Grant and Lee Essay

Another thing that stood out to me about General Lee was that he was not a big fan of slavery. He had command of Northern Virginia during the Civil War, so it does make sense. Lee through out this book shows his love for Virginia. Let’s face it, he is solely in this war because Virginia made the decision to leave the Union. He is very loyal to his home state, and it shows through out the

During the mid 1960s Grant was determined to modify its strategy and align itself in a different section of the market. One aspect of this strategy was to rapidly expand into suburban shopping centers and on the other hand, Grant also wanted to modify its product line (product mix). This rapid expansion required Grant to increase their physical store space to accommodate new items in their existing stores, in addition to an overall change in product mix (including larger items such as furniture and appliances). Not only did they have to increase their existing store space, they also needed to sequester new properties (which they did via long-term lease agreements) in suburban areas in order

Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee are two of the most effective military leaders in American history. These men have become symbolic of the two nations at conflict during the Civil War. Both had very different backgrounds and personalities that caused them to differ in their military leadership and accomplishments. Even though General Lee would surrender his army to General Grant, Lee throughout the course of the war proved himself to be a better military leader.

“As a tactician, he was head and shoulders above Grant. Good defensively, Lee was even better on the offensive. He was bold and decisive, a calculating gambler…Splitting his army on several occasions, he surprised his opponents and won the day. Lee was a master of the holding attack, a tactic George Marshall would later instill as the only tactic taught at the Army War College prior to World War II.”

Grant and Lee are completely different when it comes to their views on what the American life style should be. Grants goals and standard are high, as the author says here in this statement: “Grant was the modern man emerging; beyond him, ready to come on the stage, was the great age of steel and machinery, of crowded cities and a restless burgeoning vitality” (411). I think that these values of a much larger and brighter future is a better choice. Thinking ahead rather than staying with the old ways is by far the greatest selection for the nation. Though Lee was a man of great class and noble causes he was forced to surrender to Grant. I suppose that the statement “out with the old and in with the new” is a true one. It would seem that Catton would agree with me when he said: “Lee might have ridden down

Although Grant and Lee had individual beliefs that clashed with one another they also had a few things in common. For example, Catton points out they were both great fighters that displayed a lot of tenacity and fidelity to their separate causes. Grant battled and endured his way down the Mississippi Valley despite his military handicaps and personal discouragements while Lee still had faith at Petersburg after all hope was lost. Also, their fighting qualities were very similar and they both refused to give up as long as they were able to fight. They were both also very daring and resourceful in that they had the ability to move quickly and think faster than the enemy. Most importantly, they were alike in the sense that they had the ability to turn away from war and come to peace once the fighting had ended. As a result, this helped the nation become whole and united again. Their gathering at Appomattox was a great moment in American history.

This source could be of value to historians due to its focus on Lee as a general and not necessarily about Lee in the civil war. The purpose of this book is not to debate the civil war, but to appreciate Lee’s role as the general. Therefore, the source is biased based on the authors clear appreciation of Lee. The source both gives facts about Lee’s life as well as information about Lee part in the civil war.

Grant viewed his role as formulating general policies for the Union armies and leaving tactical decisions to theater commanders. He favored bold attacks and maneuvers, however, while Meade felt more comfortable waging set-piece battles. Their approaches to fighting Lee were incompatible, and friction was inevitable.” (Civil War Series)

Lee's Army was not very prepared for the battle with two of its three Corps having new commanders appointed. Lee did not do much to prepare these new commanders as they were

Despite the mistakes his father and brother made, Lee managed to grow learning the ways of a true Southern gentleman. The departure of his father and two older half-brothers made Lee the man of the house at an early age. His mother, Ann Carter, raised Lee in modest circumstances and helped him to learn standard of conduct. Lee grew up in modest conditions, and though he received the normal education for someone of his class, he had to earn his own living and didn’t live the easy-going plantation life that most members of his family did. Since his mother did not have sufficient cash to send Lee to go to college, he chose instead to enter West Point military and academy. He entered in 1825 at the age of 18. At West Point Lee excelled tremendously. He finished second in his class and didn’t receive one demerit during his four years there (A feat that has yet to be repeated since then). Lee entered Engineer Corps after graduation where he was employed to build and maintain military installations and assist the Federal Government in the enormous work of providing internal improvements in order to settle border disputes on the frontier lands.

In the end of the Civil War. Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant were considered as heroes. The two generals would earn a great reputation and will go down as one of the best generals for the years to come. These two changed, todays American History and how we can know better understand how the war actually came about. We know that these two made life decisions out on the battle field. We know that the both of them gave everything they had for their homeland. Though we know that their choices would represent each other.

By the end of the Civil War, much of the country thought of General Robert E. Lee and General Ulysses S. Grant as personal heroes. Despite the outcome of the war, both the Union and the Confederates looked towards their leader with admiration. Both men were viewed as spectacular fighters, who were smart and strategic during the war. However, despite similarities between the two Civil War generals their differences in background experiences, personality traits, and personal underlying aspirations made them not only opposites of each other but the perfect champion for the people they were chosen to lead.

Sears uses language that most all of us can understand, and clearly it is a very well researched work. He supports his claims in the book with a copious amount of facts and yet still keeps the course of the book moving forward. He draws on a variety of sources including diaries and letters of the participants to produce, arguably, his definitive work. Sears thesis is actually two-fold; one that McClellan missed countless opportunities to defeat Lee and two that McClellan was an incompetent commander who missed several instances to take initiative and win the battle decisively. The young Napoleon, as McClellan was known, often waited an inordinate amount of time before making a movement with his troops. For me, reading the details (with heavy emphasis to the Union story) was captivating. No recon, no communication, egotistical leadership, timidity, and procrastination all combined and helped the Union snatch defeat (or, at the very least, a draw) from the jaws of victory. This battle, like others before and after it, could have really shortened the Civil War.

During the times of Civil War, there were many Commanding Generals that came along. But two stand out amongst all, Ulysses S. Grant of United States of America and Robert E. Lee of Confederate States of America. Both men had formally fought, not along side of each other, in the Mexican-American War. At one point Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant worked together in the Mexican-American War. They both gained a war time experience, Grant as a quartermaster and Lee as an engineer who positioned troops and artillery during their participation in the Scott’s march from the coastal town of Vera Cruz to Mexico City. Both men were vastly different with different styles and background who not only won the affection of their men but respect of

General Lee also understand that the ability to lead not only requires to lead by example and influence his men, it is also by trusting them