View single post by Gettysburger
 Posted: Sun Feb 12th, 2012 12:00 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Gettysburger
Member
 

Joined: Thu Jan 19th, 2012
Location:  
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I might be off on a slight tangent here, but I keep seeing
the over simplification of why Gen. Grant and the Union was victorious.

There were far more reasons than a manpower(soldiers) superiority as the reason why the Union was successful in so many battles.

I won't go into the myriad reasons why the CSA lost the war.

But, a quick summary would have to include the CSA's lack of coordination from top levels of government(Davis/Stephens) all the way down to major difficulties in supply and transport of men and materiel due to the lack of uniformity of railroad
gauges.

The Confederacy had many more railroad miles in service than the Union but could not put them to the best use when
trains had to be unloaded and reloaded due to those differences in track gauge.

The great river systems(Ohio/Mississippi) were effectively used in '61-'62 by the CSA. But once Gen. Grant confiscated
Fts. Henry and Donelson on the Cumberland River, it was the beginning of the end of river traffic on the 2 bigger rivers.

The loss of these 2 forts may have been the first 'turning' point of the war for the CSA?

Certainly it proved to Mr.Lincoln that Gen. Grant was the right man to get the job done....

GB

 Close Window