What Impact Did Grant Have On The Outcome Of The Civil War

850 Words4 Pages

The importance of this war and need to reestablish the Union caused Grant to take new strategies when waging war. In this war Grant used tactics such as year long warfare, high tempo warfare and siege warfare to destroy the confederates. By doing this he not only secured many major Union victories, but also changed how wars would be fought for years to come. And furthermore, through these new strategies of war we can can see how Grant not only affected the outcome of the war and war itself, but also the people within the war both confederate and federal. Prior to this war, wars had only been waged seasonally so that men could operate their farms or not have to deal with the intense winters. But Grant completely ignored this and decided to fight year round forcing southern men to fight as …show more content…

In this type of warfare a city, fort or town is surrounded due to its defensive position. While neither side aggressively fought there is a constant ongoing the battle for survival. The end of this warfare occurred by one group starving or running out of supplies and either surrendering or dying out. This use of passive aggressive warfare allowed Grant to take a large group of southern troops without facing enormous losses on his side, and in turn saving union soldiers lives. An example of this would be the Battle or Siege of Vicksburg, in which Grant surrounded the city and forced Pemberton to surrender after 47 days of siege warfare. The affects of this specific example on the confederates were devastating with 29,491 officers and men being surrendered to the Union, but more importantly it resulted in the union gaining control of the Mississippi River. As Lincoln said, “Vicksburg is the key. The war can never be brought to a close until the key is in our pocket.” This shows how this use of warfare directly correlated to the result of the war, and therefore how Grants use of siege tactics caused the Union to

Open Document