Broadly, the Union’s strategy was to end the rebellion by regaining control of the territory that succeeded to form the Confederacy. Because their aim was to conquer, the Union had to fight offensively. Conversely, the Confederacy had to maintain control of their territory, placing them on the defensive. How these strategies were carried out depended on the generals in charge of the armies and on the theater of war those generals fought in.
In the Eastern Theater, the Union initially hoped to end the war by capturing the Confederate capital in Richmond, Virginia. As such, the Union generals hoped to fight a decisive battle, in the Napoleonic style, believing it would end the war quickly. The necessity for a fast war was also a driving motivation for the capture of Richmond. The Union populace did not want a long war, as demonstrated by their reaction to Winfield Scott’s ‘Anaconda Plan,’ and some did not support the war at all. Later in the war, Grant shifted the Union’s focus from winning a single decisive battle to the complete annihilation of the Confederate’s army. For Grant, this general goal remained intact in both spheres of the war.
The Confederate Army in the Eastern Theater largely sought to outlast the Union Army, though Lee did …show more content…
For the Union, control of the Mississippi River was necessary for the ‘Anaconda Plan.’ Control of the river would prevent the flow of resources to the Confederate Army and it would give the Union strongholds in Confederate territory. Once the Union established control over the Mississippi River, they had to maintain their hold against raids. Through his work in the Western Theater, Grant came to believe that the armies in both theaters of the war needed to work together, under one strategy, in order to defeat the Confederacy. Thus, toward the end of the war, forces in the Western Theater also focused on annihilating the enemy’s army by attacking the army and army
In the Eastern Theater, the Union initially hoped to end the war by capturing the Confederate capital in Richmond, Virginia. As such, the Union generals hoped to fight a decisive battle, in the Napoleonic style, believing it would end the war quickly. The necessity for a fast war was also a driving motivation for the capture of Richmond. The Union populace did not want a long war, as demonstrated by their reaction to Winfield Scott’s ‘Anaconda Plan,’ and some did not support the war at all. Later in the war, Grant shifted the Union’s focus from winning a single decisive battle to the complete annihilation of the Confederate’s army. For Grant, this general goal remained intact in both spheres of the war.
The Confederate Army in the Eastern Theater largely sought to outlast the Union Army, though Lee did …show more content…
For the Union, control of the Mississippi River was necessary for the ‘Anaconda Plan.’ Control of the river would prevent the flow of resources to the Confederate Army and it would give the Union strongholds in Confederate territory. Once the Union established control over the Mississippi River, they had to maintain their hold against raids. Through his work in the Western Theater, Grant came to believe that the armies in both theaters of the war needed to work together, under one strategy, in order to defeat the Confederacy. Thus, toward the end of the war, forces in the Western Theater also focused on annihilating the enemy’s army by attacking the army and army