General Sherman

Nothing like...................is there?
 

Attachments

  • BeatDeadHorse.gif
    BeatDeadHorse.gif
    129 KB · Views: 514
diggummup said:
Nothing like...................is there?
Click to expand...
Hahahaha...love the pic dig
 

I'm neither anti nor pro Sherman. As in any war there were a certain number of atrocities committed by both sides. I have read several accounts where the Southern cavalry conducted raids behind enemy lines and held towns for ransome, holding them hostage, so to speak until they came up with a certain amount of money or goods before they would leave them alone. I am merely relating information I have read on the war. My forefathers fought on both sides and some were even Cherokee rebels in Indian Territory. Monty
 

Monty said:
I'm neither anti nor pro Sherman. As in any war there were a certain number of atrocities committed by both sides. I have read several accounts where the Southern cavalry conducted raids behind enemy lines and held towns for ransome, holding them hostage, so to speak until they came up with a certain amount of money or goods before they would leave them alone. I am merely relating information I have read on the war. My forefathers fought on both sides and some were even Cherokee rebels in Indian Territory. Monty
Click to expand...
My point exactly and I can say the same thing concerning my family tree.We could dig up this type of informaion all day long concerning both sides.The end result would be the same.War aint pretty and Civil War is even worse. However, I still believe with the U.S.Government backing and funding that the Union was receiving throughout the war it was done more out of spite than neccessity as was more so the case when it came to the rebel troops.JMO
 

There was a war. A Civil War. Lincoln was trying to pull the union back together for a number of reasonsnot the least of which was his desire to be reelected. The abolishment of slavery was a cause that was popular in the North where a vast majority of the voters lived, but many statesmen were just as willing to let the question of slavery be a states right although they finally had to jump on the band wagon to help justify the Union invading the South. Lincoln and his Secretary of War...I think Stephens or something similar to that name thought the South had no backbone for fighting and that a few skirmishes at the offset would bring the South to its knees and back into the Union and were also just as willing to let slavery remain a states right to prevent an all out war. But when the South failed to roll over and actually kicked a lot of Yankee butt with little or no army, weapons and uniforms to wage war or anything else other than a strong will, they realized a war was inevitable. When Lincoln first went to war and for at least the first two years of the war he couldn't find a leader who was actually competent and willing or capable of mounting an offensive. Generals were mostly political appointees and were incompetent. Heads rolled by the numbers until true military leaders like Sherman and Grant rose to the top. The same could be said of the South to a lesser degree, therefore contributed to the early on victories attained by the South. The South could have ended the war a couple of times by invading and capturing Washington D.C., but they always seemed to fail to follow up and pursue the enemy when a victory was won, thus giving the North the time and opportunity to rebuild its armies, improve its weaponry and supplies and conscript many times the number of forces than the South could ever muster. At first the main if not only advantage other than sheer will was that the South had a very good railway system to move troops and supplies about. This was because the South provided much if not most of the raw materials for the North's Industrial base. Nearly every little Southern town or city had a railroad connection to ship raw goods to major cities and trade centers. The North had much better roads, but of course the railroads were much faster in moving troops and equipment even in bad weather, and until the southern railway system was destroyed the South could usually remain a half step ahead of the North. As an example, when a campaign was began against a southern City, Atlanta as an example, the railroads that would assist the north were first destroyed and damaged by the South leaving only supply lines open into the city mainly from the south that could be easier to protect and ship men and supplies into the city and by the same token, keeping the North from using the destroyed lines to aid their invasion. The North got to taking vast numbers of engineering companies to restore the railroads for their advantage. Meanwhile Sherman side slipped around Atlanta until he was able to shut off the supply lines by destroying the inbound rails.
And again I am getting wound up way too much and straying off topic! Perhaps those readers who are not Civil War buffs can get a better understanding of what was going on by my meandering? I hope so. Monty
 

