Posted on 12/05/2014 1:01:20 PM PST by aomagrat
And then the "he who denied it supplied it" supposition prevails.
The smell....the smell....I love the smell of napalm in the morning...it smells of victory....
If one uses it enough it works every time.
Yeah, Hitler really screwed up by attacking Pearl Harbor.
And, then, the Nips launched Operation Balballosa against the USSR and that sealed their doom.
When I was a boy driving through the South, you could still see those charred chimneys standing alone - Sherman’s Sentinels.
I once met a bitter, old hag feminist who was a history PhD. from Arkansas. She was also compelled to rant about the Civil War.
Balbossa Kilbossa!
Great with Pale Ale Beer...
He who smelt it dealt it.
The South was right and so was Sherman when it came to the blacks. He said they would not be able to care for themselves. 150 years later and it’s gotten worse.
The point is correct: You want your adversaries to understand their cause is permanently hopeless and defeated.
That is the only basis on which to build a lasting peace.
See The South, Germany, Japan, etc.
For counter-example, see all the places we didn’t really have the guts to crush the opposition completely: Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.
It is actually humane to do this. The faster they learn they are utterly defeated, the sooner the death-dealing ends.
“Today’s civilian firearms are utterly ineffective against tanks and really any fighting vehicle”
You mean like in Afghanistan? LOL!! Tanks and fighting vehicles especially tanks are not designed for uban warfare which is what CWII in the US will be. I’m still laughing. What do you think the govt is going to do Sherm blow up all the cities with tanks? :-)
“One of my favorite subjects: our Civil War.”
First it was not a Civil War. Civil War is when two factions are fighting for control of the government. The South just wanted to leave the Union which was their right. They never tried to invade, conquer and subjugate the North.
Sherman’s methodology was simple. His march to the sea went through an agricultural heartland of the South. By ruining it, it could no longer provide food to the Confederacy.
Importantly, this represents a choice: do we destroy their farms, or do we kill them?
A similar choice was later made by Kit Carson, ordered to subdue the Navajo, who at the time were a significant mounted threat. And he concluded that, “I could kill every Navajo horse, or I could kill every adult Navajo man.” And he chose their horses. This effectively neutralized them as a fighting force, and saved thousands of lives.
In any event, southerners are free to ritually hate Sherman for what he did.
Why don’t you Rebs change the tune already. Lincoln a traitor. What is your evidence?
‘and did not admit until 1875 in his memoirs that he had blamed the Confederates, namely General Hampton.”
Sorry, this simply does not make sense. If he blamed him at the time, how did not disclose that he blamed him until 1875? There’s no evidence that he ordered it, and eyewitnesses said he was surprised when he was told. Since he readily admitted to deliberately burning Atlanta, I don’t see why he would bother with an elaborate deception in Columbia. Where is her new evidence?
I go by it’s traditional name which is the Civil War - brother against brother. I, too, do not believe they ever intended to conquer the North. But the genius of Lee is that he knew how to intimidate the north. Good for him.
“”He wanted to cripple the Confederacy,” said retired University of South Carolina journalism professor Patricia McNeely.”
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
Yeah, it was the “War between the States,” but they never really caught on. Like the “Battle of Bunker Hill” was fought at “Breed’s Hill”. It’s not accurate, but that’s what it’s known as.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.