Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
Surely you jest, or my apologies if you were posting to Rob.
Dawna
---------
Dawna,
No, ma'am, I'm not jesting. Wars are terrible things that lead to all sorts of destruction, both on and off the battlefield. There is no such thing as a war that did not hurt innocent people grievously. Those who start the war are the ones who are responsible for its results. It was the confederates who started this war, and as both sides engaged in destruction off the battlefield singling out the destruction that happened in southern states strikes me the same as the Menendez Brothers pleading for mercy because they were orphans. [If anyone doesn't remember this case, these two were convicted of murdering their parents]
Those who start the war are the ones who are responsible for its results. It was the confederates who started this war, and as both sides engaged in destruction off the battlefield singling out the destruction that happened in southern states strikes me the same as the Menendez Brothers pleading for mercy because they were orphans. [If anyone doesn't remember this case, these two were convicted of murdering their parents]Cash
Cash:
Regardless of who you or I think started the war, the death and destruction directed at innocent civilians in the South was to say the least barbaric and undeserving. Could you please show me anything that remotely compares to the death and devastation that was inflicted upon people in the Shenandoah Valley, or the innocent civilians of South Carolina and Georgia?
I remember the Menendez brothers trial quite well - it rates famously with O.J. and the Bobbits. As I recall, these two men murdered their unsuspecting parents in cold blood and their illuminous defense team spun together a yarn in keeping with almost any chapter of Grimm's Fairy Tales. The defense lawyers agreed that the Menendez brothers 'shouldn't have killed their parents,' but it was 'justifiable' and therefore the 'boys' were not responsible for their actions. This reversal in the role of perpetrator/victim mentality sought to relieve the Menendez brothers of any sense of culpability, and instead placed the dead parents on trial. And this is what you are asking me to believe of the South - that they deserved what they got and that it was the North who had been 'victimized.'
The notion that innocent civilians were deserving of such avengement is no different than catering to bullies on a school playground, and in attempting to morally airbrush the brutal actions of Sherman and Sheridan during their campaigns in the South, you are unfettering them from all laudable responsibility, and any sense of culpability. Was the introduction of the Leiber Code of Conduct in 1863 little more than Lincoln propoganda? The Leiber Code clearly states that innocent civilians are not to be targeted and yet President Lincoln ignored all such restrictions. Not surprising then that the author of the Leiber Code was arrested several times in his 'homeland' for subversive activites.
If I understand you correctly Cash, the North is blameless and shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, since they were merely ferreting out apropos retaliation. Perhaps it's time for me to give up my road trips with Paris and Nicole, as I fear for a moment I suspected that Sherman and Sheridan might have raised up an army that was driven by revenge and vigilantism.
What possible moral lesson and benefit came from killing innocent people and destroying their homeland? Do you think these decades of hatred and bitterness have been worth it?
But nonetheless, whether the South deserved what they got is really not the point. Sheridan and Sherman's atrocities against defenseless civilians were not justifiable, because a reason is never an excuse.
Regardless of who you or I think started the war, the death and destruction directed at innocent civilians in the South was to say the least barbaric and undeserving. Could you please show me anything that remotely compares to the death and devastation that was inflicted upon people in the Shenandoah Valley, or the innocent civilians of South Carolina and Georgia?
I'm afraid you are way overstating what happened to civilians, Dawna. There was destruction of property, but civilians were not murdered. In fact, Georgia civilians at the time thought Wheeler's cavalry was guilty of more depredations than Sherman's men.
What overshadows that is the kidnapping of black citizens off the streets in Pennsylvania and taking them south in chains to be sold into slavery. What overshadows that is the cold-blooded murder of black soldiers who had surrendered and were unarmed at Fort Pillow, Poison Springs, and Olustee. And let's not forget the diabolical plot to attempt to spread smallpox among Union civilians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawna
I remember the Menendez brothers trial quite well - it rates famously with O.J. and the Bobbits. As I recall, these two men murdered their unsuspecting parents in cold blood and their illuminous defense team spun together a yarn in keeping with almost any chapter of Grimm's Fairy Tales. The defense lawyers agreed that the Menendez brothers 'shouldn't have killed their parents,' but it was 'justifiable' and therefore the 'boys' were not responsible for their actions. This reversal in the role of perpetrator/victim mentality sought to relieve the Menendez brothers of any sense of culpability, and instead placed the dead parents on trial. And this is what you are asking me to believe of the South - that they deserved what they got and that it was the North who had been 'victimized.'
No, Ma'am. I'm asking that the blame be put squarely on the shoulders of the people who decided to start the war--Jefferson Davis and his cabinet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawna
The notion that innocent civilians were deserving of such avengement is no different than catering to bullies on a school playground, and in attempting to morally airbrush the brutal actions of Sherman and Sheridan during their campaigns in the South, you are unfettering them from all laudable responsibility, and any sense of culpability.
I didn't say civilians deserved anything, Dawna. I said that wars are terrible things, and innocents are always hurt in wars. But to claim the confederacy itself was the victim is akin to the Menendez brothers pleading for mercy on the basis that they were orphans. The confederacy started the war, so whatever happened to civilians in either section happened because of what the confederacy did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawna
Was the introduction of the Leiber Code of Conduct in 1863 little more than Lincoln propoganda? The Leiber Code clearly states that innocent civilians are not to be targeted and yet President Lincoln ignored all such restrictions.
