Which of the following were key components of the plan Scott proposed?

1 send an army of 60,000-80,000 men down the Mississippi to secure enemy fortifications

2 conduct a blockade of Southern ports

3 an immediate attack on Richmond

4 seize and control New Orleans

5 a call for three-year enlistments

6 a call for three-month enlistments

American Civil war happened between the Northern Union states and the Southern Confederate states. Union General Winfield Scot executed a war strategy.

The union army was waiting for a rigorous battle and drew a boundary in a map which divided the rebellion states and the union into two. The map was similar to the shape of an anaconda and hence it is named Anaconda Plan.

It emphasized the southern anchorages to be obstructed and an army of 80,000 men to plunge down the Mississippi river to reach the confederacy. Many army troops in boats rapidly advanced to capture the forts of New Orleans which would divide the Union and the rebellion confederate states.

Options 1 and 2. The following were key components of the plan Scott proposed:

1. Send an army of 60.000 - 80.000 men down the Mississippi to secure enemy fortifications.

2. Conduct a blockade of Southern ports.

Explanation:

At the beginning of the American Civil War, in 1861, Union's General-In-Chief Winfield Scott devised a strategic plan in order to secure an early Union victory over the Confederacy. Scott's plan became known as "The Anaconda Plan" and it had two key components: to send an army of roughly 60.000 to 80.000 men down the Mississippi river in order to secure enemy fortifications, while at the same time the Union would impose a physical blockade of Southern ports. The goal of these movements was to isolate the Confederacy states of any possible trade and exchange of goods and supplies, which in a short period of time would force the Confederate forces to surrender. Although being a well-thought plan, Scott's Anaconda Plan was rejected by the vast majority of the Union leaders, including President Lincoln, who saw the strategy as too passive and complacent.