Ulysses S. Grant: Civil War Hero (1869 - 1877)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 9 вер 2024
  • Ulysses S. Grant is best known as the general of the Union Army that brought an end to the Civil War, by getting General Robert E. Lee to surrender. But he also served as a two-term president, and he wasn't a bad one at that. He has been accused of considerable corruption, but he also did a lot for Reconstruction and to enfranchise African-Americans. Let's learn about what he did, as well as the truth behind his middle initial, which he was not born with!
    Script by Michael Thomas
    Watch the whole American History playlist: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Italian Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Classical Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Modern Physics Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    General Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Organic Chemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Biochemistry Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDave...
    Biology Tutorials: bit.ly/ProfDaveBio
    EMAIL► ProfessorDaveExplains@gmail.com
    PATREON► / professordaveexplains
    Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
    Amazon: amzn.to/2HtNpVH
    Bookshop: bit.ly/39cKADM
    Barnes and Noble: bit.ly/3pUjmrn
    Book Depository: bit.ly/3aOVDlT

КОМЕНТАРІ • 57

  • @teresabarrett8676
    @teresabarrett8676 3 роки тому +6

    I have been fascinated by the Civil War for decades. I started by reading every Bruce Catton book my library had. I went back east in the 90's and the Wilderness Battlefield and Spotsylvania and Manassas but I didn't know about the Wonderful Ranger tours etc so I didn't see it all. I did enjoy Mount Vernon and Montecello. Ten days just isn't enough time. I wish I could see Vicksburg, Shiloh, FORT DONELSON and Antietam and Gettysburg. I think General Grant is in the top five or ten of all time generals. I love to read about his descendents. Hello sir. Love Teresa

  • @RonLWilson
    @RonLWilson 5 років тому +19

    The nation certainly has much to be thankful for Grant. But another person that deserves much credit is Gen Thomas, who saved the day at Chickamauga, turned the tide at Chattanooga by taking Missionary ridge, and decimated the army of Tennessee at the Battle of Nashville. He was a southern that stayed loyal to the US and was rejected by his family for doing so. Grant, Sherman, and Thomas were all instrumental in winning the war, that is winning the battles needed to get Lincoln reelected so that the North did not negotiate an end but saw it through to the end and bring about the end of slavery..

    • @wh3nderson95
      @wh3nderson95 5 років тому +3

      Why not create an essay or video essay elaborating the achieve of this individual?

    • @jlenhumphrey4933
      @jlenhumphrey4933 3 роки тому +1

      Thx. Didn't know this

    • @geographyhistorygeopolitic3851
      @geographyhistorygeopolitic3851 2 роки тому +2

      To be fair, Thomas only took missionary ridge because Bragg's head engineer, (I forgot his name) severely screwed up the defenses of the ridge.

    • @geographyhistorygeopolitic3851
      @geographyhistorygeopolitic3851 2 роки тому +2

      Yeah, but Grant deserves such as much credit as Thomas at Chatanooga, he commanded all forces you know.

  • @shampoofully7923
    @shampoofully7923 Рік тому +2

    He originally sold his memoir for $1000 when he was dead broke. When he told his friend Mark Twain what he did Twain argued with him to get out of the contract. He followed the advice and went on to write the most successful book in American history at that time

  • @lukesmith1003
    @lukesmith1003 2 роки тому +1

    As a person who considers themselves an apprentice in the American Civil War, I finally feel some subject I may hold a candle to Dave.

  • @dennispaulsmith6728
    @dennispaulsmith6728 2 роки тому +7

    Could have mentioned Grant was an Ohioan and he once stopped his troops because they ran out of onions.

  • @endangeredcreator5050
    @endangeredcreator5050 5 років тому +19

    Everyone knows who is civil war hero
    It's *Chris Evans*

  • @ashleighstratmann7783
    @ashleighstratmann7783 Рік тому +1

    Fact: Grant was the mastermind behind the explosions in the mines within Confederate lines creating craters and traps leading to the Battle of the Crater, but instead of going around the crater to attack the union forces went into the crater but found they couldn't get out leading to the Confederates shooting them from above not only massacreing them but winning the battle. Fortunately Grant learn not to make those mistakes again.

  • @frostyclamori7927
    @frostyclamori7927 5 років тому +7

    Can you make a video about ottoman empire?

  • @aiparemorons8908
    @aiparemorons8908 3 роки тому +6

    Alright this general was a Millitary legend.

