Replies

I'm not going muddy the waters with boatloads of unrelated material.

From the beginning of warfare to the advent of contemporary humanitarian law, over 500 cartels, codes of conduct, covenants and other texts designed to regulate hostilities have been recorded.

They include the Lieber Code, which came into force in April 1863 and is important in that it marked the first attempt to codify the existing laws and customs of war. Unlike the first Geneva Convention (adopted a year later), however, the Code did not have the status of a treaty as it was intended solely for Union soldiers fighting in the American Civil War.

Lieber, Francis (professor at Colombia College (New York); at the request of Abraham Lincoln, drew up a series of instructions for Union soldiers during the American Civil War

In 1863 there was an international convention in Geneva, Switzerland, that sought to codify international law with regard to the conduct of war. What the convention sought to do was to take the principles of "civilized" warfare that had evolved over the previous century, and declare them to be a part of international law that should be obeyed by all civilized societies. Essentially, the convention concluded that it should be considered to be a war crime, punishable by imprisonment or death, for armies to attack defenseless citizens and towns; plunder civilian property; or take from the civilian population more than what was necessary to feed and sustain an occupying army. On April 24, 1863, the Lincoln administration seemed to adopt the precepts of international law as expressed by the Geneva Convention, Vattel, and Halleck, when it issued General Order No. 100, known as the "Lieber Code."

http://www.ptialaska.net/~swampy/powers/mart_law.html#sec2

1864 Sherman would announce that "to the petulant and persistent secessionists, why, death is mercy." In 1862 Sherman wrote his wife that his purpose in the war would be "extermination, not of soldiers alone, that is the least of the trouble, but the people" of the South. His loving and gentle wife wrote back that her wish was for "a war of extermination and that all [Southerners] would be driven like swine into the sea. May we carry fire and sword into their states till not one habitation is left standing."

Just because you say it "isnt" a war crime dosen't make it so. You can pretend that Grant,Sheridan, and Sherman didn't commit war crimes and d*$k dance around it all you want. BTW-Well chosen screen name.

I'm not going muddy the waters with boatloads of unrelated material.

Huh? You claim that the Geneva Convention of 1864 contained all sorts of clauses preventing attacking cities, protecting property, and all the rest. I print the entire convention showing you're completely wrong and that becomesm 'boatloads of unrelated material'? You lied, there is nothing unrelated in that.

From the beginning of warfare to the advent of contemporary humanitarian law, over 500 cartels, codes of conduct, covenants and other texts designed to regulate hostilities have been recorded.

And how many of those existed prior to 1861? Name a few.

1864 Sherman would announce that "to the petulant and persistent secessionists, why, death is mercy."

Sherman also said, "War is the remedy our enemies have chosen. And I say let us give them all they want; not a word of argument, not a sign of let up, no cave-in until we are whipped - or they are." Sherman's tactics, while harsh, were effective and ended the war sooner. Sherman's tactics weren't a lot different than those practiced by Lee when he was in the North. If they were war criminals, then they were all war criminals together.