Battle Analysis for Bull Run

The battle itself was fought on July 21st, 1861, though the Union Army began executing its movements to Virginia almost a week prior. The Civil War divided the states in simple terms of a Union north and a Confederate south, with a couple undecided states in the middle. The President of the Union was Abraham Lincoln and the Confederate President was Jefferson Davis. Months prior to Bull Run President Lincoln had appointed Brigadier General Irwin McDowell to command the Army of Northeastern Virginia. McDowell was a Mexican-American War veteran and West Point graduate. The commander of the Confederate Army of the Potomac was Brigadier General P. G. T. Beauregard, who was dubbed â€Å"The Hero of Sumter. † He was also commended for valor in the Mexican-American war and like McDowell, a graduate of West Point. The two were classmates at one point. Only months after the start of the war at Fort Sumter, the Northern public pressed to march and capture the Confederate capital of Richmond, Virginia, which could bring an early end to the war. Against his better judgment, BG McDowell yielded to the political pressure and on July 16, 1861, the general departed Washington with the largest field army yet gathered on the North American continent. The Confederates found themselves at a disadvantage in mass initially, and BG McDowell wanted to keep that advantage. He ordered Union MG Robert Pattersons Army to engage BG Joseph Johnstons Army in the Shenandoah Valley, about 50 miles northwest of Manassas. The Union objective was to overwhelm the Confederate forces with a distraction flank attack to the right and a swift surprise flank to the left. With the reinforcements choked off, BG McDowell’s ambitious plan would put his Army in the Confederate capital by the end of the day. The Confederates, however, had been planning to attack the Union left, and if the attack had gone as planned it might have led to a clockwise rotation of the forces. Hundreds of excited spectators in horse-drawn carriages flocked from Washington D. C. to Manassas to watch what they thought to be a speedy Union Army defeat the Confederacy. Both the spectators and the Union Army would leave Bull Run in a hectic retreat back to Washington D. C. Each force had two Armies, one to the east and one to the west. For the Union, BG McDowell commanded the 36,000 Army of Northeastern Virginia Union troops in the east. MG Patterson commanded the 18,000 troops in the west. Within BG McDowell’s Army of five divisions there were several elements that consisted of: The 11th, 13th, 14th, 38th, and 69th New York, the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Maine, the 1st Minnesota, the 5th and 11th Massachusetts, the 1st Michigan, the 1st Vermont, the 2nd Wisconsin, with Griffin and Ricketts Artillery Brigades. BG Beauregard’s Confederate Army of the Potomac consisted of 21,000 troops in the east. BG Johnston’s four Brigades of 12,800 troops were in the Shenandoah Valley to the west and were critical reinforcements. BG Beauregard’s force of six Brigades consisted of: The 2nd, 4th, 5th, 8th, 18th, 27th, 33rd, and 49th Virginia, the Hampton Legion, the 6th North Carolina, the 7th Georgia, the 4th Alabama, Stuart’s Calvary, Elzey Regiment, Early Regiment, and the 7th and 8th South Carolina. The weapon technology used was fairly similar for both sides. Both the Union and Confederate Army relied on simple single-shot Pattern 1853 Enfield Muskets for their infantrymen. The revolvers used by the Union were mainly the new Colt Army Model 1860, and the Confederates preferred the older Colt 1851 Navy Revolver. A variety of bayonets were also an integral part of the infantrymans gear. Typically, these were socket or ring bayonets, intended to be attached to the end of the musket or rifle, and not wielded separately like a knife. The Confederate Calvary would also employ a Sabre, which was a long, lightweight single-edged slashing sword. Field Artillery also played an important role for both sides. The Union used 10-30 pound Parrott Rifles, 12 pound Napoleon smoothbores, 12 pound Howitzers, and 13 pound James Rifles. The Confederates had 6 pound guns, 6 pound rifles, 12 pound Howitzer, 10 pound Parrott Rifles, and 6 pound Cadet Guns. Both Generals had planned offensives. Much of the intelligence was concentrated on reporting the mass of the opposing forces rather than each other’s strategy. BG McDowell wanted a concentrated attack on the Confederate left flank, while BG Beauregard had planned to strike the Union left flank. From Washington D. C. the Union troops had marched southwest into Virginia, and it was at Centreville on July 20th, that BG McDowell decided to rest his weary, overheated troops and concentrate his forces. The same day, BG Johnston’s troops to the west in the Shenandoah Valley received word of the Union advances and they immediate slipped away to reinforce BG Beauregard. He never met MG Patterson’s forces. An hour after BG Johnston’s departure, MG Patterson wired BG McDowell saying he had managed to keep BG Johnston’s Army in the Shenandoah. Shortly after entering Centreville on the 20th, BG Tyler would disobey his orders and send his troops to attack the Confederate front along Bull Run. The attack was easily repulsed. With the Confederate troops dug in across the bank of Bull Run, and the majority of BG Beauregard’s force were behind them. The Union troops marched from Centreville at 0230 on July 21st. BG Tyler was ordered to initiate a diversion to the northwest at Stony Bridge at 0600. The diversion was quickly crushed by COL Evan’s Confederate forces and the feign fails. At 0830 the bayonets of McDowell’s flanking troops were spotted by one of COL Evan’s soldiers and he was warned of the Union plan to flank him. BG McDowell’s troops continued on to the left down bad roads, which would destroy his timeframe to ford Bull Run at Sudley Springs. COL Heinzelman’s Union division also missed the trail at Poplar Ford, and they were forced to stack up behind COL Hunter’s division also fording at Sudley Springs, further downstream. They arrived there at 0930, hours behind schedule.

