hey fieldmusician123 aka "he who plows little boys." i hate fags and blacks and also i am a nazi. sherman was all of the above (fag and black, not a nazi lol). his faggy little dick couldn't even get his mom pregnant, though he tried desperately to achieve such ends. he was almost as gay as you.
I have my ggrandfather’s Grand Army of the Republic medal. He was a Reb in the 30 Tenn Regt CSA. Just before Vicksburg he was captured at battle of Raymond MS and sent to Camp Morton POW camp at Indianapolis. Offered to join the Yankees or die in prison, he joined the 23rd Ind Light Artillery, USA. He was with Sherman through the Battle of Atlanta, then sent back to Tenn to fight at Franklin, and Nashville. Then to S. Carolina to rejoin Sherman. "If you can’t lick 'em, join 'em," haunted him.
@tmodel1000 A lot of reb prisoners fought for the Yanks (just as some Russian POWs fought for the Germans in WWII, and vast numbers more would have gladly done so but for the Nazi racial "theories". Sherman's personal bodyguard was made up entirely of those boys - the 2nd Ala. Cav. (US). Since they'd be hanged if they surrendered, and the war might be lost if Sherman captured, he needed to be able to be certain that his bodyguard would fight to the death for him.
What Sherman did in his march to the sea throughout the state of Georgia is the exact equivalent to what America did when they bombed those 2 Japanese cities that ended WWII because of the same reason. To break the will of these people.
The difference, of course, being that he didn't actually go around killing civilians. He only foraged, which while drastic and unforgiving to the civilian population, could be recovered from eventually. Being turned to a shadow on the wall takes a LITTLE longer to recover from.
But the comparison is never the less apt. Both events, both acts were designed to end the war by ruining infrastructure and demoralizing/attacking the fighting spirit of a people,
@Mahbu,Also you need to remember too that the Japanese and the Southerners had the somewhat the same mentality on not wanting to surrender even though they were both outnumbered.
Correct. The South was tough and determined but more importantly it believed that, as long as Lee fought on, it could win. That the Southern way of life would prevail.
Sherman's march proved how vulnerable the South was, that its government was corrupt and inept. That the South couldn't do anything to stop the North and that it'd eat its words or, as I like to put it, it reaped what it sowed.
@XxRusty96xX Who does Mosby think he was, hanging random union soldiers for doing nothing wrong. Both sides acted barbaric in some ways, deal with it. Cant be changed.
@Mr19thIndiana As much as I hate the fact that Mosby did hang union soldiers it should be pointed out it was in retaliation against Union forces that did the same thing to Confederate prisoners. He sent a message to the Union General responsible telling him that every time a Confederate prisoner was hanged by Union troops he would do the same to a Union prisoner. The hanging stopped by both sides immediately. You are right atrocities were committed by both sides during that war and in all wars.
Mosby is an interesting character. He did not support slavery and actually believed the South was fighting for slavery but he sided with the South anyway out of loyalty and duty. He first retaliated against the lynching of his men then reasoned with the North over prisoner exchange. After the War he is saved by Grant, becomes a Republican, and supports General Grant's bid for election. And THEN he works for the Federal Government. (continue to next post)
@Mahbu Mosby retaliated because Seven of his men were hung, not "Lynched". Mosby's men (43rd Virginia Cavalry Battalion) captured around thirty Union soldiers. Only two were hung (William Wallace Prouty, 19 years old, joined the 5th Michigan Cavalry on September 22nd, 1864. He had a small pocket bible with his name and regiment in it. The others broke free and Mosby did not give the order to chase them. Mosby put the sign "Measure for Measure" around my ancestors neck.
Retaliation was unfortunately the only way, it seemed, to keep things anywhere near a 100% kosher. At least, kosher in their eyes. Unfortunatey it happened a little too often but it was the acceptable thing in that day, not like today. Today, at least in the west, the higher road must always be taken and permission must be sought to engage almost every target.
