Would Grant or Sherman have used nukes?
2 posted on
06/02/2020 9:28:50 AM PDT by
Hieronymus
(“I shall drink to the Pope, if you please, still, to conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards.Â)
To: Hieronymus
Sherman? Maybe so. He was certifiable.
8 posted on
06/02/2020 9:30:17 AM PDT by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire. Or both.)
To: wardaddy
See post 2 on this thread. I drew a blank and meant to ping you. Enquiring minds want to know.
15 posted on
06/02/2020 9:31:28 AM PDT by
Hieronymus
(“I shall drink to the Pope, if you please, still, to conscience first, and to the Pope afterwards.Â)
To: Hieronymus
Ha! Smoke ‘em, if you got ‘em
22 posted on
06/02/2020 9:34:57 AM PDT by
SMARTY
("Nobility is defined by the demands it makes on us - by obligations, not by rights".)
To: Hieronymus; Pelham
Although here’s a twist on old WT Sherman
His wrath upon the southern heartland may have been to win a war quickly more than his support of abolitionism
He knew the south and southerners and got on fairly well with them prior to the war
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/shermans-southern-sympathies/
I found this fascinating
To be fair union commanders like Grant and Sherman probably would not have completely destroyed the south in order to win so I temper my suggestion Sherman would have used nukes
GE Gatlin guns for sure but nukes likely not honestly
57 posted on
06/02/2020 4:18:30 PM PDT by
wardaddy
(I applaud Jim Robinson for his comments on the Southern Monuments decision ...thank you run the tra)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson