Sherman Sherman was a hero

[Elennsar]

Where do the people who are neither fans or...um...of different persausion fit?

I can't be the only one with mixed feelings.

 

[Nathanb1]

Where do the people who are neither fans or...um...of different persausion fit?

I can't be the only one with mixed feelings.

No, you're not. I swing back and forth depending on whose post I'm reading. Sort of like an anti-pendulum.

 

[dvrmte]

Where do the people who are neither fans or...um...of different persausion fit?

I can't be the only one with mixed feelings.

Yep, you're the only one. Now clean out your inbox.

dvrmte

 

[brass napoleon]

Where do the people who are neither fans or...um...of different persausion fit?

I can't be the only one with mixed feelings.

Nope, you're not (at least if I think you're saying what I think you're saying).

 

[wilber6150]

"that can apply to the first attacks on the Federal Arsenals in 1860"

Attacks? 1860?


"Governor Pinkens firing on and taking U.S. Forts, then again firing on Fort Sumter"

I don't think any of the firing on forts was ordered by Pickens. What other firing on forts was there before Sumter in April '61?

Hmmm are really saying so no other federal properties were taken by force before Sumter?

 

[wilber6150]

Dan, there was one BIG difference. Sherman's total war was against fellow Americans.

And the Confederates in Charleston were firing on fellow Americans as well....

 

[brass napoleon]

And lest we forget, shots were fired at ships supplying Fort Sumter long before April, 1861.

 

[K Hale]

I like Sherman generally, but he screwed up sometimes.

 

[dvrmte]

I like Sherman generally, but he screwed up sometimes.

If I could forget the South Carolina part, I might forgive him for his other sins. Every time I go to Hampton county and see those crumbled chimneys, no matter that they're hardly recognizable anymore, I can't forgive him. By the size of the foundation rocks, these were small homes, not the dwelling of a Planter.

So I'll just continue to cuss the caustic ba*t*rd.

dvrmte

 

[Baggage Handler #2]

...

So I'll just continue to cuss the caustic ba*t*rd.

dvrmte

It might sound strange, but I don't think he'd be displeased with that.

 

[wilber6150]

If I could forget the South Carolina part, I might forgive him for his other sins. Every time I go to Hampton county and see those crumbled chimneys, no matter that they're hardly recognizable anymore, I can't forgive him. By the size of the foundation rocks, these were small homes, not the dwelling of a Planter.

So I'll just continue to cuss the caustic ba*t*rd.

dvrmte

As harsh as it is to lose your house, the Union soldiers didn't go on a killing spree when they entered the state that they felt started the war, so at least they had their lives left to rebuild...In most other Civil Wars there would be shallow graves of the families next to the crumbled chimenys if there was anybody left in the area to bury them.

 

[Elennsar]

If I could forget the South Carolina part, I might forgive him for his other sins. Every time I go to Hampton county and see those crumbled chimneys, no matter that they're hardly recognizable anymore, I can't forgive him. By the size of the foundation rocks, these were small homes, not the dwelling of a Planter.

So I'll just continue to cuss the caustic ba*t*rd.

dvrmte

And this is what makes me feel mixed feelings. The March on the whole wasn't something I'd condemn. Things like this are a sign something went wrong, and whether that's Sherman's fault (as in, something he did or didn't do) or not...I'm not sure.

At some point, one has to wonder what exactly any general can do to enforce discipline when the men in the ranks aren't willing to accept it.

 

[K Hale]

That's when you start the hangings.

 

[Elennsar]

And who is going to do the hangings? At some point you're left with mass mutiny.

That's what I meant.

In my understanding, Sherman did not try to keep order by any means necessary - it was less of a loss to him (which says something distinctly unpleasant about him) to see ordinary homes burned than to attempt to enforce the kind of discipline that might have prevented that.

I am not sure how much the misdeeds that occured could have been prevented entirely (or kept to the absolute minimum level possible - that an army of 60,000 men could be effectively policed so as to be entirely without actions by the bad elements would take a lot more than any general I know of has ever had), so I'm not sure how far Sherman fell short.