@XxRusty96xX And what would you call Anderson? Sherman put a quick end to the souths will to fight after Atlanta burned and he cut his path across the heart of the south.
" I am prepared to grant liberal terms to the inhabitants and garrison; but should I be forced to resort to assault, or the slower and surer process of starvation, I shall then feel justified in resorting to the harshest measures, and shall make little effort to restrain my army—burning to avenge the national wrong which they attach to Savannah and other large cities which have been so prominent in dragging our country into civil war."
General William mother fucking Tecumseh Sherman, that's who he thought he was and he burnt that land to remind those southern idiots of the futility of war and bring new meaning to reaping what you sow.
"You are particular in defining and claiming "war rights." May I ask if you enumerate among these the right to fire upon a defenseless city without notice; to burn that city to the ground after it had been surrendered by the inhabitants who claimed, though in vain, that protection which is always accorded in civilized warfare to non-combatants; to fire the dwelling houses of citizens after robbing them; and to perpetrate even darker crimes than these crimes too black to be mentioned?"
@TheBoberton Well Fredricksburg was in the middle of a fight and could not be avoided. Plus the south murdered the north in that battle on the heights anyways. The soldiers were ordered by sherman to hit the military buildings and burn them. When unknown troops burned houses and stole and all that, he couldnt point the finger at any random person because he didnt know who did it. Sherman was a good leader, knowing that burning factories meant it couldnt be used anymore. It was his men that burnd
@MustangWW2 hmmmm... I really don't remember posting that!!!!! Someone mascarading as me? hmmm... Strange, I could delete that comment, but not other ones that I have made... I hope somthin' screwy isn;t happening here.
I am foreigner from Europe, however I am interested in the History of the Civil War. It is very interesting the Confederating Army found the skilled generals at once, but the Union Army only 2 years later. As there were Sherman, Grant, Thomas, Sheridan.
@avenaoat You have it right: the Union had the manpower but the Confederacy had the skilled generals. Lincoln's key military challenge was in fielding a general who was aggressive and strategically ruthless. He didn't have him until Grant. Sherman and Sheridan won key victories.
@bookkeeper57,That's true because if you look at the generals who fought in the Spanish-American War,they were more former Confederate generals than Union generals.
Indeed. And many of the generals he had to work with were tangled in politics. So they got where they were not by ability but by string pulling and there was very little Lincoln could do if he wanted to remain elected.
The North could have easily won in 1862 had Grant and Sherman been in command. It took 2 costly years for the fighting Generals to be appointed. Hats off to the Confederates for the fight they put up. (One an ancestor who died in 1864 after lingering in a dreadful hospital with a head wound for 7 days.)
It took Sherman some time to get used to handling volunteer troops, but once he learned, like the volunteers, these Westerners became THE stoutest fighters in the Union Army.
I'm a big fan of the author Bruce Catton. He states that had the North won the war early (which they could have easily done but squandered) the war wouldn't have escalated into the full-scale destruction which happened later on. As Sherman said, "the crueler war is, the sooner it'll be over. War is the remedy our Southern brothers have chosen and I say, let them have all they want."
As a kid in highschool, in 1994, I wrote a rather lenghty paper on this matter. I focused on the effective tactic of WTS to cut off the North's effectiveness. My teacher was actually impressed by what I wrote. I did all this as a favor to honor a man that changed the course of history. History was the class I wrote the paper for and I love the American history!!!
No matter which side you prefer to take, Union, or Confederates, the war will still be the same. Your ideas may be different but the war will be the same. The battlefields may vary, but the war is the same. Lets leave it that way. What hapend then is unnessasary to have to argue about it today, what happend happend and thats all there is too it.
Sherman is buried over the hill from my Great grandfather and grandfather in St. Louis 3 great Americans. Long live the Union. Death to all traitors!!!
@homer63109 The only "traitors" was the union. They fought against the ideas of the founding fathers. People can think what they want about the civil war, but calling a man who defends his home and his family a traitor, that is just too low.
The brave men who fought in the civil war should be honored. All of them.