I'm afraid in your haste to cast President Lincoln as the Devil incarnate you have gone beyond what the historical record will sustain. President Lincoln did not ignore any restrictions, and neither did Generals Sherman and Sheridan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawna
If I understand you correctly Cash, the North is blameless and shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, since they were merely ferreting out apropos retaliation. Perhaps it's time for me to give up my road trips with Paris and Nicole, as I fear for a moment I suspected that Sherman and Sheridan might have raised up an army that was driven by revenge and vigilantism.
As I said, wars are terrible things, and it is inevitable that innocent civilians will be hurt. There is nothing that can be done to prevent it. No matter how much one tries to limit the damage to civilians, they will still be hurt. That is one reason why one must take very seriously the decision to go to war. The ultimate blame for what happened to southern states in the Civil War belongs with those who made the decision to start the war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawna
What possible moral lesson and benefit came from killing innocent people and destroying their homeland? Do you think these decades of hatred and bitterness have been worth it?
Having lived in the United States for a good number of years, and having spent a good portion of my adult life in the south, I can safely tell you that for the vast majority there is no hatred or bitterness. The only hatred that exists is with a tiny minority who cannot see beyond 1865.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawna
But nonetheless, whether the South deserved what they got is really not the point. Sheridan and Sherman's atrocities against defenseless civilians were not justifiable, because a reason is never an excuse.
Hi, Dawna.
Excellenty put! Waging war on indefensible and infirmed citizens, white and black alike, during the WBTS was totally void of merit and dishonorable. Revenge, enacted by anyone for any purpose, always fails. How very differently would we view the victorious North today, if the burning and looting, rapes and murders, not transpired.
Ashley,
You are right, of couse! If our ancestors had burned Chicago, looted New York, murdered Northern citizens & raped Northern women, they would hold no honor in my heart.
I am so very thankful that my ancestor burned only black powder in propelling Minie balls toward MEN in blue, who were a declared enemy. My ancestor, in killing Yankees, is considered an act of self defense, and Thank God, not murder!
I've lived in Alabama for 47 years; my lifetime. I've roamed the Rocky Mountains, dined at Grand Hotel at Mackinac I., Michigan, St. Joseph Bay, Canada and visited my in-laws in Sterling, Alaska and visited most states in between; but everywhere I've travelled, the WBTS & the South has been mentioned by people other than me. Consider it via my obvious Southern accent. Focus of the expounded topic was Southerner's superb fighting ability and how the South was ravaged un-necessarily by Sherman. President Lincoln & Gen. W.T. Sherman earned/garnished eternally bad sobriquets for themselves by the dirty revenge factor. It is not just a small minority of Southerners unable to "get passed 1865." The majority of people anywhere with more brainpower than bollocks, like many people here on CWT, have trouble justifying not only 1865, but 1864 as well! I might be disabled physically, but Thank God I'm still possessive of a viable brain and cognitive ability to discern savagery from uncivilized behavior!
Dear Dawna, As usual your posts are spot on and I have to commend you for this entire thread. But the picture you gave reference to: http://memory.loc.gov/service/pnp/cph/3c00000/3c07000/3c07000/3c07050r.jpg is worth a thousand words. Also, your "Images" thread certainly shows without a single word being written what horrors were visited on the South. Anyone who thinks that these scenes which were repeated all over the South were merely soldiers following orders has blinders on and no amount of debate is going to penetrate such an attitude. Forget about the plonkers here and save your energies (plus have a lot more FUN) for those who actually want to study and debate rather than wasting time on those who would force-feed their tunnel-visioned opinions on us all. Leave the pillocks to their own devices!
CWT used to be for fun and debate. Let's get back to that!
I have seen on the net an introduction to a book that I am thinking of buying and wondered if any of my Southern friends, or my more freely "open to debate" Northern friends had heard of this book: When Sherman Marched North from the Sea
Resistance on the Confederate Home Front
by Jacqueline Glass Campbell Copyright (c) 2005, 2003 by the University of North Carolina Press. All rights reserved.
I could leave but I won’t go
It’d be easier I know
I can’t feel a thing from my head down to my toes
So why does it always seem to be
Me looking at you, you looking at me
It’s always the same, it’s just a shame, that’s all
But just as I thought it was going alright
I find out I’m wrong when I thought I was right
It’s always the same, it’s just a shame, that’s all
Well I could say day, and you’d say night
Tell me it’s black when I know that it’s white
It’s always the same, it’s just a shame, that’s all
That’s all (Genesis)
From the Heart of Dixie, I remain, YMOS,
__________________ Thea
No one has permission to use any material from any of my posts on any CWT forum, the archives, or any other forum without my express written permission.
Rob,
Well put my good buddy.As always your response is intelligent and honorable.I hope you feel better soon buddy.You'll be in my prayers.
Dawna and Thea,
I don't know what you girls think about when you think of antebellum Southern belles.I picture strong- minded,intelligent women, with upstanding character, and morals who stands for what is right.You girls would fit the bill.I really enjoy your post and responses.Both of you amaze me.Keep up the good work girls.
Ashley
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
