Battle of Cold Harbor - Civil War

Battle of Cold Harbor - Civil War Battle of Cold Harbor - Conflict Dates: The Battle of Cold Harbor was fought May 31-June 12, 1864, and was part of the American Civil War (1861-1865). Armies Commanders: Union Lieutenant General Ulysses S. GrantMajor General George G. Meade108,000 men Confederate General Robert E. Lee62,000 men Battle of Cold Harbor - Background: Pressing on with his Overland Campaign after confrontations at the Wilderness, Spotsylvania Court House, and North Anna, Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant again moved around Confederate General Robert E. Lees right in an effort to capture Richmond. Crossing the Pamunkey River, Grants men fought skirmishes at Haws Shop, Totopotomoy Creek, and Old Church. Pushing his cavalry forward towards the crossroads at Old Cold Harbor, Grant also ordered Major General William Baldy Smiths XVIII Corps to move from Bermuda Hundred to join the main army. Recently reinforced, Lee anticipated Grants designs on Old Cold Harbor and dispatched cavalry under Brigadier Generals Matthew Butler and Fitzhugh Lee to the scene. Arriving they encountered elements of Major General Philip H. Sheridans cavalry corps. As the two forces skirmished on May 31, Lee sent Major General Robert Hokes division as well as Major General Richard Andersons First Corps to Old Cold Harbor. Around 4:00 PM, Union cavalry under Brigadier General Alfred Torbert and David Gregg succeeded in driving the Confederates from the crossroads. Battle of Cold Harbor - Early Fighting: As the Confederate infantry began arrive late in the day, Sheridan, concerned about his advanced position, withdrew back towards Old Church. Wishing to exploit the advantage gained at Old Cold Harbor, Grant ordered Major General Horatio Wrights VI Corps to the area from Totopotomoy Creek and ordered Sheridan to hold the crossroads at all costs. Moving back to Old Cold Harbor around 1:00 AM on June 1, Sheridans horsemen were able to reoccupy their old position as the Confederates had failed to notice their early withdrawal. In an effort to re-take the crossroads, Lee ordered Anderson and Hoke to attack the Union lines early on June 1. Anderson failed to relay this order to Hoke and the resulting attack consisted only of First Corps troops. Moving forward, troops from Kershaws Brigade led the assault and were met with savage fire from Brigadier General Wesley Merritts entrenched cavalry. Using seven-shot Spencer carbines, Merritts men quickly beat back the Confederates. Around 9:00 AM, the lead elements of Wrights corps began arriving on the field and moved into the cavalrys lines. Battle of Cold Harbor - Union Movements: Though Grant had wished IV Corps to attack immediately, it was exhausted from marching most of the night and Wright elected to delay until Smiths men arrived. Reaching Old Cold Harbor in early afternoon, XVIII Corps began entrenching on Wrights right as the cavalry retired east. Around 6:30 PM, with minimal scouting of the Confederate lines, both corps moved to the attack. Storming forward over unfamiliar ground they were met by heavy fire from Anderson and Hokes men. Though a gap in the Confederate line was found, it was quickly closed by Anderson and the Union troops were forced to retire to their lines. While the assault had failed, Grants chief subordinate, Major General George G. Meade, commander of the Army of the Potomac, believed an attack the next day could be successful if enough force was brought against the Confederate line. To achieve this, Major General Winfield S. Hancocks II Corps was shifted from Totopotomoy and placed on Wrights left. Once Hancock was in position, Meade intended to move forward with three corps before Lee could prepare substancial defenses. Arriving early on June 2, II Corp was tired from their march and Grant agreed to delay the attack until 5:00 PM to allow them to rest. Battle of Cold Harobr - Regrettable Assaults: The assault was again delayed that afternoon until 4:30 AM on June 3. In planning for the attack, both Grant and Meade failed to issue specific instructions for the assaults target and trusted their corps commanders to reconnoiter the ground on their own. Though unhappy at the lack of direction from above, the Union corps commanders failed to take the initiative by scouting their lines of advance. For those in the ranks who had survived frontal assaults at Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania, a degree of fatalism took hold and many pinned paper containing their name to their uniforms to aid in identifying their body. While Union forces delayed on June 2, Lees engineers and troops were busy constructing an elaborate system of fortifications containing pre-ranged artillery, converging fields of fire, and various obstacles. To support the assault, Major General Ambrose Burnsides IX Corps and Major General Gouverneur K. Warrens V Corps were formed at the north end of the field with orders to attack Lieutenant General Jubal Earlys corps on Lees left. Moving forward through the early morning fog, XVIII, VI, and II Corps quickly encountered heavy fire from the Confederate lines. Attacking, Smiths men were channeled into two ravines where they were cut down in large numbers halting their advance. In the center, Wrights men, still bloodied from June 1, were quickly pinned down and made little effort to renew the attack. The only success came on Hancocks front where troops from Major General Francis Barlows division succeeded in breaking through the Confederate lines. Recognizing the danger, the breach was quickly sealed by the Confederates who then proceeded to throw back the Union attackers. In the north, Burnside launched a sizable attack on Early, but halted to regroup after mistakenly thinking he had shattered the enemy lines. As the assault was failing, Grant and Meade pressed their commanders to push forward with little success. By 12:30 PM, Grant conceded that the assault had failed and Union troops began digging in until they could withdraw under the cover of darkness. Battle of Cold Harbor - Aftermath: In the fighting, Grants army had sustained 1,844 killed, 9,077 wounded, and 1,816 captured/missing. For Lee, the losses were a relatively light 83 killed, 3,380 wounded, and 1,132 captured/missing. Lees final major victory, Cold Harbor led to an increase in anti-war sentiment in the North and criticisms of Grants leadership. With the failure of the assault, Grant remained in place at Cold Harbor until June 12 when he moved the army away and succeeded in crossing the James River. Of the battle, Grant stated in his memoirs: I have always regretted that the last assault at Cold Harbor was ever made. I might say the same thing of the assault of the 22d of May, 1863, at Vicksburg. At Cold Harbor no advantage whatever was gained to compensate for the heavy loss we sustained.