Since Germans and Russians are ashamed of beign associeted with the Soviet and Nazi parties Why is it that modern southerners are so darn proud of being associeted with the confederacy!? The Germans and Russians are truely sorry guys, the entertianment industry needs to shift the focus away from them and on to our less than apologetic neo-confederate nieghbors and have them as the featured villians of all of our non-modern war games and movies.
Sherman was one of the few genuine geniuses to emerge from the Civil War. While most of the Southern leadership were captives to the spell of Napoleonic warfare, Sherman anticipated the features of Total War that were to prevail in the 20th Century. The outcome of any conflict must be decided by the conclusive application of superior force. The South didnt know what hit them!
I think the Union Army was great! But what Sherman did on his march was just evil, he just destroyed every thing in his path. I read that about the only thing he spared was a Hound dog and thats it.
youcannot say sherman was more important than grant because they fought in diffrent theaters and had diffrent objectives. shermans was to take control of key southren strongholds and grants was to capture the mississippi river. plus grant was shermans superior.
They were both equally important in their own ways. Neither could have won the war without the other. They were lost without each other. As Sherman himself put it. "Grant stood by me when I was crazy, and I stood by him when he was drunk, and now we stand by each other."
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Sherman was garbage. Never faced a standing army of any significance whatsoever, but he sure was a bad man against women, children, and old men, burning homes, robbing, pillaging, and turning the civilian populations on their ears. Real tough guy, let me tell ya.
mikedatigah--Sherman faced significant CS armies plenty of times--Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chattanooga, the whole Atlanta Campaign, and Bentonville. And more often than not, he won. The only reason he didn't face a standing army on the March to the Sea and the Carolinas was because of Hood's harebrained decision to invade Tennessee instead of staying in front of Sherman to protect the people and resources of Georgia. Had Hood done this instead, it's likely that march would not have been made.
General Sherman ended the civil war. He lived in the South and warned them to not secede. He told them that they would lose in a war. They ignored him. Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was one of his pall bearers. Sherman played a big part in California and San Francisco history before the Civil War. He was instrumental in the Gold Rush of 1848-49. He fought against the San Francisco vigilantes. Study history! The Southern hate against Sherman goes against the facts of history.
@mars5 You suck he didnt live in the south he killed thousand of women 10 of thousands of children and (Black and white) you know Sherman your a terrorist
@mars5,It's so funny that the south made a villainous picture of Sherman,but at the same time,the southern blacks were whipped to pick up the cotton fields and were treated less than human beings.
William Tecumseh Sherman burned down a sixty mile wide swath of Georgia, starting with Atlanta. Many cities that existed before 1864 are no longer on the map because of that man. As he went along, foraging MIGHT (Big might there) have been ok, if he had not allowed his men to steal everything that wasn't bolted down.
Ever heard of Roswell, Georgia? It was just one of many places that had no inhabitants after Sherman marched through.
@mars5 Sherman was far better then Grant was. He defended a Union fort of 300 men against a rebel cavalry attack of over 3000. If you ask me...Sherman should have been in charge in the West. A shitload less people would have died. Grant sent that number through the roof with his careless tactics.
Indeed. The hate for sherman is misplaced, most likely born of resentment for the humiliation he brought on them. Of course, from there it was greatly exaggerated. Never once do they realize that his actions saved lives by reminding the South of the futility.
"War is hell and not a popularity contest". Sherman's tactics were cruel yes, but he ultimately strove for a quick ending to the bloodshed. Without his march the war could have went on for years resulting in hundreds of thousands of more deaths. Like when Truman dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, it was cruel but it saved countless lives as Japan immediately surrendered making an invasion of the mainland uneccessary. In the long run Sherman actually saved lives by ending the war quickly.
hey fieldmusician123 aka "he who plows little boys." i hate fags and blacks and also i am a nazi. sherman was all of the above (fag and black, not a nazi lol). his faggy little dick couldn't even get his mom pregnant, though he tried desperately to achieve such ends. he was almost as gay as you.
hail hitler
coaster4587 5 months ago
@coaster4587 Troll fail.
