Sherman was a winner.
It's not a surprise you see a coward as a winner.
Sherman was a winner.
Coward? He marched into a fortified city and burned it. It wasn't fast, but it was effective. He wasn't a coward. He might have been batshit crazy, but he was not a coward.
He burned it, including killing innocent people. You are correct, he was a coward.
Johnston was the coward. He had a reputation for retreating before major contact with enemy forces.
Sherman's mission was to disrupt or remove the transportation hub in Atlanta. He succeeded.
In sieges, there always innocents killed. It is the nature of war, especially 150 years ago. That is not cowardice on the part of the command of either side. Gen Sherman acomplished his mission with the fewest casualties to his troops.
Sherman fought in a cowardly manner. Accomplishing something by using cowardly tactics doesn't mean you're not a coward. Sherman indiscriminately killed innocents.
Yes, innocents were killed. Atlanta was under siege. Artillery shells do not differentiate between soldiers and civilians.
from: https://www.thoughtco.com/shermans-march-to-the-sea-p2-104511
"Sherman’s March to the Sea devastated Georgia and the Confederacy. There were approximately 3,100 casualties of which 2,100 were Union soldiers, but the countryside took years to recover."
From the same link:
"Early in the war, the North had maintained a conciliatory policy towards the south, in fact, there were explicit orders to leave families enough to survive on. As a result, the rebels pushed their limits: there was a steep rise in guerrilla warfare on the part of Confederate civilians."
The "innocents" of which you speak helped keep the rebels alive and fighting.
There were 620,000 casualties during the Civil War. To have treated the south more gently would have raised the number of casualties.
Indiscriminately killed by a fucking coward you hold in high regard. There's no surprise there.
Your last sentence is pure speculation. If the southern states that seceded would have been allowed to go peacefully, there would have been no casualties as there would have been no war. How much more gentle can those wanting to leave be treated than to let them leave. We have thousands of people that voluntarily renounce their U.S. citizenship each year, a type of personal secession. We don't go to war with them. We let them go.
Sherman did not "indiscriminately" kill civilians. He was actually somewhat sympathetic to the southern cause.
And if a person wants to renounce their citizenship, that is fine. They don't get to take their state with them.
Plus, while States Rights are lauded as the reason, the Confederacy opposed states rights.
You don't get to "take your toys and go home" whenever you want.
You don't carry out a scorched earth plan then claim sympathy.
If the citizens of that STATE vote to do so and it's their toys, they do.
Typical left wing answer. Typical lack of knowledge from an Alabama, state school, graduate.
Sure you do. You carry out scorched earth tactics and end the war.
You can secede any time you want. We, the United States of America, will beat you into submission and put you back where you belong.
Which means you indiscriminately kill innocent people like a coward.
You couldn't keep your wife from dying. What makes you think you can do anything to anyone, coward?
I didn't have to do anything. The Civil War started 100 years before I was born. And the USA prevailed.
I'm not talking 100 years before you were born. Your wife died without you being able to do a damn thing to stop it. Why couldn't someone that presents himself as such a tough guy, smart, and worldly not prevent it? Apparently the grim reaper prevailed there.
So you are actually asking why, since I said I can kick your ass, could I not cure cancer? Are you really that stupid?
Let's get back to the topic of the thread, okay?
Seems you can't do either tough guy. Lots of talk, also lots of crying like a little bitch, yet nothing from you. I guess that's why you didn't show the night I came to your hangout.
Next time let me know you are coming, not a week after you say you were there. lol
Back to the topic.
The last bowl game is for all the marbles.
LSU v. Clemson.
Will Venables be able to stop LSU's Heisman winning QB? I don't know about stopping him. They will get their points. But it should be fewer points than usual.
Can Clemson score as much against LSU's defense?
Next time, don't make excuses because you know you know the results of having shown up, tough guy.
Hopefully it still hurts inside.
Clemson's defense stopped Alabama in the 2017 and 2019 games.
They won't have to stop them this year since LSU and Auburn did it preventing Alabama from getting to the playoff.