...but innocent of any wrongdoing. Sherman had him executed in cold blood.
Before these executions, Sherman's men were subjected to bushwhacking and ambush by non-combatants. It was made very plain to authorities of the so-called CSA that if these actions outside the laws of war were not stopped, that reprisal executions would take place. More ambushes and bushwahcking followed. A few CSA POW's chosen by lot (or maybe just this one) were executed.
The bushwhacking stopped.
This was something done throughout the war.
There was a thread a few weeks ago venerating some CSA captain executed by federal forces.
Well, turns out he was executed for the cold blooded murder of 53 Union POW's at Saltville, VA. That puts a slightly different tinge on it, don't you think?
Many of those Union POW's were black.
Threatening, or executing, CSA prisoners in order to extort better treatment of US prisoners was a constant in 1863-65.
That is something the CSA cult mongers gloss over.
Walt
Yes Walt. Now how come you refuse to acknowledge WHY they were subjected to "bushwhacking" by non-combatants?
The answer is simple as to why non-combatants attacked northern soldiers, Walt. It was because those soldiers, part of an army of invasion, were actively participating in criminal acts against the property, homes, and persons of southern civilians. Many of those criminal acts were permitted and actively encouraged by those soldiers' commanders.
The right to defend oneself against those who would illegitimately violate their home, livlihood, and very existence is inherent to man's liberty and sanctity as a person. Sherman's men violated that right, making acts of self defense legitimate. Surely you do not argue that a civilian facing the torcher of his own home has no other option than to let that arsonist procede, do you? Surely you do not argue that a victim of rape has no other option than to "sit back and enjoy it" as the old saying so crudely suggests, do you?
It was made very plain to authorities of the so-called CSA that if these actions outside the laws of war
The actions for which the yankees were being shot at were themselves violations of the laws of war, thereby rendering your assertion void. Further, the right to defending one's own home, livlihood, and very existence against those who would illegitimately usurp it by violent and illegal means supersedes codified or law itself. Gen Wade Hampton directly informed Sherman of this reality in response to the yankee demands you mention above.
More ambushes and bushwahcking followed.
...and only because more rape, arson, looting, and theft against civilians preceded it.
A few CSA POW's chosen by lot (or maybe just this one) were executed.
...in retaliation to the fact that southern civilians attempted to defend their own person against criminal violations of it by Sherman's troops.
The bushwhacking stopped.
Actually, Sherman sanctioned looters were shot in the act through the end of the war.
Well, turns out he was executed for the cold blooded murder of 53 Union POW's at Saltville, VA.
Speaking of Saltville, I recently heard a report that the so-called massacre there was committed against less than a dozen troops. Any chance you could confirm that for me...perhaps by posting their names?