XXGDUBSXX 5 months ago
@coaster4587 FYI Sherman and his wife had eight children- 4 sonsand 4 daughters.
kentamitchell 5 months ago
I have my ggrandfather’s Grand Army of the Republic medal. He was a Reb in the 30 Tenn Regt CSA. Just before Vicksburg he was captured at battle of Raymond MS and sent to Camp Morton POW camp at Indianapolis. Offered to join the Yankees or die in prison, he joined the 23rd Ind Light Artillery, USA. He was with Sherman through the Battle of Atlanta, then sent back to Tenn to fight at Franklin, and Nashville. Then to S. Carolina to rejoin Sherman. "If you can’t lick 'em, join 'em," haunted him.
tmodel1000 6 months ago
@tmodel1000 A lot of reb prisoners fought for the Yanks (just as some Russian POWs fought for the Germans in WWII, and vast numbers more would have gladly done so but for the Nazi racial "theories". Sherman's personal bodyguard was made up entirely of those boys - the 2nd Ala. Cav. (US). Since they'd be hanged if they surrendered, and the war might be lost if Sherman captured, he needed to be able to be certain that his bodyguard would fight to the death for him.
jking1737 5 months ago
What Sherman did in his march to the sea throughout the state of Georgia is the exact equivalent to what America did when they bombed those 2 Japanese cities that ended WWII because of the same reason. To break the will of these people.
98bigbutt 6 months ago
@98bigbutt
The difference, of course, being that he didn't actually go around killing civilians. He only foraged, which while drastic and unforgiving to the civilian population, could be recovered from eventually. Being turned to a shadow on the wall takes a LITTLE longer to recover from.
But the comparison is never the less apt. Both events, both acts were designed to end the war by ruining infrastructure and demoralizing/attacking the fighting spirit of a people,
Mahbu 6 months ago
@Mahbu,Also you need to remember too that the Japanese and the Southerners had the somewhat the same mentality on not wanting to surrender even though they were both outnumbered.
98bigbutt 6 months ago
@98bigbutt
Correct. The South was tough and determined but more importantly it believed that, as long as Lee fought on, it could win. That the Southern way of life would prevail.
Sherman's march proved how vulnerable the South was, that its government was corrupt and inept. That the South couldn't do anything to stop the North and that it'd eat its words or, as I like to put it, it reaped what it sowed.
Mahbu 6 months ago
fuck sherman. Burning our land, who the fuck did he think he was. South Carolina FTW
XxRusty96xX 1 year ago
@XxRusty96xX Who does Mosby think he was, hanging random union soldiers for doing nothing wrong. Both sides acted barbaric in some ways, deal with it. Cant be changed.
Mr19thIndiana 1 year ago
@Mr19thIndiana As much as I hate the fact that Mosby did hang union soldiers it should be pointed out it was in retaliation against Union forces that did the same thing to Confederate prisoners. He sent a message to the Union General responsible telling him that every time a Confederate prisoner was hanged by Union troops he would do the same to a Union prisoner. The hanging stopped by both sides immediately. You are right atrocities were committed by both sides during that war and in all wars.
686204 1 year ago
@686204
Mosby is an interesting character. He did not support slavery and actually believed the South was fighting for slavery but he sided with the South anyway out of loyalty and duty. He first retaliated against the lynching of his men then reasoned with the North over prisoner exchange. After the War he is saved by Grant, becomes a Republican, and supports General Grant's bid for election. And THEN he works for the Federal Government. (continue to next post)
Mahbu 9 months ago
@Mahbu Mosby retaliated because Seven of his men were hung, not "Lynched". Mosby's men (43rd Virginia Cavalry Battalion) captured around thirty Union soldiers. Only two were hung (William Wallace Prouty, 19 years old, joined the 5th Michigan Cavalry on September 22nd, 1864. He had a small pocket bible with his name and regiment in it. The others broke free and Mosby did not give the order to chase them. Mosby put the sign "Measure for Measure" around my ancestors neck.
rebel2276 6 months ago
@rebel2276
Retaliation was unfortunately the only way, it seemed, to keep things anywhere near a 100% kosher. At least, kosher in their eyes. Unfortunatey it happened a little too often but it was the acceptable thing in that day, not like today. Today, at least in the west, the higher road must always be taken and permission must be sought to engage almost every target.
