Then I think we are either on the same page or talking past each other. I have never claimed that Sherman deserved to be hanged or that the entire Union army was comprised of war criminals. I have merely maintained that war crimes were committed by Sherman and others (as understood at the time, namely the making of war upon noncombatants) during the war. Painting Sherman as a monster who deserved to be executed is disingenuous, but then so is painting him as a totally honorable and innocent man. As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
People would do well to read the correspondence sent between Sherman and John Bell Hood when Sherman was on the outskirts of Atlanta. There were several messages sent back and forth between emissaries. They pretty much reveal Hood as a desperate drama queen who knew he was in a tight spot, and Sherman as a no-nonsense tactician. In summary, they basically read as follows:
HOOD: Dear General Sherman, Your siege of the city and shelling of civilian positions is the worstest, most eeeeevil, dastardly and criminal act in all the entire history of warfare. You are a very, very bad man and you lead an army of demons who are doing nothing but perpetrating great acts of horror. I urge you in the name of all that is good and decent and holy to please leave us alone.
SHERMAN: Dear General Hood. As per my previous correspondence, I have repeatedly made offers to provide for the safe evacuation of civilians from the city of Atlanta as far as my Army can guarantee their safety. You have declined same. I personally would rather not shell civilian positions, neighborhoods, churches, etc. If you would stop interspersing your soldiers and cannon amongst them, I would happily do so.