Lincoln Lincoln finds a general

[frontrank2]

From the start of the war, President Lincoln was directly involved in the overall strategy of the Union Army, including overall troop movements. He would issue a constant stream of directions to his field commanders which were most often ignored by a succession of military leaders. ( the name McClellan comes to my mind right off the top ). This proved to be a constant source of frustration for the President.
Early on, Lincoln stated "Vicksburg is the key...the war can never be brought to a close until that key is in our pocket." With General U.S. Grant's triumphs in the West, including his great victory at Vicksburg, Lincoln was elated. Best of all, Grant's accomplishments came without pushing, prodding or nagging. After the capture of Vicksburg Lincoln said of Grant, "It stamps him as the greatest general of the age, if not the world."
In a letter to Grant, Lincoln admitted that he had doubted Grant's strategy during the Vicksburg Campaign. "I do not remember that you and I ever met personally. I write this now as a grateful acknowledgment for the almost inestimable service you have done the country…. I never had any faith, except a general hope that you knew better than I, that the Yazoo Pass expedition, and the like, could succeed…. I feared it was a mistake. I now wish to make the personal acknowledgement that you were right, and I was wrong."
On March 10, 1864, President Lincoln signed a brief document officially promoting then-Major General Grant to the rank of lieutenant general of the U.S. Army, tasking the future president with the job of leading all Union troops against the Confederate Army. The rank of lieutenant general had not officially been used since 1798; at that time, President John Adams assigned the post to George Washington in anticipation of a possible French invasion of the United States. Also, Winfield Scott had briefly earned the rank, but the appointment was only temporary. As lieutenant general of the U.S. Army, Grant was answerable only to Lincoln. Well-respected by troops and civilians, Grant earned Lincoln's trust and went on to force the South's surrender in 1865.

 

[FarawayFriend]

Just for the fun of it, read the chapter in "Last Full Measure" by Jeff Shaara, that describes how Lincoln told Grant he would be his new Lieutenant General. The chapter is named "Part Two, GRANT, March 1864". I'm sure you will like it - and Last Full Measure to me is the best volume of the "Killer Angels" trilogy, and it will be my everlasting grief that this book never made it into a movie!

https://books.google.de/books?id=4a...ce=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Here is a teaser from that chapter:

 

[johnTbridgens203PA]

First and foremost I would say that General US Grant was a real badass. He was a warrior and he was a very focused individual. Most importantly, he was a man of his time.

Many generals today and then do a lot of crowing and self aggrandizement regarding their war abilities but few are real down in the mud Art of War, Sun Tzu bad *****. In my opinion, Grant was among the best.

 

[Reconstructed Rebel]

Lincoln's communications with his generals before Grant urged them to do something - attack, move forward, have a plan, use this expensive army in some potentially positive way. With Grant, action was a given. He did not quit. He was just what Lincoln wanted in a General - keep trying until you succeed.
The best monument to any CW general, in my view, is the one of Grant in Washington D.C. Grant sits on his horse and does not look heroic or handsome or noble, he looks like a man who will not back down.

 

[Ole Miss]

Lincoln himself was a self-made man who had earned everything through hard labor and saw the same features in Grant. Both were quiet men who lead by example and had no doubt in their cause of Saving the Union.
Fortunately for this country God provided these men!
Regards
David

 

[Dead Parrott]

No battle plan (however brilliant) survives contact with the enemy. And no general (however intelligent or careful) is perfect.

So it's what that general does when plans fail - how he understands, reacts, adapts, and adjusts to still obtain his objective IN SPITE of the failures - that defines his greatness and his success.

Grant was the right man at the right time.

 

[jackt62]

Grant shared an important trait with Lee. Both men were properly deferential to their civilian leader (Lincoln and Davis), understood that the military was subservient to governmental authority, and cultivated good and respectful relations with them.

 

[Saphroneth]

There is an article I've read which makes the case that what allowed Grant to win the war was partly that he achieved high command in 1864; that is:

1) it was within the means and will of the Union to produce a field army of much greater strength than the Confederate field army in the east, and to sustain that army with further infusions of strength.
2) the Union newspapers, public and political leadership were willing to accept gradual progress, rather than loudly hoping for a quick, decisive end to the war with minimal casualties and at minimal expense.
3) Consequently, Grant could maintain pressure over a long period of time.

Within that environment, Grant was effective.
His style of command may however not have worked in the earlier years of the war, not without a significant change to the methods he used to reflect the different environments then at play.*

* if there's not the men for Grant to outnumber Lee to the same extent, then Grant has to change tactics. If Grant has the ability to execute tactics of similar effectiveness with a smaller numerical advantage, then he could have done so historically.