Replies

Mrs. Don-o: "So realistic estimates could be made."

Statistical extrapolations only, that's what we have.
People look at the population growth rate from 1850 to 1860 and say, "if that same rate of growth had continued until 1870, then populations in 1870 would have been XX-thousands more than they were."
The difference between projected and actual they call "civilian deaths caused by war".

But what are we really talking about?

Men away at war don't father as many children.
Old people with reduced family care die sooner.
Economic migration and settlement patterns disrupted.
Slaves "set free" by military actions, no place to go, can't cope, victims of exposure, disease, etc.

However, actual data to support any of these factors is entirely lacking.

I think that your point regarding the relatively good behavior of soldiers on both sides of the Civil War is certainly a valid one. However, the fact that the war was conducted in a generally honorable fashion does not mitigate the moral responsibility of those who did commit dishonorable actions. Any number of civilians intentionally killed constitutes a war crime.

Is it a valid defense for a murderer in a criminal trial to point out that the society in which he lives has the lowest murder rate in the world? Obviously not. You seem to be using a similar defense for those men who committed war crimes during the Civil War.