  • @plur2179
    @plur2179 4 роки тому +8

    Be honest I came hear after watching GRANT on History channel

  • @virgovirgo9367
    @virgovirgo9367 5 років тому +4

    Professor, can we synthesis Rutin C27-H30-O16 synthetically???

  • @Star_Dust696
    @Star_Dust696 Рік тому +1

    All of this dude subs are from his student; all 2.46M students

  • @markgrant3465
    @markgrant3465 4 роки тому +16

    I am his great grand son

  • @kuntalkoley3107
    @kuntalkoley3107 5 років тому +2

    Please make vedios on the Mongol Empire

  • @barrysorento3572
    @barrysorento3572 5 років тому +3

    Im glad the union won, but Lee was the better general.

    • @briansheehan3430
      @briansheehan3430 5 років тому +20

      No, he most certainly was not.
      Lee was a failed local insurrectionist leader who lost the northwestern half of his own home state, and was whipped every time he left Virginia.
      U.S. Grant was a legitimately competent continental General who fought and dominated in every major land theatre, always on the offensive and undefeated in every campaign all the way up to him winning the war.

    • @barrysorento3572
      @barrysorento3572 5 років тому +2

      @@briansheehan34301. Lee stayed loyal to his friends and family he grew up with instead of the federal government. Id do the same today. 2.Compare the casualties of the battles between Lee and Grant. Grant lost far more men (who were better equipped than Lee's). If Lee had commanded the union army the war would have been over years earlier. 3. He didnt get whipped in Maryland. Lee had half the troops, and his plans (lost order 191) we in enemy hands, but still managed the inflict more casualties on his opponent. 5. Plus Grant was one of our worse presidents ever

    • @briansheehan3430
      @briansheehan3430 5 років тому +11

      @@barrysorento3572 Wrong. Lee betrayed the oath he swore to the nation which he had served a consecutive 36 years in the Army for.
      You say he was "loyal to his friends and family," I guess you never heard of his cousin Samuel Lee, who was a Rear Admiral in the US Navy during the insurrection.
      As for casualty rates, the attacker almost always loses more men than the defender.
      But the fact is throughout the entire war General Grant suffered around 137,000 casualties total, while commanding two armies against several rebel armies and in every land theatre.
      Lee, by comparison, lost more men than any General of the war, around 209,000 casualties, while only commanding one army against one Federal army and in only one land theatre, 90% of the time in his own home state which he lost the entire northwestern section of.
      Grant one of the worst Presidents ever? He had to deal with a corrupt administration, but he was the President who signed the first Civil Rights Act into law, pacified the plains from the western Indian marauders, and destroyed the first Ku Klux Klan terrorist insurgency.
      Lee lost well enough in Maryland to give President Lincoln momentum to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, and he most certainly got whipped in Pennsylvania, where 1/3rd of his entire army was annihilated in just three days.
      In order to make a true comparison between the two, you have to compare them in the same roles, and since General Grant was always the attacker, then you have to compare Lee as an attacker.
      General Grant's entire service against the rebels was defined by successful strategically significant offensive campaigns, and he remained undefeated in every campaign he fought.
      Lee fought only two true offensive campaigns, and lost both of them.
      No comparison.
      Therefore, since Lee was a failure on the strategic offensive, he would have been sidelined as the likes of Burnside and McClellan were, and the statement that "he would have won the war years earlier" had he commanded the US Army (no such thing as the "Union Army"), is an ahistorical fallacy.

    • @barrysorento3572
      @barrysorento3572 5 років тому +1

      @@briansheehan3430 If Grant was such a good president, than how come he couldn't even win his parties nomination in 1880? Instead the Republicans nominated a man who wasn't even running for president (Garfield) before nominating Grant. You cant learn history in a government institution (aka school)

    • @briansheehan3430
      @briansheehan3430 5 років тому +7

      @@barrysorento3572 He was backed by the Stalwart Republicans, but didn't receive the majority. However, Grant crushed Seymor in the 1868 election, and crushed Greeley in the 1872 election.
      If he was a poor President, why did he served two terms after decisively winning both elections?
      Also, I never said he was a great President, but he was a good one and underrated. He destroyed the Ku Klux Klan, signed the first Civil Rights Act ever, and conquered the Indian marauders in the western plains.
      He was a decent President, but he is better remembered as the greatest General in American history, and the only one to ever capture three enemy armies.

  • @UpNxtMedia
    @UpNxtMedia 4 роки тому

    We need his methods to eliminate these nationalist

  • @Fundaykidzz
    @Fundaykidzz Рік тому

    Great video .. however not a mention of his helping implement the Dept of justice primarily to go after the klan