THE BATTLE OF ATLANTA: Civilians were Sherman's targets

Atlanta Journal Constitution ^ | 07/16/04 | JOHN A. TURES

[canalabamian]

Not only was William Tecumseh Sherman guilty of many of the crimes that some apologists portray as "tall tales," but also his specter seems to haunt the scandal-ridden halls of the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Sherman had a relatively poor record battling armies. His lack of preparation nearly destroyed Union forces at Shiloh. He was repulsed at Chickasaw Bluffs, losing an early opportunity to capture Vicksburg, Miss. The result was a bloody campaign that dragged on for months. He was blocked by Gen. Pat Cleburne at the Battle of Chattanooga and needed to be bailed out by Gen. George Thomas' Army of the Cumberland. His troops were crushed by rebel forces in the Battle of Kennesaw Mountain.

But Sherman knew how to make war against civilians. After the capture of Atlanta, he engaged in policies similar to ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia by expelling citizens from their homes. "You might as well appeal against the thunderstorm as against these terrible hardships of war," he told the fleeing population. Today, Slobodan Milosevic is on trial for similar actions in Kosovo.

An article on Sherman in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution last spring asserted that Sherman attacked acceptable military targets "by the standards of war at the time." This seems to assume that human rights were invented with the creation of the United Nations. But Gen. Grant did not burn Virginia to the ground. Gen. Lee did not burn Maryland or Pennsylvania when he invaded. Both sought to destroy each other's armies instead of making war against women and children, as Sherman did.

After promising to "make Georgia . . . howl," Sherman continued such policies in the Carolinas. Not only did he preside over the burning of Columbia, but he also executed several prisoners of war in retaliation for the ambush of one of his notorious foraging parties. While Andersonville's camp commander, Henry Wirz, was found guilty of conspiracy to impair the health and destroy the life of prisoners and executed, nothing like that happened to Sherman.

According to an article by Maj. William W. Bennett, Special Forces, U.S. Army, Sherman turned his attention to a new soft target after the Civil War: Native Americans. Rather than engage Indian fighters, Sherman again preferred a strategy of killing noncombatants. After an ambush of a military detachment by Red Cloud's tribe, Sherman said, "We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men, women and children."

Bennett notes that Sherman carried out his campaign with brutal efficiency. On the banks of the Washita River, Gen. George Armstrong Custer massacred a village of the friendly Cheyenne Chief Black Kettle, who had located to a reservation. Sherman was quoted as saying, "The more we can kill this year, the less will have to be killed the next war, for the more I see of these Indians, the more convinced I am that they all have to be killed or maintained as a species of paupers. Their attempts at civilization are simply ridiculous."

Such slaughter was backed by the extermination of the buffalo as a means of depriving the men, women and children with a source of food. Many Native Americans not killed by Sherman's troopers were forced onto reservations or exiled to Florida to face swamps and disease.

Now we have learned about the abuse of prisoners in Iraq. Such events may seem unrelated, were it not for reports that Sherman's policies are still taught to West Point cadets as an example of how to break an enemy's will to fight.

Are we therefore shocked by the acts of barbarity against Iraqi detainees? As long as we honor Sherman, teach his tactics and revise history to excuse his actions, we can expect more examples of torture and savagery against noncombatants we encounter in other countries.

John Tures is an assistant professor of political science at LaGrange College who was born in Wisconsin, opposes the 1956 Georgia flag and still has a low opinion of Sherman.

[Wampus SC]

"Yep. The Slaveship Wanderer by Tom Henderson Wells."

So you say. Now lets see some evidence that proves your denial that the captain and crew weren't all from the north, rather than you just expecting us to accept your stories at face value.

You must have it somewhere. Anywhere?

:)

[Wampus SC]

Still avoiding saying what the homeport was, are you? None of that changes the fact that telling where a ship was built does not tell where it's homeport is. It's still a misdirection, which is what you did, and are still doing.

[Wampus SC]

"btw, when we manage to fire up the majority of the black CSA desendents, such that they are even half as fierce for the TRUE CAUSE as their ancestors were,that actually wore the GRAY, damnyankees watch out!!!!"

It's easy to do, too. In one case, all it takes is showing those black descendants in the Sandhills what N-S says about them, their families, and their truthfulness. Take a guess at the reaction to Modernman's words saying that what happened to their families was good for their souls, and demanding they be grateful for it.

In my area, black Confederate heritage is strong and growing. It's because they're more interested in fact than in PC. Anyone whose family has been born and raised here for centuries is Southern through and through, regardless of their skin color.

[Non-Sequitur]

No arguement there. The goal of the war was the end of the rebellion and the preservation of the Union, and not to end or save slavery. I've never said otherwise. Just like I never said that the defense of the institution of slavery wasn't by far the single most important reason for the southern rebellion in the first place.

[Non-Sequitur]

You must have it somewhere. Anywhere?

Yep. In The Slaveship Wanderer by Tom Henderson Wells.

[Non-Sequitur]

The ship left from Charleston, South Carolina. That is as good a homeport as any.

[Wampus SC]

Doesn't mention the homeport. Doesn't mention where the captain and crew were from - at the time of the wreck on Jekyll Island, which is what we're discussing.

Just more running away, again.

[Wampus SC]

"The ship left from Charleston, South Carolina. That is as good a homeport as any."

Charleston is a good homeport to many ships. That doesn't say that Charleston's was the Wanderer's homeport. Saying it left from Charleston doesn't say that Charleston's its homeport. It's another misdirection. Sounds like you might be just expecting us to accept your stories at face value.

