Replies

These are NOT “Southron tales”. I am more than willing to pull ANY random sampling of pictures of Confederates - or of the general Southern populous, for that matter, taken in 1864 - 5, and see if they do not show very thin, underfed people. There are many - MANY - journals from Southern officers saying the same thing-that their troops were starving to death.

The South gave all it had in its’ attempt to win its’ independence. Something like 1/3 of all men of fighting age. All its’ wealth. Everything it had.

The rations of the Confederate army in -64 and early -65 are very well documented, for anyone willing to do a little research. If you don’t believe me, do some reasearch. The entire South was literally starving to death.

This says nothing about the “rebel leadership”. It says something about the dedication Southern men made to go to war; about the minimalist Southern navy and the effectiveness of the blockade; etc. The WAS NO FOOD, PERIOD. And that’s not all. There was no paper; there was not cloth to make clothing; nothing.

Life for troops in Andersonville was tough, no doubt. 95 degree heat in the south Georgia sun isn’t a lot of fun. What is even less fun was the yankee gangs that collected within the camp and beat up on - even killed - each other.

Yankee camps near Chicago (and other places north) were different. While a 95F afternoon in Geogia ain’t fun, a sub-feezing day in northern Illinois means DEATH. As stated, the yankees COULD have provided food and shelter - they just DIDN’T.

Ever read a transcript of Wirz’ trial? It was a complete kangaroo court. Union ‘judges’ thanked yankee witnesses who claimed to have seen Wirtz’ abuses for their “good and honest testimony” - until it was proven that the “witnesses” were not even AT Andersonville.

In fact, at Wirtz’ trial, there is only ONE witness who could not be discounted. He claimed that he had personally seen Wirtz shoot a prisoner in cold blood. Only two problems with his testimony:
1) Wirtz was not even AT Andersonville on the day the witness claimed; and
2) Sometime later, it was proven that this single “witness” was not at Andersonville at all. He was a Union deserter who wasn’t even there.

Wirtz was innocent. He paid the price for yankee radicals who wrote stories of “abuses” in Southern prison camps in northern newspapers, much has they had published repeated stories of abuses of Southern slaves. Take a little bit of truth, add in a bunch of over-the-top sensationalism, and you’ve got a real story. Actually, the liberal press isn’t a whole lot different today.

There was indeed someone who was guilty for what happened in the Southern prisons, though.
You see, the Confederacy asked Lincoln for medicine and food for the northern prisoners; even guarranteed passage for Union medics. Lincoln refused.
The South offered prisoner exchanges that would have saved their lives. Lincoln refused.

There was, indeed, a criminal involved.

His name: Abraham Lincoln.

Please do. I'm willing to look at any information at all on the starving Southern civilian population, and evidence of famine or widespread hunger, you may have. And if you can show where it was occuring in south Georgia, a fertile area untouched by the war, then you get extra credit.

The South gave all it had in its’ attempt to win its’ independence. Something like 1/3 of all men of fighting age. All its’ wealth. Everything it had.

They made their choice and they suffered terrible consequences as a result. But are we supposed to feel sorry for them?

The rations of the Confederate army in -64 and early -65 are very well documented, for anyone willing to do a little research.

As are the reasons why. And lack of available food had nothing to do with it. It was lack of transportation and sheer bloody incompetence in the confederate commissary that caused the problems. In his book "The Cause Lost: Myths and Realities of the Confederacy" William C. Davis points out that once John Breckenridge was appointed War Secretary he was able to accumulate several million rations for the army without much trouble. The issue was getting the food to the troops, currently bottled up in Petersburg and running for their life from Sherman.

If you don’t believe me, do some reasearch. The entire South was literally starving to death.

Well you've done the research, or so you say, so let's see the fruits of your labor. If the South was literally starving to death then there should be some evidence. Numbers who died of starvation or malnutrition. Pictures and tales of widespread hunger and deprivation. Let's see what you've been able to come up with.

Ah but there was.

And I'm not denying it. But the fact of the matter was that the South could have provided adequate food and decent shelter but they too refused to do so. The difference between us is that I don't try and justify the Union death camps while you go to ridiculous lengths trying to justify the Southern ones and try and lay blame everywhere but where it belongs, with Southern leadership.

War crime trials tend to be that way. I can only imagine what the Southern ones would have been like had they one their rebellion.

You see, the Confederacy asked Lincoln for medicine and food for the northern prisoners; even guarranteed passage for Union medics. Lincoln refused. i>

And had Lincoln done so that food and medicine would have no doubt found its way to the rebel army somewhere.

The South offered prisoner exchanges that would have saved their lives. Lincoln refused.

Because the South refused to include black Union POWs in the exchanges, insisting that they were runaway property and not soldiers. Why should the Union have dealt with the South if they weren't going to be upfront and honest about it?