Warning: Graphic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Retribution

[Unionist]

I know it was used a few times during the war. I don't have a problem with it, in theory. I was wondering other people's opinions. It seems to be the best way to protect the average soldier. I guess my only problem would its use against civilians.

 

[ole]

Few champion its use -- especially against civilians -- but it often worked. For example, when Sherman was governing Memphis and West Tennessee, civilians developed a habit of shooting at boats on the Mississippi. He burned a village in the area and let it be known that he would continue doing that if the shooting continued. I can't say the shooting stopped, but did drop off considerably.

He did the same on his infamous March. When confronted with downed trees on the road or a bridge burned, he'd have local homes burned. Word spread. If your neighbor plots to burn a bridge on the creek, you might try to stop him because it might be your home burned.

 

[Rebtracker]

Few champion its use -- especially against civilians -- but it often worked. For example, when Sherman was governing Memphis and West Tennessee, civilians developed a habit of shooting at boats on the Mississippi. He burned a village in the area and let it be known that he would continue doing that if the shooting continued. I can't say the shooting stopped, but did drop off considerably.

He did the same on his infamous March. When confronted with downed trees on the road or a bridge burned, he'd have local homes burned. Word spread. If your neighbor plots to burn a bridge on the creek, you might try to stop him because it might be your home burned.

ole - Sherman is still not very well thought of around middle Georgia...

 

[bama46]

ole - Sherman is still not very well thought of around middle Georgia...

or bu some in central Illinois for that matter

 

[diane]

Sherman's handling of west Tennessee and northern Mississippi included burning down the whole town of Salem because Forrest had been raised there. Nothing too personal, really, just lots and lots of kin to the rebel cavalryman in them thar parts and therefore lots and lots of spies, safe houses, supplies, food, recruits and so on. If he thought he'd get rid of Forrest this way he was certainly mistaken - it just gave Forrest great incentive to stay. But as you say, the objective was really to make it unprofitable and painful for support of rebel forces - even if they were your cousins! It's hard to say what else Sherman could have done - the idea of winning hearts and minds wasn't hatched yet, I suppose, but family is family at any rate. I'm always surprised a ruckus is made over Sherman in Georgia but barely a peep out of anybody about Sherman in Tennessee and Mississippi!

 

[Unionist]

Few champion its use -- especially against civilians -- but it often worked. For example, when Sherman was governing Memphis and West Tennessee, civilians developed a habit of shooting at boats on the Mississippi. He burned a village in the area and let it be known that he would continue doing that if the shooting continued. I can't say the shooting stopped, but did drop off considerably.

He did the same on his infamous March. When confronted with downed trees on the road or a bridge burned, he'd have local homes burned. Word spread. If your neighbor plots to burn a bridge on the creek, you might try to stop him because it might be your home burned.

I could be way off base, but I feel like once a civilian puts his hands in the pot, he/she is no longer a civilian but a combatant. I'm not saying your neighbors should pay for this, BUT the neighbors shouldn't tolerate such people.

 

[Rebtracker]

If a General did today what Sherman was said to have done in Georgia and South Carolina on his march... "to make them pay for aiding their families", he would be charged as a war criminal.

 

[deleson1]

If a General did today what Sherman was said to have done in Georgia and South Carolina on his march... "to make them pay for aiding their families", he would be charged as a war criminal.

Half of world war 2 was bombing of citizens of waring countries and no general was charged as a war criminal. In fact one of the reasons Nagaski{spelling} was chosen was because it had miles of area that had not been bombed due to being a very low priority. There was a reason why there were more civilians killed in ww2 than soldiers. Was it right, probably not, but it did end the war faster.

 

[Unionist]

If a General did today what Sherman was said to have done in Georgia and South Carolina on his march... "to make them pay for aiding their families", he would be charged as a war criminal.

That is because today is post Geneva convention, and the ACW was pre-Geneva conventions. Notwithstanding, I don't think anyone was charged for bombing Dresden or England. Who was charged for the killing of Irish civilians? I could go on. It happens. At least with Sherman it wasn't indiscriminate. There was a method to his madness.

 

[Rebtracker]

"I guess my only problem would its use against civilians."

I agree...

 

[Unionist]

No offense to anyone here because the war and the death toll and destruction are sad, but I get slightly annoyed because it was not so bad compared to real war crimes. The south didn't know what terror was. I'm not making light of the horrors, it was bad, but light compared to what most people suffer during war.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWdresden.htm

One tactic used by the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Force was the creation offirestorms. This was achieved by dropping incendiary bombs, filled with highly combustible chemicals such as magnesium, phosphorus or petroleum jelly (napalm), in clusters over a specific target. After the area caught fire, the air above the bombed area, become extremely hot and rose rapidly. Cold air then rushed in at ground level from the outside and people were sucked into the fire.

 

[napoleon 12 pounder]

I personally hate the idea of using the pain and suffering of innocents to flush out combatants whether sherman or hermann goering. It is a deplorable act.

No offense to anyone here

and unionist cant we label that there are dead bodies posted. I hated having to explain this photo to my 9 year old who happened by as I was reading the posts! isnt there something about labeling the forum with a disclaimer first?
respectfully,
Napoleon 12 pounder

 

[Unionist]

Fortunately Sherman didn't have an air force with high explosive, incendiary bombs to create such devastation, but he did do the best he could with what had had available.

"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography."
Ambrose Bierce

Completely unfounded statement. Not only did Sherman have a lower death rate than Grant and Lee, he purposely tried to avoid bloodshed when he could. You all have such tunnel vision that you don't care whose reputation you tarnish. There is no evidence that he committed war crimes, going by the rules of the day, let alone that he would have done so on such a scale.

 

[Unionist]

I personally hate the idea of using the pain and suffering of innocents to flush out combatants whether sherman or hermann goering. It is a deplorable act.


and unionist cant we label that there are dead bodies posted. I hated having to explain this photo to my 9 year old who happened by as I was reading the posts! isnt there something about labeling the forum with a disclaimer first?
respectfully,
Napoleon 12 pounder

Sorry, I was unaware of the rule. Can a mod fix it, I don't know how at this point.

 

[Red Harvest]

Fortunately Sherman didn't have an air force with high explosive, incendiary bombs to create such devastation, but he did do the best he could with what had had available.

Actually what he did was more targeted and more precise, covering a wide zone in a shorter time with fewer militiary casualties. There weren't significant civilian casualties as a result of burning barns, corn cribs, killing the livestock, burning the bridges, destroying the rails/ties, and depots, etc.

 

[Nathanb1]

Sorry, I was unaware of the rule. Can a mod fix it, I don't know how at this point.

I fixed it. Everyone please label graphic threads when you begin them or contact a mod to do so.

Posted in Capacity as Moderator

 

[Nathanb1]

Now I expect everyone to get back on the topic as it pertains to the Civil War and off modern atrocities.

Posted in capacity as Moderator

 

[Lee]

What did I miss? What graphic? retribution for what?

 

[ole]

What did I miss? What graphic? retribution for what?

Not much, Lee. Just a truckload of bodies supposedly after Dresden was fire-bombed.

 

[Lee]

Not much, Lee. Just a truckload of bodies supposedly after Dresden was fire-bombed.

Thanks ole..........Yes Dresden was a terrible event.