View single post by Bama46
 Posted: Thu Aug 14th, 2008 02:27 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 


  back to top

"Sherman is certainly not as bad as he is sometimes portrayed but his men did get out of control and plunder the countryside. And his men were primarily responsible for what happened at Columbia. Another example is the way his men behaved in Milledgeville which at the time was the capitol of Georgia. To say that Sherman's men only targeted military infrastructure is just as disingenuous as the claim that he executed thousands of civilians and poured salt into the soil."

I would remind that a commander is responsible for the conduct of his men... If he allowed his men to plunder at will, and I believe that is exactly what he allowed..or did not stop, then I am not surprised his men 'loved' him

There is a very clear difference between war trophies and plunder.... by the destruction of civilian dwellings, the carting off of all food, and leaving old men, women and children destitute with no means of survival..he made war on them.

I stand with my original statement...he was a war criminal!

 Close Window