Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

phillipgoodrich t1_j18advm wrote

Reply to comment by DadTaunWesHere in Simple/Short/Silly History Questions Saturday! by AutoModerator

Indeed, McClellan had at least implied, if not openly asserted, that were he elected POTUS in 1864, he would pursue an armistice with the CSA (thus recognizing their legitimacy, and the separation of the CSA from the USA!). Lincoln certainly took this seriously, which would explain his encouragement of Sherman's destruction of Georgia. Lincoln felt he needed a rapid improvement in the prosecution of the war, with at least the appearance of inevitable CSA capitulation.

1

phillipgoodrich t1_j18b7j6 wrote

Apropos nothing, it is interesting from a general historical standpoint to look at the consequences of "regime change" to the success of any nation's prosecution of a war. Certainly in the U.S., regime change has almost invariably culminated in a death knell for any war effort (FDR doesn't really count, as his VP succeeded to the POTUS, and the US army was within 50 miles of Berlin when FDR suffered his fatal stroke). But, e.g., Johnson to Nixon, and then Bush to Obama, produced a nightmarish drag on war efforts.

1