Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


Grant Takes Action to Shorten the War.... - U.S. Grant - The Participants of the War - Mikitary & Civilian - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost
 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 12:53 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
1st Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 907
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

  On this date in 1864, General Grant took action to effectively end prisoner exchanges.

Exchange Of Prisoners In The Civil War

  While this decision led to much suffering on both sides, it made perfect sense from a military standpoint. It was an effective way to exploit the Union's great manpower advantage, and accelerate the exhaustion of the CSA's dwindling resources.



 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 01:55 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
2nd Post
Hellcat
Root Beer Lover


Joined: Tue Nov 15th, 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 831
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Grant was willing to fight a war of attrition. Lee won most of the battles he fough against Grant but unless he could take those battles without loosing a single man to injury, capture, or death and unless he could take them without loosing ammo then each battle was ultimately costing Lee even more than Grant.



 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 02:08 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
3rd Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 907
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Hellcat-

  You are quite right that General Grant was willing to fight a war of attrition against the CSA. This can be seen from Grant's own words in a letter written to General Butler on 18 April 1864:

  "Every man we hold, when released on parole or otherwise, becomes an active soldier against us at once either directly or indirectly. If we commence a system of exchange which liberates all prisoners taken, we will have to fight on until the whole south is exterminated. If we hold those caught, they amount to no more than dead men."

Last edited on Wed Apr 17th, 2013 02:21 pm by Texas Defender



 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 02:40 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
4th Post
Hellcat
Root Beer Lover


Joined: Tue Nov 15th, 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 831
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I have to wonder if Grant was considering another fact when he said that. Veterans have experince that green recruits won't have. And both sides were loosing veterans to the POW camps in addition to green recruits. Given the numbers both had to fall back on I think Grant could more afford to loose that experience.



 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 02:55 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
5th Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 907
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Hellcat-

  Without having documentation at hand, I would have to believe that by 1864 and 1865, most of the soldiers in General Lee's army were battle hardened veterans. By the later stages of the war, those who remained were likely to be the most dedicated to the cause of the CSA. For this and other reasons, depriving General Lee of these soldiers was much more important to General Grant than getting back a like number of his own soldiers.



 Posted: Wed Apr 17th, 2013 05:27 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
6th Post
Hellcat
Root Beer Lover


Joined: Tue Nov 15th, 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 831
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I'm not disagreeing on that note, TD. I'm just saying that I think given their experince veterans were a bit more important than green recruits to both sides. But the North had a large enough population that it could better afford to loose that experince while the South didn't have the population to fall back on as they lost that experince.

Last edited on Wed Apr 17th, 2013 05:27 pm by Hellcat



 Current time is 04:15 pm
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.1573 seconds (13% database + 87% PHP). 25 queries executed.