Mahbu 6 months ago
@XxRusty96xX May Sherman march again, motherfucker!
tiradegrandmarshal 1 year ago
@XxRusty96xX And what would you call Anderson? Sherman put a quick end to the souths will to fight after Atlanta burned and he cut his path across the heart of the south.
orckiller91 11 months ago
@orckiller91
'And what would you call Anderson?'
A response to Camp Douglas?
TheBoberton 10 months ago
@XxRusty96xX In the words of the General himself:
" I am prepared to grant liberal terms to the inhabitants and garrison; but should I be forced to resort to assault, or the slower and surer process of starvation, I shall then feel justified in resorting to the harshest measures, and shall make little effort to restrain my army—burning to avenge the national wrong which they attach to Savannah and other large cities which have been so prominent in dragging our country into civil war."
ssimmons0602 10 months ago
@XxRusty96xX
General William mother fucking Tecumseh Sherman, that's who he thought he was and he burnt that land to remind those southern idiots of the futility of war and bring new meaning to reaping what you sow.
Mahbu 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"You are particular in defining and claiming "war rights." May I ask if you enumerate among these the right to fire upon a defenseless city without notice; to burn that city to the ground after it had been surrendered by the inhabitants who claimed, though in vain, that protection which is always accorded in civilized warfare to non-combatants; to fire the dwelling houses of citizens after robbing them; and to perpetrate even darker crimes than these crimes too black to be mentioned?"
TheBoberton 1 year ago
@TheBoberton Well Fredricksburg was in the middle of a fight and could not be avoided. Plus the south murdered the north in that battle on the heights anyways. The soldiers were ordered by sherman to hit the military buildings and burn them. When unknown troops burned houses and stole and all that, he couldnt point the finger at any random person because he didnt know who did it. Sherman was a good leader, knowing that burning factories meant it couldnt be used anymore. It was his men that burnd
Mr19thIndiana 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Mr19thIndiana
When did I speak of Fredricksburg?
I am speaking of cities that had no men, or at most a few guerrillas.
Hell, Atlanta had SURRENDERED after the Confederate army retreated, and Sherman burned it to the ground.
TheBoberton 1 year ago
Sherman marched through on a tour through the south and much hillarity ensued
sleazypig 1 year ago
fuck sherman and his devil yankees!!!!!!
makedeido 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fuck your gay ass video bitch fagget
871622 1 year ago
@FeildMusician123 As long as I have known you, I have never heard you say such a thing
MustangWW2 1 year ago
@MustangWW2 hmmmm... I really don't remember posting that!!!!! Someone mascarading as me? hmmm... Strange, I could delete that comment, but not other ones that I have made... I hope somthin' screwy isn;t happening here.
FeildMusician123 1 year ago
@FeildMusician123 Are you coming to Allison's Woods?
MustangWW2 1 year ago
I am foreigner from Europe, however I am interested in the History of the Civil War. It is very interesting the Confederating Army found the skilled generals at once, but the Union Army only 2 years later. As there were Sherman, Grant, Thomas, Sheridan.
avenaoat 1 year ago
@avenaoat You have it right: the Union had the manpower but the Confederacy had the skilled generals. Lincoln's key military challenge was in fielding a general who was aggressive and strategically ruthless. He didn't have him until Grant. Sherman and Sheridan won key victories.
bookkeeper57 1 year ago
@bookkeeper57,That's true because if you look at the generals who fought in the Spanish-American War,they were more former Confederate generals than Union generals.