Monty....Love reading you posts on here...For some reason I don't seem to find the time to do all the reading I should and like hearing what you have to say...keep it coming for my feeble mind..lol
 

you know that each side will tell a different story and that each side will say it was handed down from generation to generation, no one here reading this was at the war and we all have to visualize what went on . What the cause was and how it was implemented to win the war against slavery. Sherman was from the south, and new what it was like in the south and he was just setting a threat to do away with slavery and that all man kind is equal and we all have to get together to make it work now adays the south is still fuming and mad and i know because the north is quicker the south is slower i live down here in Georgia and believe me they dont like northers but guess what, i will get a job and get it done before the south gets out of bed in the morning, and the gibberish , thats another page in the books, so south get over it and step up to the plate before it gets taken away before you open up your eyes as an extended hand will come your way as thats what the northerners do , help thy neighbors, as thy neighbors need helping. dont take things to far it will haunt ya.....
 

gadget1961 said:
What the cause was and how it was implemented to win the war against slavery. Sherman was from the south, and new what it was like in the south and he was just setting a threat to do away with slavery and that all man kind is equal and we all have to get together to make it work
Click to expand...
I might have to disagree with you a little in this remark, gadget1961. The war was not really about slavery..it was about "States" rights..the right of each state to make certain laws that affected them at the time. Also, there is lot said by Sherman that would lead one to believe that "He" had no real feelings one way or the other about slavery. Hopefully Monty can set me straight "ifn" I'm wrong on this one..lol
 

not really, if you read the other posts and not just one, others where saying mostly that the slaves where killed or wounded ect. i was just writing into the whole not as one vision of one post, but all together, the war that others say are, ill say again from both sides of the line. True or not true, stories were made and storieswhere told quote (stories)
 

Thanks for reminding me to read all the posts...I have btw
 

There was NO CIVIL in the civil war ---war is hell ---you only want to hurt your enemy as bad as you can to make him cry ---I QUIT----so that you win and it stops----polite war goes on and on ----to be effectively fought a war needs to be conducted Rapidly and be very costly to your foe -- you you must be willing to be as nasty and brutal as you need to be to win sadly ---Ivan
 

its your post not mine. i am just adding to it and inputting my feelings toward what was said and done thanks bfn
 

gadget1961 said:
its your post not mine. i am just adding to it and inputting my feelings toward what was said and done thanks bfn
Click to expand...
BTW...Welcome to TNet...I was just replying to your post my friend..then I took your post as saying I didn't care enough to read the posts...but I do..We do have some lively discussions from time to time and it would be a dull world if we all saw things in the same light..Thanks for posting...
 

i agree with that amen ;D as for if no discussions then no one is reading them and their would not be a great site like this :D :) ;D i apologize if i offended anyone thanks for your understanding,, what a great bunch of people we have
 

transplant said:
someone said if I knew it was going to end up like this I would pick my own cotten
Click to expand...
LOL...I think many had the same "thought"..
 

Hey guys I am from the south & the only way that you will get at the truth about Sherman is to read the state archives. A lot of letters were written or written for them,by the slave men & women ten years after the war for southern independence was fought.I am not trying to sway anyones opinion but I did figure out that my American history books were full of propaganda supposedly put in there by northerners after the war was over. I graduated in 1967 so you will know about when I had american history.Read Georgia & Ala. &the two carolinas Archives to get at the truth. Goldpenny
 

I am reading the third of three huge volumes, a narrative of the Civil War by Shelby Foote. He is/was a southerner but wrote them seemingly with an unbiased eye, or so the critics all say. I say is/was because someone told me he was recently deceased. If so, we who are interested in the civil War have lost a really good author. He did not overly vilify Sherman, but I caught myself rooting for the South even though I knew how it turned out. In reading his accounts you almost feel as if you were there. And the many battle field maps are extremely helpful in understanding how the strategy of a battle was doped out and how and where the troops were aligned. The one thing Foote seems to have skipped over is the war in the west, specifically Indian Territory that is now the state of Oklahoma where I live. There was two really major battles and many skirmishes here. I am presently searching for some books about Generel Stand Waity and Chief John Ross, two opposing factions from within the Cherokee Tribe. Waity was the only Indian to obtain the rank of General in the Confederate Army. He was a Brigadier General for the Confederacy. Food for thought. Monty
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Action west of Winchester, VA

⬅️ Previous Thread

Snows Hill, TN

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Metal Detecting Stuff

Latest Discussions

Back
Top