Yeah, and for a reason - there are certain times when one may justly take the life of a non-innocent, for example a murderer. Heck, even unintended civilian casualties in a war can, in certain times, be tolerable so long as you are making a conscious effort to minimize them in every way possible (kinda like Bush did in Iraq). But intentionally going out of ones way to wage warfare upon innocent civilians like Lincoln and his henchmen did is out of the question.
Let me simplify. In war, you have the right to kick the crap out of the enemy and to utterly destroy his war-making capacity.
Right? And exactly who gave you that "right," capitan?
Interesting that you would mention Thomas Jackson. Jackson was an early proponent of fighting a "psychological" war - one designed to break the will of the enemy.
Indeed he was, and all for the better. Jackson's psychological attack was to "show them the bayonet" as he often said. And the recipients of that bayonet being representative of a morally unjust effort of conquest, he was absolutely right in doing so. The soldier who I meet in battle is not always a perpetrator of evil - he shoots not because he hates me or wants something of mine, but rather for the same reason I shoot at him: the fact that if I do not, I will certainly get shot myself. The criminal who violates my land and property with an intent to physically harm me, however, is different as are armies composed of him. By making the initial violation in his very presence and intent of being there, he forfeits any claim he might have had to mercy on the battlefield.
There were a great many southerners in the areas I listed who "sat out" the war.
Then provide statistical data, that is if you can.
The natural right of self-preservation. Jefferson was a big advocate. You know who Jefferson is, don't you? "No man has a right to unjustly take the life and property of an innocent other ..."
Back to your original statement. The first part is a truism. However, it has no relation to the issue. I said, in war, one had the right to destroy the enemy's war-making capacity. If you take up arms against the rightful government, either as a civilian or in uniform, you can be killed. If you have a factory thats makes munitions, or a shipyard that repairs vessels, or a ranch that supplies horses, or a farm that grows food, or any activity that is used in making war, it can be destroyed.
"But intentionally going out of ones way to wage warfare upon innocent civilians like Lincoln and his henchmen did is out of the question."
Gratuitous accusations. No one who actively supports a war effort is an "innocent."