That success was largely due to overcautious Union generals. While the Union did attempt to cut off Southern resources with a close blockade, generals like George B. McClellan failed to otherwise push home Northern advantages, continually refraining from action. Often, as depicted in the battle of Antietam, McClellan would win a battle, but then refrain from pursuing the retreating confederate forces, allowing them to recover, fearing the possibility of defeat. Such policy was characteristic of early Union generals, and continued for a span of almost three years. (“George B. McClellan”). As a result of refraining from offensive strategy, the Union could not drain Confederate supplies, enabling the Confederacy to continue to hold out, despite having inferior …show more content…
Grant assured a Union victory by engaging in a policy of total war, vigorously and continuously attacking Confederate resources and supply lines. He, along with generals William Tecumseh Sherman and David Hunter, raided cities, destroyed farms, railroads, factories and shipyards, and liberated slaves, having realized the inability of the south to recover from such losses (Haines 19; Surdam 115; Buhl; Black Soldiers in the Civil War). The most famous such raids were those on Atlanta and Savannah, Georgia, in which Sherman destroyed all machinery and buildings beneficial to the Confederate cause. So fervent, indeed, were the efforts of Union soldiers during this period, that the soldiers were described as attacking “like famished wolves [...], breaking locks and whatever is in their way[,]” by Dolly Burge, a Savannah plantation owner. The South could, quite simply, not afford to loose these resources (Buhl). In fact, Confederate soldiers were described having “gone without rations for several days” at the time of Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s surrender (Plante). Through taking away Confederate supplies, Grant and his subordinates were able to do what prior generals could not, and utilize Union advantages. The effectiveness of total war is even still recognized by military strategists today, resulting in its usage in the modern world.
By allowing the Union to utilize its superior resources, the radical, new strategy of total war allowed the Union bring the American