1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
pshichka [43]
4 years ago
5

Which best compares the attitudes of Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis about Fort Sumter? Lincoln was eager to fight at Fort S

umter, while Davis did not want armed conflict. Davis wanted to avoid fighting at Fort Sumter, while Lincoln knew that fighting was inevitable. Davis planned to begin and end the war at Fort Sumter, while Lincoln thought the battle was the first of many. Lincoln did not want armed conflict at Fort Sumter, but Davis acted quickly to cripple Union forces.
History
1 answer:
shutvik [7]4 years ago
4 0

The correct answer is "Lincoln did not want armed conflict at Fort Sumter, but Davis acted quickly to cripple Union forces".

Lincoln was certainly adamant about avoiding military confrontation over the Fort. <u>His aims were put in preserving the Union</u>, <u>which proved to be extremely hard as the conflicts were started by the sates that had separated or seceded</u>, as well as the first attacks on Fort Sumter.

Davis cared a lot less about preservation and just tried to find <u>the quickest and most effective way to mitigate the conflict</u>. He believed crippling the Union's army would make them leave as they would not have enough time to respond and they'd be at a great disadvantage.


Hope this helps!

You might be interested in
In which way did the goals for soviet intervention in Europe differ from those of the U.S.?
vichka [17]

Answer:

jvefkvfjkvfjkdvdkvvjdjkdbfvfjk

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
What was the goal of hitler's final solution
AURORKA [14]

Answer:

it c

Explanation:

it ceiureuueheheheehhwhwhwhwhw

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Did the British government act wisely in dealing with the colonies
denpristay [2]
This is an opinion based question. The way to handle this is too look at the things they did such as the passing of the tea and stamp acts. Then consider if it was fair.
Personally I don’t think it was fair because the colonists didn’t have representation in England in parliament.
3 0
3 years ago
When did hitler become chancellor and president?
Deffense [45]
Adolf Hitler was appointed Reich Chancellor by President Hindenburg on <span>30 January 1933</span>
5 0
4 years ago
What was the significance of the Emancipation Proclamation to the war and to the North and South?
Wittaler [7]

Answer:

From the first days of the Civil War, slaves had acted to secure their own liberty. The Emancipation Proclamation confirmed their insistence that the war for the Union must become a war for freedom.

Explanation:

It added moral force to the Union cause and strengthened the Union both militarily and politically.

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • what do we call it when a person or nation can produce a good using fewer resources than other person or nation
    5·2 answers
  • Which areas where settled by the french in America?
    7·1 answer
  • I need answers....................???????
    6·1 answer
  • Which of the following is NOT an example of a privilege?
    12·2 answers
  • How did signification impact east Asia ?​
    14·1 answer
  • What is the first Presidential power listed in Article II of the Constitution?​
    9·1 answer
  • Who tryna help me out with history ?I really need help I have back up assignments And it’s hard
    12·1 answer
  • Illuminated manuscripts have historically been created and used by which two religious faiths?
    11·1 answer
  • What sections of the great wall is referred to as the interior wall?
    13·1 answer
  • After World War II, Germany was divided into east and west Germany through what city?
    10·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!