What the Yankees Did to Us: Sherman's Bombardment and Wrecking of Atlanta

There are scads of them. I have about eight.

Atlanta, like Vicksburg, was a city occupied by enemy troops. You'd have Sherman not drive them out by military action?

The civilians always get the mooky end of the stick when they're stuck between two opposing armies.

Atlanta and it's industry and rail connections was a war objective. I can't blame Hood for fortifying it, nor can I blame Sherman for taking it.

For some historical fact, a good portion of the city was destroyed when Hood blew up his accumulated powder and munitions and decamped. Another good portion of it was destroyed due to collateral damage when Sherman instructed his men to destroy all industries of military value. Vicksburg was not destroyed presumably because there was little of military value to destroy.

The questionable feature was when Sherman demanded that all civilians leave Atlanta. He didn't care if they went north or south, he just didn't want the mix in the military depot he was constructing.

I think those who understand war can find sound reasoning therein.

Now. Can we get back to the books touted in the OP? I've not read them, and I probably wouldn't if they were free. Having been on this board for longer than most, I could write them. BooHoo. He didn't play fair.

I don't know where we get the idea that there is honor in a war. And that one can tippy-toe around a guy you've just knocked down. Seems that the prevalent, contempory attitude was to make durn sure he didn't get up.

"What the Yankees Did to Us." Crock.

Crock.
 
I f you want a really good source of info about Atlanta I would choose. I shook the authors hand once before he passed away.

Atlanta and Environs: A Chronicle of Its People and Events [Hardcover]

Franklin M. Garrett (Author), Harold H. Martin (Author), Franklin M. M franklin Garrett

41XRRJPAJ2L._SY300_.jpg


and the other link I shared before. My 80 Years in Atlanta by Sarah Huff

www.artery.org/08_history/.../SaraHuff/My80YearsInAtlanta_All.pdf
  1. You can download the entire PDF
 
Sherman ought to have been hung as a war criminal. The senseless murder and destruction that he was responsible for is unforgivable.

"They robed every house about such battlefield not only of eatables but everything they could lay their hands on. They tore up dresses to bits and broke all the furnature."

"the people in this state did know any of the war times only what they herd and read...but they feel the effects of war at this time.."

Seems like the Confederates weren't angels either, but people tend to over look their actions..​
 
Sherman ought to have been hung as a war criminal. The senseless murder and destruction that he was responsible for is unforgivable.


Funny stuff. I wonder how much senseless destruction was caused by retreating Confederate troops at Richmond?

160px-Richmond_va_1865_cropped_8x5.jpg
Richmond_Virginia_damage2.jpg
lossy-page1-160px-Ruins_of_Richmond,_VA_,_1865_-_NARA_-_524883_tif.jpg
 

This is not going to suffice, Complicity. Around here, members gain credibility by explaining what they mean. You've been asked twice to explain your answer. I'd suggest you do so. Doesn't mean anyone will agree--but if you make coherent arguments over time, people will respect your opinion.

This is not your usual internet hit and run forum. Once you've been here awhile, we'll probably understand what you're getting at--till then please humor us. And show a little respect for long-term folks (all of them).
 
This is not going to suffice, Complicity. Around here, members gain credibility by explaining what they mean. You've been asked twice to explain your answer. I'd suggest you do so. Doesn't mean anyone will agree--but if you make coherent arguments over time, people will respect your opinion.

This is not your usual internet hit and run forum. Once you've been here awhile, we'll probably understand what you're getting at--till then please humor us. And show a little respect for long-term folks (all of them).

Please examine post number 3 on the December 23, 2012 thread "What the Yankees Did to Us"

It was a two word post by a former moderator using the pseudonym "Ole" and is provided below. It was popularly "liked" and never criticized by a moderator.

Calling "crock."
 
Please examine post number 3 on the December 23, 2012 thread "What the Yankees Did to Us"

It was a two word post by a former moderator using the pseudonym "Ole" and is provided below. It was popularly "liked" and never criticized by a moderator.