Critical Analysis on Summer Reading essays

Critical Analysis on Summer Reading essays Books have been around for over a millennium, while the motion picture industry is no more than a century old. Despite this age difference, many of the qualities that make a book deep and entertaining are no different than what makes those two hours at your local cinema so immersive. Occasionally, a book will even take the form of a movie or visa-verse. Many times, however, a book that would seem rather irrelevant to a movie of a completely different nature may have more in common than one would assume. A great example of this literary connection is the similarity between the novel In the Time of the Butterflies by Julia Alvarez and the movie Jakob the Liar starring Robin Williams. Three themes that are portrayed throughout both stories are hope, the utilization of propaganda, and using corruption to gain power. Propaganda plays a big role in both stories. For example, in Jakob the Liar, a Russian propaganda radio broadcast tells of German defeat, and Jakob spreads the news around the ghetto. Meanwhile, the Nazi regime is using propaganda to convince the German people that they are in control of the war effort. Similarly, an example of the use of propaganda in In the Time of the Butterflies is the twisted and guiltless lies about General Raphael Trujillo. He was viewed as a saint by all those who were ignorant of his ruthless regime. Those who were educated and did speak up did so at the cost of their lives. Through propaganda, Trujillo proclaims himself as more than just a president but a divine King. When she is still fairly young, Minerva Mirabal even admits, At home, Trujillo hung on the wall by the picture of Our Lord Jesus with a whole flock of the cutest lambs (Alvarez 17). Although no evil man like Trujillo should ever be viewed as equal to a God, at least this type of propaganda i s not physically harmful. The corruption and dishonesty needed to reach that point, however, is much more treacherous. ...

Schools of Strategy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3250 words

Schools of Strategy - Essay Example Also this school makes chief executive officer as the main formulator of the strategy. The planning school of strategy identifies strategy making as a formal process. It calls for a mechanical and systematic process of strategy formulation with no or little creativity. The cognitive school sees strategy making as a mental process and takes input from different concepts of psychology. This school is largely conceptual in nature. The learning school stresses on learning from past experience and therefore sees strategy making as an emergent process. The power school of strategy argues that negotiating between different power holders within the organization is an important part of strategy formulation. The environmental school sees strategy making as a reactive process that is dependent on the external environment. The cultural school of strategy calls for group work in formulation of strategy. The configuration school of strategy sees strategy making as a process of transformation. The different schools of strategy can be grouped into three larger groups (Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, & Lampel, 2002). First group is prescriptive in nature and consist of design, planning, and positioning school. This group tells how a strategy should ideally be made. Second group tells how the strategy is made and compromises of entrepreneurial, cognitive, learning, power, cultural, and environmental schools. The last group consists of the configuration school that is both prescriptive and descriptive in nature. Design School of Strategy The design school of strategy argues in favor of consciously controlled thought when it comes to strategy making in order to establish a fit between external opportunities and internal competence (Mintzberg, 2006).... This paper stresses that the position school also puts the job of strategy formulation in the hands of expert. Both the schools do not talk about team work and sharing of information when it comes to development of strategy. Centralized approach in strategy making was the mindset for a long time in management. Knowledge sharing was not considered vital until modern modes of communication were developed. This is why both the positioning school and design school view strategy making coming from a centralized source. Design school assumes that environment is stable and predictable, and there is no uncertainty while the positioning school accepts that market place might change due to competitors and change in demand. But both the schools focus on the economic environment. This report makes a conclusion that the design school and the positioning school are two of the schools of strategy presented in the book. The design school became popular in later part of 1950s and focuses on creative strategy formulation by the leader with the aim of creating a fit between the outside environment and the competence of the firm. The positioning school was founded by Michael Porter and it focuses on strategy formulation as an analytical process. This school argues that finding the right industry for the firm is essential and offer model for choosing an industry. Then this school suggests that firm positions itself in the industry and then chooses a strategy relative to the position of the firm.