Sherman Sherman was a hero

[K Hale]

Now, see! That's something interesting! How many people knew that??? (I kinda meant career-wise, but that'll do)

She was very pretty, too. Even by the high standards of some of the gentlemen 'round here.

Career-wise, well, he helped make Texas safe for settlers.

 

[Elennsar]

Well then Im thinking the Devil lost cause the war could have lasted years with non-stop guerrilla warfare...

That's the sign of divine providence in my book (that it didn't get as bad as Old Scratch wanted it to).

 

[unionblue]

You have a lot more knowledge than I do about some things of the Civil War and and I respect you for that.



Perhaps if my name was Northland instead of what it is would change things some.

No, it would not.

Your log-on ID is not important and should not be taken as a degree of ones region, knowledge, or personal opinion.

Take mine, Unionblue. The only reason I have this log-on ID is because a fellow reenactor of mine, from Mississippi, gave it to me during a reenactment I attended with him. I adopted it here as a joke when he invited me to come to this forum.

I mainly contest what you say and post here because I consider it wrong or lacking in historical evidence and I hold an opposite point-of-view on the matter. Nothing more, nothing less. To take it personal seems a bit much to me, as I have invested no money, no vacation days, and no blood to simply disagree with your interpretation of Civil War history.

As for communicating with you via a PM, I see no need for such, as I have yet to see any discourse or disagreement we cannot settle in posts on the forum, as long as they are about the topic or the American Civil War in general. But, if you feel the need for such private communication, I will answer any PM you send me.

Until that time,
Unionblue

 

[Nathanb1]

She was very pretty, too. Even by the high standards of some of the gentlemen 'round here.

Career-wise, well, he helped make Texas safe for settlers.

Very interesting woman. When did she....uh.....he....."date"?

 

[wilber6150]

She was very pretty, too. Even by the high standards of some of the gentlemen 'round here.

Career-wise, well, he helped make Texas safe for settlers.

But why is she cleaning her ear while getting her portrait done.. Thats odd lol just kidding very pretty

 

[Glorybound]

Very pretty girl. Sometimes when you're watching a band or musical artist with backup singers, you'll see one or two of the backups, and sometimes the artist, put one finger up and block one ear, so they can more clearly hear themselves apart from the rest of the music, and determine if they're singing in tune. I believe this pretty young girl was singing back-up to "A Walk on the Wild Side", by Ezekiel Reed, Lou's ancestor, who was the original composer of that tune. Her intro would've been, "..and the colored girls go..."

 

[K Hale]

Very interesting woman. When did she....uh.....he....."date"?

According to this biography, it got going in 1873 and went on for 15 years, even though she married somebody else in 1878. Sherman attended her wedding.

 

[Glorybound]

 

[unionblue]

Glorybound,

Haven't heard that song in a LONG while.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[Baggage Handler #2]

It is always a big deal when one poster tries to tell another poster what and how to post if there is something there that they don't like.

You are right, though. No big deal.

You miss the point completely.
It has nothing to do with whether I "like" it or not.
It has everything to do with abstract concepts of truth, self discipline, and integrity. A source that deliberately misquotes - say one that claimed Jeff Davis was a female impersonator because of some unsubstantiated bits of propaganda - is worse than useless.

A lie is wrong, regardless of about whom it is spread.
A deliberately mangled quote is a lie.

That is the point.

 

[K Hale]

A deliberately mangled quote would be kinda like photoshopping a bonnet and dress onto a picture of Davis and using it as proof that he was a female impersonator. It doesn't prove that he was or wasn't, it just makes the person putting it forth as evidence look bad.

 

[TheGhost]

Nathanb1
On the subject of tactics I find it hard to understand the vitriol that surrounds Sherman. We laid waste to an entire continent in pusuit of victory during WWII and all consider it a great victory. Sherman did about the same thing and is cursed for it. The only real difference is the method of delivery for the destruction.
Dan

No, the difference between the first and second descriptions is Sherman isn't "we."

 

[Southland]

No, the difference between the first and second descriptions is Sherman isn't "we."

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

 

[M E Wolf]

I'm watching ...

Ladies and Gentlemen;

The postings are starting to get 'personal' again -- toes on the line and near going over the line as far as personal opinions are better than another person's personal opinions.

The discussion is degrading rapidly.

This thread is getting real close to my locking it.

M. E. Wolf
POSTED IN THE CAPACITY OF MODERATOR

 

[M E Wolf]

As far as Sherman's Total War was against fellow Americans, that can apply to the first attacks on the Federal Arsenals in 1860; Governor Pinkens firing on and taking U.S. Forts, then again firing on Fort Sumter.

This whole Internet site is dedicated to a truthfully all "American" Civil War. Brother against Brother; Fathers against sons, Sons against Fathers, relatives against relatives, States against other States, One half against the other half.

General W. T. Sherman is one of many involved in the American Civil War. Sherman didn't declare War ... the People who voted and had the power declared War.

Lets get back onto facts and not broad sweep all sins of the American Civil War on Sherman's shoulders alone.

M. E. Wolf

 

[ole]

That Sherman was the devil incarnate is akin to slavery was really quite benign. Sherman's was an idea whose time had come. That being enslaved was doing the negro a favor has long since failed to pass muster.

 

[TheGhost]

Ladies and Gentlemen;

The postings are starting to get 'personal' again -- toes on the line and near going over the line as far as personal opinions are better than another person's personal opinions.

The discussion is degrading rapidly.

This thread is getting real close to my locking it.

M. E. Wolf
POSTED IN THE CAPACITY OF MODERATOR

I don't see how this is getting "personal" unless there is an intent to protect the image of the long dead Mr Sherman.

I am from the South...and Sherman definitely ain't "WE."

 

[TheGhost]

That Sherman was the devil incarnate is akin to slavery was really quite benign. Sherman's was an idea whose time had come. That being enslaved was doing the negro a favor has long since failed to pass muster.

...now who said anything about "being enslaved was doing the negro a favor?"

What sort of moderating is this?

 

[TheGhost]

As far as Sherman's Total War was against fellow Americans, that can apply to the first attacks on the Federal Arsenals in 1860; Governor Pinkens firing on and taking U.S. Forts, then again firing on Fort Sumter.

"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?

 

[Nathanb1]

Really, quite polarizing, isn't he? Reminds me of another guy....

Attacks on moderators and snippy stuff is quite mind-numbing. Let's work on the merits again. Not what "I" think--but something about Sherman...."I" believe the lines between the fans and the non-fans have been clearly drawn.