And of course, its hard to say how much Sherman personally has anything to do with it.

Is Sherman personally really supposed to keep an eye on every company? Every squad? Every platoon?

And a system of "Sherman watches the wing commanders and corps commanders who watch the division commanders who watch the brigade commanders who watch the regiment commanders who watch the company commanders who watch their companies" at some point will have a weak link.

 

[K Hale]

Find the weak link and eliminate it. Did I mention hangings?

 

[Elennsar]

Find the weak link and eliminate it. Did I mention hangings?

Easier said than done.

I don't think its possible to monitor 60,000 men in a sixty-mile wide area so closely as to eliminate all offenders.

 

[K Hale]

No, you can't eliminate all offenders in any group of people that size. Efforts should be made to do so, however.

 

[Elennsar]

No, you can't eliminate all offenders in any group of people that size. Efforts should be made to do so, however.

I don't think anyone is arguing with that. I know I'm not.

What troubles me (and this is about all "army in enemy territory" scenarios):

Its one thing to be unable to catch each and every rotter. But something has gone wrong when the ordinarily decent soldier is acting badly.

 

[DixieDude007]

With all due respect Wild Rose in reference to your comment on his failure to "square off in front of the Confederate army", unless I am reading revisionist history if Johnson would have stood his ground at Kennesaw Mtn, perhaps the tale of Atlanta might have been a different tale to tell.
I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure it was Johnson doing the Georgia two step backwards. The scorched earth policy, well thats another issue for another day and one we are much more on the same page with.
Respectfully,
Spartan

Well If Joe Johnston had stood his ground....other than the time he was in VA then the war would have been different

 

[DixieDude007]

Only thing i have on the subject

I half way agree with y'all yankees. He was a brilliant commander...he was also a racist but that is a different bone to pick for a different day. I believe that the Union saw that they could not break us unless our homes and industries were gone and Sherman's troops did that well and a victory by whatever means is still a victory so i do tip my hat to him to helping quell the rebellion.

That being said the southern forces were treating the yankee property with respect and even payed (in confederate note) for any property they took. When Lee was in Maryland or Pennsylvanian had he comprised the unwritten rules of war and waged war on homes that were defended by elderly men and young boys then he would have been labeled as a butcher and not as a "hero" (although many still don't think that he is), but he might have been able to bring the war to an end by braking the Union's will.

On the first page Ole wrote and said "Personally, I can't see the reasoning behind it, but then, I was not raised there, nor were my antecedents. The destruction is considerably overblown, although there certainly was destruction.At the time, and continuing into today, I will never understand how a people who start a war can complain about how it is conducted."

Well Ole your right, you were not from here and those were not your people. However the destruction is not over blown Atlanta-Burnt, Jackson, MS- Burnt Four times (twice were under Grant but Sherman was under Grant) Sherman practice his march to the sea through Central Mississippi (Vicksburg to Meridian) and his men tore up every inch of train track, left the countryside bare of every scrap of food, "burnt" (confiscated and sold on the black market) only God knows how many bells of cotton, and the good Lord knows how many pictures were slashed, how much furniture was stolen and broken. His men used private homes as stables forcing the families out. There is a Church in Bovina, MS that was used as a stable for the union, the Church's cornerstone was used as target practice, the church itself was used as a butcher shop (the cutting was done on the alter...just saying) a dance hall...then it was burnt.

How can you call the man that authorized this destruction and mayhem a hero? Granted they saved the Union and made our country a stronger better country that it was before...but how can we glamorize a man that would do that to people of a country he was trying to protect and reunite. If this is the NEW definition of a hero then GOD HELP THE FUTURE!! I was always taught that a hero is someone worth idolizing, whose deeds were just and pure.

Maybe I am a young, naive, southerner whose vision is blurred by magnolias and a sense of honor that is dieing out with each generation, but their are some people who don't need to be honored in the class of "hero" William T. Sherman is one of them. My mentor told me this "People do Sherman just like they do with a steak...they cut away the fat give it to the dog or the trash...but they keep the good part for themselves."

Sorry if i rambled again sorry if you are offended that i used the term yankee,

GCBond