OT: 141st Anniversary of Custer's Last Stand w/ Mich connection

"All that Sherman proposed to do in Georgia was well within the existing laws and customs of war and not all that different, at least qualitatively, from what Lee and his army had practiced in Pennsylvania the preceding summer."  

-Steven Woodworth "This Great Struggle" page 316

Stonewall Jackson proposed doing exactly what Sherman did, except to the North, 2 and a half years BEFORE Sherman did it to the South.  Jackson even had his map maker make a map for an invasion into Pennsylvania to carryout such actions.

I don't sympathize with the whines of the South over Sherman.

Additionally, previously in the war the Union Army of the Potomac arrived across the river from Fredericksburg Virginia.  The Cofederate Army of Northern Virginia then arrived second and moved into the city itself.

The Confederates fired out of the city first.  It is laughable that the Confederates scream bloody murder that the Union fired back into the city after the Confederates moved into the city and fired out of it.  There are still lost causers that talk about the horrors of Union soldiers firing into "George Washington's boyhood hometown," but they never mention the Confederate actions begging such a response by the Union.

This precedent that if Confederates moved into a city and fired out of it, it was therefore fair game, had been established well before Sherman and Atlanta.

Ridiculous post on so many levels.

#1 The US didn't sign the Geneva Convention until 1882 - and that one only protected civilians aiding wounded.  Not civilians or their property, period.  Also, Sherman had already started on his march before this first treaty was ratified in Europe - NOT in the US.

#2 If we are to use modern day standards, I could make a legitimate argument that the Continental Armies were war criminals.

Robert E. Lee was then a war criminal.  His men did everything Sherman did BEFORE Sherman.  Just that Sherman had more ability to do it longer.

#3 And you ignored this - Sherman violated no laws, treaties, or conventions of war for his day and time, period.

#4 Sherman did not set any such precedent and it is laughable lost cause BS to claim so.

"In later generations, popular legend would have it that Sherman invented destructive warfare  specially for the use on this operation, and the claim would be taken up by some historians who ought to have known better.  In fact, the practice of attacking an enemy's economy and infrastructure and therby also his morale was as old as warfare, nor had it gone into disuse during the supposedly limited wars of the eighteenth century, much less those of the Napoleonic era.  Such wars were certainly not limited in that way.  All Sherman proposed to do in Georgia was well within the existing laws and customs of war and not all that different, at least qualitatively, from what Lee and his army had practiced in Pennsylvania the preceding year." -Steven Woodward "This Great Struggle" Pages 315-316

#5 Sherman didn't target civilians for sport.  He was deep behind enemy lines and had to survive.  The Confederates chose to dig in behind Atlanta and then chose to fire first from the civilian areas.  This is using your civilians as human shields.  Sherman admitted that firing back would harm civilians, but that is different than how you are portraying it - and it was the Confederates choice to hunker in the city and shoot out of it.