1. Describe the different approaches to waging war of Grant and McClellan, utilizing Grant's campaign in the West and McClellan's maneuvers in Virginia.

During the American Civil War, leadership within the Union’s army was constantly an issue. Within the Union, various generals were found at times to be at odds with the political leaders in Washington. This was especially evident in the relationship between General George McClellan and President Lincoln. This tension was the result of McClellan’s approach to waging war. By examining the differing approaches to waging war of U.S. Grant and George B. McClellan one can gain a better appreciation for the decision making that was necessary by leaders like Lincoln, in selecting military generals who could effectively wage war to defeat the Confederacy.
By all accounts, George B. McClellan had the makings of a great general. Graduating second in his class at West Point in 1842, he served under General Winfield Scott in the Mexican War. (McPherson, 1988, p. 4) He also served with distinction early in the war by assuring that Kentucky and the region that would become West Virginia, remained out of Confederate control. (McPherson, 1988, pp. 299-301) After the Union loss at the First Battle of Bull Run, McClellan was named commander of the Army of the Potomac, and by November 1861, he was the General-in-Chief of all Federal forces. (McPherson, 1988, pp. 348-350)
McClellan’s approach to waging war was one of the cautious tactician. He was quite adept at assembling forces and the supply lines necessary to sustain those forces. After being named the commander of the Army of the Potomac, McClellan set to work to prepare his troops, still stinging from defeat at Manassas, into a cohesive fighting unit, capable of taking the battle to the Confederacy. It was during this time of preparation, McClellan endeared himself