whether slavery was to be allowed to extend to existing new territories and states. Thereafter was the major compromise of the Kansas-Nebraska Act by Stephen Douglas, an Illinois Senator. Its aim was to unify the Union and prevent possible fallout due to the issue of slave ownership. However, instead, this compromise became so controversial and resulted in negative consequences.
According to Ford (2004), during the civil war-cum Second Revolution, both sides of the war had their own unique advantages but the Northern States side of the war had more strategic advantages than the South. For instance, in term s of population size, the North had almost four times the number of free people who could be recruited and engaged in war. Another important advantage that the North had was the presence of the railroads or lines that transported fresh food supplies from factories to feed the fighters. The telegraph lines also enabled easy communication for supply of food and weapons for the Northern soldiers. It also had a relatively large and strong navy, having been the main state before the war. Further, the strong leadership under Lincoln, the global recognition of the North as being the main state, controls of the original US navy and adequate financial resources gave the North an upper hand during the war. The South, unlike the North, also had few factories. However, the main advantages the South enjoyed over the Northern side of the war included a long defensive military tradition of strong and skilled slaves, good and better trains war generals including Jackson and Lee. In addition to these, the Southern advantage was in the form of the presence of heavy warfare machines sue to early innovations such as repeating rifles, ironclad ships among other equipment.
Another feature of the American Civil War was the Anaconda war tactics plan that the North used to suppress attempts by the confederate states to withdraw r from the Union. These tactics were the ideas of Winfield Scott, a Genera-in-Chief for the North. Its main aim was to cut off and block the Southern troops’ advancement along the Mississippi River. The Southern soldiers would be cornered within a planned area in a manner that resembled the anaconda snake, and would then be defeated completely. It was a well calculated strategy involving the Eastern and Western part of the river and region in which the Southerners were stationed. This stratify of blockading the Southern regions to pre vent the passage of soldiers and compelling them into submission led successfully to the defeat in 1865 though the Union had earlier been defeated. The plan was mainly strategically centered on Richmond which was the Confederate’s capital then. In the West, Grant’s army managed to capture Tennessee, Farragut and New Orleans in April 1862. Subsequently, there was the capture of Atlanta by Sherman in 1864. After many attempts to capture this strategic point or city by the Union soldiers that had earlier resulted in failures, General Ulysses Grant was instrumental in the fin al successful capture and occupation of Richmond by the Union soldiers in April 1865. It is this capture that dealt a blow to the Confederate and eventually led to the Confederacy’s surrender on April 9 of the same year. This capture and occupation of Richmond according to Ford (2004) formed the major turning point in the East while in the West; the main turning point involved the battle of the Bull Run in 196. Other turning points during the Civil war included the Battle of Gettysburg, the Battle of Chancellorsville, and the Siege of Vicksburg.
References
Ford, C. T. (2004). The American civil war: An overview. New York: Enslow Publishers, Inc.