London striptease Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

London striptease - Essay Example In London, for example, the striptease industry is currently booming and many people are flocking into related institutions e.g. the Jo King’s School of Striptease. Many of the women who striptease feel that it empowers them and that it is an adequate way to improve their image. Sexualisation has also hit the media with sexual exposure becoming vital for magazines, movies, music and advertisements to achieve financial success. However, does embracing sexualisation in the society really liberate those involved, especially women, or does it imprison their potential and possibilities? Does sexualisation really empower? It all started with strippers going live on TV to give lessons on lap dancing men to orgasm. Then celebrities like Britney Spears started becoming increasingly popular in relation to their nudity, so much, so that discussions about some of their private parts became major subjects in entertainment gossip. Charlie’s Angels, the movie, was then introduced in 2 001, enhancing the interest of people in ‘sexy’ crime fighting. It involved stars who dressed in soft porn like fashion, which was apparently meant to inspire empowerment and independence in women. Its sequel involved even more sexualisation as the stars were required to perform many stripteases while undertaking their missions. This did not end with the TVs and the radios as anyone walking down the streets in any Western world community would come across teens, young women, and some occasional wild fifty-year –olds wearing shorts cut so low and so tight that they exposed the butt cleavage. These shorts would then be paired with miniature tops, which showed the whole sections of breasts above the nipples and the pierced navels alike. In some cases, as if the overall message radiated from such clothing was not obvious enough, the pieces of clothing would be imprinted with the playboy bunny or a nude porn star’s picture or drawing. As if things were not beco ming weird, enough, many women started going to strip clubs (with female strippers) in their leisure time. They explained that it felt liberating and rebellious to watch their fellow women on the poles, toss some notes at them or shove them in their underwear and occasionally strip down and join them. Many young women became openly and shamelessly obsessed with porn stars, a hobby previously thought to be exclusively for teenage boys. As a result, girls started purchasing merchandise like the one g-strings and vibrators commonly associated with their favorite porn stars (Levy 2010: 32). Nowadays, nudity has become such a common part of life. So much so that exposing a woman’s breasts in public is not considered a taboo, most so in the Western world. In fact, such a scenario is given surprisingly little attention as witnessed in many of the streets. There have been numerous reports of female celebrities taking their morning jogs on the streets of Hollywood with nothing but the ir underwear on, during rush hour traffic. According to the reports, very few people even pay any significance to them, leave alone staring, whistling or commenting inappropriately. Such a scenario can be witnessed in many of America’s beaches, which have fully embraced nudity and anyone seen with even a drab of underwear is considered out of place. Also contributing to this notion is the fashion industry. Models are strolling down the runway with tops that reveal everything under them as they apparently believe that it does not

Reflective Discussion Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Reflective Discussion - Essay Example The fact that I could not perform well and the falling expectations that I had from myself made me lose interest in my studies. When I started this independent learning module, I was both a bit reluctant and sceptical. This is because the major way that I learnt was through the lectures given by teachers. I had not been in the habit of learning on my own unless it was to prepare for a test or to do an assignment. Independent learning did not seem to be of any use to me, since I had developed the attitude that when left on my own, I would give other things priority over my learning and education. However the full impact of the module was yet to unfold. Starting the module with scepticism, I saw my attitude and perception towards self-directed learning change over the course of the module. The experience of pursuing information on my own and learning for the sake of learning, without having a supervisor directing me to study taught me a number of things. The experience also brought my strengths and weaknesses to surface. Initially, independent learning was an arduous task for me. I knew that I had to study and it made me feel guilty when I used to waste time in the first few days of the module. However, it took me a class on self-motivation to realize where my problem lay. The class made me aware of my inaptitude to focus on goal-oriented learning. I realized that I lacked the intrinsic drive to study on my own and regulate my own learning. This encouraged me to take a series of steps to solve the problem. I asked my peers who performed well about how they study and balance their study and social life. I read literature on self-motivation. Moreover, I started implementing the philosophy of kaizen into my daily routine. Instead of delaying my assignments till the last day, I started work on them timely. I set short-term goals for myself, rewarding myself when I achieved them. Thus I gradually brought about little changes in my daily routine. These experiences made me appreciate my ability to identify the problem at hand and take concrete measures to counter it. I realized that where there is a will, there is a way. If a person is motivated and dedicated towards the achievement of his/her goals, he is most likely going to achieve them no matter how many challenges come in the way. However one weakness that independent learning highlighted was my tendency to become isolated. Effective independent learning requires that the individual engages in discussions with his/her teacher (CILL 2009). However I felt that I became very isolated with my peers and teachers towards the latter half o f the module. I believe that interaction with the tutor is necessary for not only clearing the misconceptions regarding the course work and understanding any concepts that the student does not comprehend, but also for providing guidance to the student. I feel that I did not have adequate interaction with my tutors and peers. There were some things in the course work that I did not get. Initially I remember that I did approach teachers or a peer for help. However later in the module, as I became involved in my own work, my interaction with my peers and teachers decreased so much so that I felt hesitant when it came to approaching them for help. This hesitance did have its consequences. I spent a longer period of time understanding a concept on my own as compared to the time I would have spent if I had received directive from an external source. Moreover