Calling "crock."
Ole as a long term member has a reputation of being able to back up his posts with solid research and first hand sources, you on the other hand have not proven yourself yet and posted about Yankee conspiracys to stifle book sales..Not the kind of thing that supports a reputation as a solid researcher on the war...And besides if someone asks Ole why would he call crock on something he would be glad to explain himself, thats something you have not done even though asked twice..
 
Sherman ought to have been hung as a war criminal. The senseless murder and destruction that he was responsible for is unforgivable.

Always worth repeating when this subject comes up,

"You have heretofore read public sentiment in your newspapers, that live by falsehood and excitement; and the quicker you seek for truth in other quarters, the better. I repeat then that, by the original compact of Government, the United States had certain rights in Georgia, which have never been relinquished and never will be; that the South began war by seizing forts, arsenals, mints, custom-houses, etc., etc., long before Mr. Lincoln was installed, and before the South had one jot or title of provocation. I myself have seen in Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Mississippi, hundreds and thousands of women and children fleeing from your armies and desperadoes, hungry and with bleeding feet. In Memphis, Vicksburg, and Mississippi, we fed thousands upon thousands of families of rebel soldiers left in our hands, and whom we could not see starve. Now that war comes home to you, you feel very different. You depreciate its horrors, but did not feel them when you sent car-loads of soldiers and ammunition, and moulded shells and shot, to carry war into Kentucky and Tennessee, to desolate the homes of hundreds and thousands of good people who only asked to live in peace at their old homes, and under the Government of their inheritance. But these comparisons are idle. I want peace, and believe it can only be reached through union and war, and I will ever conduct war with a view to perfect and early success.
But, my dear sirs, when peace does come, you may call on me for any thing. Then I will share with you the last cracker, and watch with you to shield your homes and families against danger from every quarter."

Sherman's letter to the mayor of Atlanta
Atlanta, Georgia, September 11, 1864.
Major-General W. T. Sherman.
 
O.R.--SERIES I--VOLUME XXXIX/2 [S# 78]
UNION CORRESPONDENCE, ORDERS, AND RETURNS RELATING TO OPERATIONS IN KENTUCKY, SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA, TENNESSEE, MISSISSIPPI, ALABAMA, AND NORTH GEORGIA (THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN EXCEPTED), FROM MAY 1, 1864, TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1864.(*)--#21

WASHINGTON, September 28, 1864.
Major-General SHERMAN, Atlanta, Ga.:
GENERAL: Your communications of the 20th in regard to the removal of families from Atlanta and the exchange of prisoners,(+) and also the official report(++) of your campaign, are just received. I have not had time as yet to examine your report. The course which you have pursued in removing rebel families from Atlanta and in the exchange of prisoners is fully approved by the War Department. Not only are you justified by the laws and usages of war in removing these people, but I think it was your duty to your own army to do so.

I get it. Two wrongs make a right.
We have tried three years of conciliation and kindness without any reciprocation.

Just because Halleck said it doesn't make it true.

It is necessary for the objective historian to evaluate the validity of remarks by war participants. Cutting-and-pasting original source material is valueless w/o such discernment.

When Halleck wrote the above obscenity Jackson, Mississippi was in ashes as was much of central Louisiana because of fires deliberately set by Yankee soldiers. Admittedly, anyone can go to the OR and find false denials of Yankee culpability, but they were largely self serving. Sherman and his pyromanic subordinate, A. J. Smith, were responsible. It would be necessary to disregard objectivity or be as gullible as the gate keepers of Troy to believe otherwise.
 
I get it. Two wrongs make a right.


Just because Halleck said it doesn't make it true.

It is necessary for the objective historian to evaluate the validity of remarks by war participants. Cutting-and-pasting original source material is valueless w/o such discernment.