The USN link you claim as evidence says the ship was outfitted for the slave trade in NYC, and left there for Charleston. I could use that to imply - but not prove - that NYC was the Wanderer's homeport, and say NYC "is as good a homeport homeport as any". But I won't misdirect.

Will you now unequivocally state that the Wanderer's homeport was Charleston, SC at the time it entered the slave trade? Either it was, or it wasn't. Which was it?

[Wampus SC]

"No arguement there. The goal of the war was the end of the rebellion and the preservation of the Union, and not to end or save slavery.

Then I expect you from now on to correct those on FR who might in the future say that ending slavery was the primary reason why the US fought.

What about schools and textbook companies that teach that ending slavery was the primary reason the US fought? Have you done anything to help them correct this idea, and stop spreading this falsehood? Will you do so in the future?

[Wampus SC]

"Yep. In The Slaveship Wanderer by Tom Henderson Wells."

You keep saying that's where it is. Over and over and over. But you haven't actually produced any real evidence. Just a claim the evidence is there. Now lets see it.



(Don't worry, NS. It's a combined humor and education break at your expense.)

[Non-Sequitur]

Will you now unequivocally state that the Wanderer's homeport was Charleston, SC at the time it entered the slave trade? Either it was, or it wasn't. Which was it?

Well, it was build in New York so you could say that it was the home port. It was seized outside of New York on suspicion of slavery, so maybe New York was the home port. It was owned by people from Charleston and Savannah, so either one of them could be the home port. It left from Charleston, so maybe Charleston was it. So take your pick. If you want to say that New York was the home port then so be it. If you want to say it was Charleston then fine. What is unequivocal is the fact that the Wanderer was a slave ship, owned by southerners, sailing on behalf of southern interests, in the illegal importation of slaves. Right?

[Non-Sequitur]

But you haven't actually produced any real evidence. Just a claim the evidence is there. Now lets see it.

Well, if you want to actually see it, you'll need the book, won't you? It's out of print, so that may pose a problem.

[Non-Sequitur]

Then I expect you from now on to correct those on FR who might in the future say that ending slavery was the primary reason why the US fought.

I have never once agreed with anyone who said otherwise. I assume that you, too, will jump in and correct those who deny that slavery was the most important reason for the southern rebellion. Right?

[Non-Sequitur]

Nope. In order to learn that you'll need to read The Slaveship Wanderer by Tom Henderson Wells. It doesn't identify the point of origin of everyone in the crew, but does mention that it was a mix of U.S. and European.

[Wampus SC]

"Well, it was build in New York so you could say that it was the home port. It was seized outside of New York on suspicion of slavery, so maybe New York was the home port. It was owned by people from Charleston and Savannah, so either one of them could be the home port. It left from Charleston, so maybe Charleston was it. So take your pick. If you want to say that New York was the home port then so be it. If you want to say it was Charleston then fine. What is unequivocal is the fact that the Wanderer was a slave ship, owned by southerners, sailing on behalf of southern interests, in the illegal importation of slaves. Right?"

Wow, a snit. It is not I who has wanted to say that any given port is the Wanderer's home port. It is you who has been repeatedly asked what the homeport is. Remember, the "To msg#" button is everybody's friend but yours.

And nowhere in there did you answer the repeated, simple, direct question; and say what the home port is. Nowhere. As usual.

That sure was a lot of flustering and blustering and running around just so you could still keep evading. And evading, it's clear now, is all the anti-Southerner trolls have got.

[Wampus SC]

" I have never once agreed with anyone who said otherwise"

Correct. You haven't.

So, are you gonna jump in and correct those who say otherwise, or not?

You will, unless you're the kind of person who wants to allow falsehoods to be perpetuated.

[Wampus SC]

"Well, if you want to actually see it, you'll need the book, won't you? It's out of print, so that may pose a problem.

You mean you can't show it here?

Could you help by setting up a meeting where I could see it?

ROTFLMCAO

[Wampus SC]

"Nope. In order to learn that you'll need to read The Slaveship Wanderer by Tom Henderson Wells. It doesn't identify the point of origin of everyone in the crew, but does mention that it was a mix of U.S. and European."

Oh, so it really does do nothing to truly settle questions about the regional origins of the American crew members.

I see.

[Wampus SC]

"!!!!!!!"

Yeah, concerning #570, the alternative secession scenario. Changing places like that shows something. It shows how ridiculous it would be for anyone to have the attitude the yanktrolls insist we Southerners should have about the war and it's aftermath. And, how evil it is for them them to insist we have that attitude.

(PS: A note for those who aren't yanktrolls: when a yanktroll decides that a post is one he'd better not touch, and just skips over it - that's their way of admitting their ideas don't hold up.)

[stand watie]

EXACTLY correct. everywhere "my darkskinned brother by choice", H. K. Edgerton, & his brother go, they spread the TRUTH about dixie's CONTINUING struggle for LIBERTY & the CONTRIBUTIONS of her SABLE patriots!

AND the southern people, of ALL colors/religions/social sets ARE LISTENING!

when H.K. came to Austin, TX to march on the statehouse (after a PC-cretin in the state senate threatened to "jail any rebels that show that damned red, rebel flag") to "camp out" on the capitol lawn, he told me that he must have gained at least 10 POUNDS from eating all the chitterlings, fried chicken,fried tomatoes,okra, pies & cakes that the ladies (of every color of the rainbow & age group) of the area brought him during his GRAY-clad vigil!

even the PC-MORON from the senate did NOT have the guts to jail a BLACK man in CSA uniform, with battleflag, who was marching all day around the state capitol.

i wish i could have gotten off from work, without getting fired! (Perhaps he would have had a "blanket@$$ injun" jailed.)

free dixie,sw