(07-04-2015 09:43 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  

(07-04-2015 12:47 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 03:45 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-02-2015 01:51 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(07-01-2015 11:18 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Lincoln had no choice at the time but to use force to keep the union intact because the north would have either starved or went bankrupt because they were dependent upon the slave labor in the plantations to feed and provide the north with the resources that supplied the northern factories. He knew that the south would eventually build it's industrial base to fill the void, but the north couldn't cheaply replace what they took from the south. We already know that the European markets were more lucrative for the resources produced in the south.....that's why South Carolina almost seceded in the late 1820's because Europe paid better than the yankees and the yankees pushed through the "Tariff of Abominations".

So slavery had nothing to do with it? LMFAO

Oh those revisionist southerners.

Causes of the War
1. Inability of compromise (most related to slavery)
2. States' Rights vs Federal Authority (related to slavery)
3. Economic Differences (slave labor / free labor)
4. Conflicts over Slavery

War aims of the North
1. Preserve the Union
2. Control the Mississippi
3. Blockade all ports (Anaconda Plan)
4. Capture Confederate capital (Richmond)
5. Prevent recognition by European nations
Additional aims late in the war
6. End slavery
7. Destroy Confederate armies
8. Lay waste to the land (total war)

War aims of the South
1. Maintain independence
2. Didn’t need to conquer north
3. Didn’t need to win (just not lose)
4. gain quick victory if possible
5. wear down Union army (if # 4 didn’t work)
6. break the blockade
7. get support from the British or French

"Lay waste to the land" was not a Union goal. It was the sole brainchild of General Sherman, who went through Georgia and South Carolina and destroyed everything in his path. He wanted to make war so horrible that the South would never try it again.

That's his explanation.

Yep, rape , murder and destruction of personal property of civilians.
Pretty cool dude Sherman was. !!

Just because Sherman was the one that implemented to it doesn't mean it wasn't a Union goal.

Sherman was a beast.

(07-04-2015 10:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Sherman was a beast.

There is an old joke that goes like this: A child, the product of a father from Ohio and mother from Georgia was reviewing for her social studies test one evening. She asked them, "Who was William T. Sherman"? Before her father could explain that he was key Union general in the Union army, his wife quickly responded, "he was an arsonist".

Sherman was a complex man. I don't know if beast really describes him adequately. It can be argued that he wasn't really the monster he has be labelled. It is hard to be objective when your ancestors were burned out of their home, but the truth is that a lot of people's ancestors were no where near Sherman's army during the total war march. Gen. Joseph E Johnston who tried to stop him in NC considered him a friend after the war. Sherman was really right about one thing. War is hell.

(07-04-2015 02:27 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-04-2015 10:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Sherman was a beast.

There is an old joke that goes like this: A child, the product of a father from Ohio and mother from Georgia was reviewing for her social studies test one evening. She asked them, "Who was William T. Sherman"? Before her father could explain that he was key Union general in the Union army, his wife quickly responded, "he was an arsonist".

Sherman was a complex man. I don't know if beast really describes him adequately. It can be argued that he wasn't really the monster he has be labelled. It is hard to be objective when your ancestors were burned out of their home, but the truth is that a lot of people's ancestors were no where near Sherman's army during the total war march. Gen. Joseph E Johnston who tried to stop him in NC considered him a friend after the war. Sherman was really right about one thing. War is hell.

Georgia fed the rebel armies. He destroyed that ability. It wasn't destruction for destruction's sake. It was to destroy the ability to support armies and to break the Southern will.

(07-04-2015 03:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-04-2015 02:27 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(07-04-2015 10:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Sherman was a beast.

There is an old joke that goes like this: A child, the product of a father from Ohio and mother from Georgia was reviewing for her social studies test one evening. She asked them, "Who was William T. Sherman"? Before her father could explain that he was key Union general in the Union army, his wife quickly responded, "he was an arsonist".

Sherman was a complex man. I don't know if beast really describes him adequately. It can be argued that he wasn't really the monster he has be labelled. It is hard to be objective when your ancestors were burned out of their home, but the truth is that a lot of people's ancestors were no where near Sherman's army during the total war march. Gen. Joseph E Johnston who tried to stop him in NC considered him a friend after the war. Sherman was really right about one thing. War is hell.

Georgia fed the rebel armies. He destroyed that ability. It wasn't destruction for destruction's sake. It was to destroy the ability to support armies and to break the Southern will.

Definition of Total War- see bolded above

Terrorist and rapist that is what he was.

Quite a contrast to when the Army of Northern Virginia went into Northern States.

I understand what Sherman was doing and why he did it. I'm just saying it takes a hard man to shut off his feelings and do what he did.