human
essay for American efforts in the Mexican-American War were two offensives led by Zachary Taylor and Winfield Scott, both of whom were Whigs and had exceptional determination to achieve the goals. Start with the sentence '#American Efforts in Mexican-American War Essay
The Mexican-American War is a significant event in US history, being the first armed conflict fought mainly in a foreign country, which inadvertently prepared the American side for a civil confrontation'.
assistant
#American Efforts in Mexican-American War Essay
The Mexican-American War is a significant event in US history, being the first armed conflict fought mainly in a foreign country, which inadvertently prepared the American side for a civil confrontation. Many efforts were put into achieving victory, and a number of striking personalities revealed themselves throughout the war’s course. Some of them would become the key players in the country’s politics. This essay will describe the American efforts in the war through two offensives and highlight two contrasting figures among the participants.
Two of the main campaigns were in the north and the center of Mexico. Zachary Taylor led the Northern one, and his achievements included an attack of Monterrey and Saltillo (Guardino 140; 146). The campaign was successful, as the US eventually gained control over the territory, although the forces were exhausted (Guardino 150). The Central campaign started a year later, in 1847, and had Winfield Scott at the forefront (Guardino 144). The American government believed that only invading the very center of Mexico, including the capital, would force the enemy to surrender (Guardino 144). Scott did not betray the expectations placed on him and conquered Mexico City after many grueling battles with diminished forces (Guardino 285). Thus, the described campaigns contributed considerably to the overall US victory.
The war saw the emergence of such figures as Zachary Taylor and Winfield Scott, who happened to lead the previously mentioned campaigns. Their personalities especially shine in contrast, as the former aspired to become a president and did not fulfill his ambition, while the latter eventually gained the post without striving for it. Taylor had unconventional and merciful thinking but did his job as appropriately as possible. Meanwhile, Scott was a model soldier with a reputation of being fussy, but it allowed him to become a war hero (Corbert et al. para 14). What united both was their party affiliation with Whigs and an exceptional determination to achieve the goals. Although Scott assumed that whoever conquered Mexico City would win the presidency, Taylor happened to be the choice (Corbert et al. para 14). Perhaps, the country wanted someone with less conventional thinking, closer to the people, and prepared for new challenges, such as the freshly experienced war.