President Lincoln had been impressed with General US Grant's overall accomplishments in the Western Theater. Among all available candidates for the position of general in chief to replace General Henry W. Halleck, Lincoln believed Grant would be a success as general in chief.
Because of his high credibility. Grant had captured Vicksburg - an almost impossible task - which liberated the Mississippi, ending the war in the West. Then he saved the Army of the Cumberland from destruction at Chattanooga.
NEW RESPONDENT
At the end of 1863, thanks to the victories of Vicksburg and Chattanooga, Lincoln and the Northern public opinion were thinking that Grant were the right man to be appointed General in Chief. Also Halleck, who, at that time was covering that commission, suggested Grant's nomination.
But before taking such a decision, Lincoln wanted to know:
1 - what were Grant's thoughts about the "grand strategy" to carry on the war and defeat the South and what were the priorities, which would have to be given for succeeding in.
2 - As the presidential election were approaching, Lincoln wanted also to be reassured that Grant was really a soldier and then had a clear insight of the relationship existing between politics and war.
This to avoid of being faced by an intriguing ambitious (like McClellan) that maybe was trying to take advantage of the great prestige of its victories for his personal political purposes, which would have shown that Grant did not understand this relationship and, in the final analysis of being a bad strategist.
Surveys on these points were carried out discreetly by Halleck and personal friends of the President and reassured Lincoln, who decided to appoint Grant to that high office.
Because he had acquired great credibility by liberating the Mississippi, and then rescuing the Army of the Cumberland from starvation.
He was a successful problem-solver.
The Union general that President Lincoln placed in charge of the department of Mississippi was Ulysses S. Grant.
A Persian expeditionary force versus the armies of Athens and Plataea.
There is no single event that triggered the Siege of Vicksburg. It was recognized as a strategic defensive position from the time that Grant began operations in the lower Mississippi Valley. Grant and Lincoln realized that the capture of Vicksburg would place the entire lower Mississippi in Union hands, especially since the Union had already captured New Orleans by sea.
It took place in WW II
So that their armies and their trade goods could get rapidly from one place to another.
The Union general that President Lincoln placed in charge of the department of Mississippi was Ulysses S. Grant.
Robert E. Lee, he couldn't fight against his place of birth, Virginia
Reports from Grant and Sherman that the enemy position was increasingly hopeless. The surrender at Appomattox had taken place a few days before Lincoln's assassination.
Gen. Robert E. Lee surrendered his Confederate army to Gen. U.S. Grant at Appomattox Court House, VA. While this event is commonly thought to have ended the U.S. Civil War, it did not, because other hostile armies remained in the field, including two large ones about 120 miles away. On April 18 Gen. Joseph Johnston surrendered his Confederate army to Gen. William T. Sherman at Benton Place, NC. Although other hostile forces remained, this effectively ended the war. In between these two surrenders, on April 14, President Lincoln was assassinated in Washington. See also http://billyjustice.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/lilacs/
The answer often used for the Union strategy of "total war", has been debunked many times. Total war is best seen in WW 2. There civilian targets were added to bombing factories, armies and enemy railroads. Union General Sherman did not attack civilians or destroy their homes, except by accident. Sherman, Grant and President Lincoln saw that they would not end the war necessarily by destroying the Rebel armies. They discovered that the best way to end the war was to deprive Southern armies of food supplies. Therefore, unlike their earlier strategies, the Union chose to place a strong focus on destroying potential sources of supply to Southern armies.
The answer often used for the Union strategy of "total war", has been debunked many times. Total war is best seen in WW 2. There civilian targets were added to bombing factories, armies and enemy railroads. Union General Sherman did not attack civilians or destroy their homes, except by accident. Sherman, Grant and President Lincoln saw that they would not end the war necessarily by destroying the Rebel armies. They discovered that the best way to end the war was to deprive Southern armies of food supplies. Therefore, unlike their earlier strategies, the Union chose to place a strong focus on destroying potential sources of supply to Southern armies.
The Union employed this concept. When it became clear that there would be no decisive battle to destroy the Confederate armies, a new strategy was put in place by US President Lincoln and Lieutenant General US Grant. The idea might be called total war, in that civilians who owned supplies in the South, allowed for the Southern armies to continue to wage battle. The Northern strategy was then turned into a "total war", where any property or assets owned by Southern civilians were destroyed. This caused supply problems for the Southern armies. Another term for what happened was that the Union applied what can be called a strategy of exhaustion.
President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth
The ancient Romans built roads to help travel their armies from one place to the other
A Persian expeditionary force versus the armies of Athens and Plataea.
Lincoln Place - Pittsburgh -'s population is 3,671.
Lincoln Place - Pittsburgh -'s population is 3,841.