When Halleck wrote the above obscenity Jackson, Mississippi was in ashes as was much of central Louisiana because of fires deliberately set by Yankee soldiers. Admittedly, anyone can go to the OR and find false denials of Yankee culpability, but they were largely self serving. Sherman and his pyromanic subordinate, A. J. Smith, were responsible. It would be necessary to disregard objectivity or be as gullible as the gate keepers of Troy to believe otherwise.

"It is necessary for the objective historian to evaluate the validity of remarks by war participants"
We need a priest class to tell us whats,what,we can't think and reason for ourselves..come to our own conclusions..
 
There are scads of them. I have about eight.

Now. Can we get back to the books touted in the OP? I've not read them, and I probably wouldn't if they were free

There is only one book mentioned by the guy who started this thread. What do you mean by OP? What are the other books you are referring to?

Having been on this board for longer than most, I could write them.

Oh? What books have you written?

"What the Yankees Did to Us." Crock.

You say this, despite admitting that you have not read it.
 
"It is necessary for the objective historian to evaluate the validity of remarks by war participants"
We need a priest class to tell us whats,what,we can't think and reason for ourselves..come to our own conclusions..

You misunderstood me. I characterize anyone posting in this forum as an "historian". Some are amateur and some are professional. Some try to be objective and others don't.
 
"It is necessary for the objective historian to evaluate the validity of remarks by war participants"
We need a priest class to tell us whats,what,we can't think and reason for ourselves..come to our own conclusions..

"Jackson, Mississippi was in ashes... because of fires deliberately set by Yankee soldiers. "
The things folks don't tell you,That is after rebel troops retreated there and used as a military position before retreating again,and that was the second time the first was in May..
 
I get it. Two wrongs make a right.


Just because Halleck said it doesn't make it true.

It is necessary for the objective historian to evaluate the validity of remarks by war participants. Cutting-and-pasting original source material is valueless w/o such discernment.

When Halleck wrote the above obscenity Jackson, Mississippi was in ashes as was much of central Louisiana because of fires deliberately set by Yankee soldiers. Admittedly, anyone can go to the OR and find false denials of Yankee culpability, but they were largely self serving. Sherman and his pyromanic subordinate, A. J. Smith, were responsible. It would be necessary to disregard objectivity or be as gullible as the gate keepers of Troy to believe otherwise.

Complicity--

You are the one who has 'cherry picked' from the entire copy of Halleck's response to Sherman, it is part of the Official Records of the Rebellion and must ask, were you in the same room with Halleck when he delivered this to stand up in a court of law, take an oath that this opinionated statement is 'truthful fact?' I'm old but, I am not THAT old, as to blanket state who was liar and who wasn't. I wasn't there and must take these statements as truths in that time. If these Official Records of the Rebellion were reviewed by former Confederate Generals and sat side by side in compiling them, to which satisfied many a Confederate General in the post-Civil War era as well as to use them for their own memoirs` --it is good enough for me.

In the era of the American Civil War, there was more honor, ethics and standards than is exhibited now days in general. It is so easy for any and all of us to be 'arm chair' generals. Even in crime cases, with a room full of witnesses and trained observers, there will be common things seen and others will pick out details others miss.

Further, many a qualified and honored historian have told me, that they know a lot but, never know it all.' Further, if one is predisposed on how things ought to be, it is difficult to by-pass the prejudices and bias as to have an open mind.

I'm not willing to call anybody filing an official report in the scope of their duties, personal experiences, personal observations a 'liar' as you Complicity have done. Reason is, I can't make a bold statement based on opinion as fact. Unless you were an eye witness to the events, an angel or God--I'll stick with the original recorders of their history and be it truth or false, it is of their peer's judgment to decide. Not mine. Meanwhile, I have faith in the individual who records their records during the Civil War. Between both sides, the many reports the 'common' facts can be established and with fresh memory. The odd ball facts can be studied and appreciated which adds to the common facts established.

Just my personal observations, comments, opinions. You have yours. I have mine.

M. E. Wolf
 
Back
Top