98bigbutt 1 year ago
@bookkeeper57
Indeed. And many of the generals he had to work with were tangled in politics. So they got where they were not by ability but by string pulling and there was very little Lincoln could do if he wanted to remain elected.
Mahbu 9 months ago
Lesson: Don't start shit 'cos Sherman gonna come and fuck you up good.
PubliusAfricanus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PubliusAfricanus More like kill your family and burn your house
ChristheAussie 1 year ago
The North could have easily won in 1862 had Grant and Sherman been in command. It took 2 costly years for the fighting Generals to be appointed. Hats off to the Confederates for the fight they put up. (One an ancestor who died in 1864 after lingering in a dreadful hospital with a head wound for 7 days.)
It took Sherman some time to get used to handling volunteer troops, but once he learned, like the volunteers, these Westerners became THE stoutest fighters in the Union Army.
OldVoice 1 year ago
I'm a big fan of the author Bruce Catton. He states that had the North won the war early (which they could have easily done but squandered) the war wouldn't have escalated into the full-scale destruction which happened later on. As Sherman said, "the crueler war is, the sooner it'll be over. War is the remedy our Southern brothers have chosen and I say, let them have all they want."
OldVoice 1 year ago
Sherman didn't deserve to call himself an American. He allowed the rape of Savannah. He was no Jackson, Lee, or Grant.
Edubbplate 1 year ago
This is an awesome song!!! I'm learning it on fife!!!
fluteisawesome 1 year ago
As a kid in highschool, in 1994, I wrote a rather lenghty paper on this matter. I focused on the effective tactic of WTS to cut off the North's effectiveness. My teacher was actually impressed by what I wrote. I did all this as a favor to honor a man that changed the course of history. History was the class I wrote the paper for and I love the American history!!!
Superegio42 1 year ago
@FeildMusician123 my friend, nice video, we truely live in some strange times.
DragonWorldProducts 2 years ago
No matter which side you prefer to take, Union, or Confederates, the war will still be the same. Your ideas may be different but the war will be the same. The battlefields may vary, but the war is the same. Lets leave it that way. What hapend then is unnessasary to have to argue about it today, what happend happend and thats all there is too it.
DragonWorldProducts 2 years ago
Sherman is buried over the hill from my Great grandfather and grandfather in St. Louis 3 great Americans. Long live the Union. Death to all traitors!!!
homer63109 2 years ago 2
@homer63109 The only "traitors" was the union. They fought against the ideas of the founding fathers. People can think what they want about the civil war, but calling a man who defends his home and his family a traitor, that is just too low.
The brave men who fought in the civil war should be honored. All of them.
Stender84 2 years ago
Comment removed
autistipton 1 year ago
Since Germans and Russians are ashamed of beign associeted with the Soviet and Nazi parties Why is it that modern southerners are so darn proud of being associeted with the confederacy!? The Germans and Russians are truely sorry guys, the entertianment industry needs to shift the focus away from them and on to our less than apologetic neo-confederate nieghbors and have them as the featured villians of all of our non-modern war games and movies.
ShermansWarHammer 2 years ago
I had Ancestors in one of the first units to march through Savannah's gates. 78th NY. Huzzah for Sherman.
bullyboy1863 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Sherman was one of the few genuine geniuses to emerge from the Civil War. While most of the Southern leadership were captives to the spell of Napoleonic warfare, Sherman anticipated the features of Total War that were to prevail in the 20th Century. The outcome of any conflict must be decided by the conclusive application of superior force. The South didnt know what hit them!
johnsammyanfal 2 years ago
i named my favorite cat after him.
GENERAL sherman.
my cat is gone now-------but he still lives
MrSkegman 2 years ago
evil???
you got to kidding me--
stop the fight---the south was finished.
-----but they kept it up--
Sherman finished it,
i love him
MrSkegman 2 years ago
I think the Union Army was great! But what Sherman did on his march was just evil, he just destroyed every thing in his path. I read that about the only thing he spared was a Hound dog and thats it.
superwhitings23 2 years ago
That is what won th war saving many lives than a prolonged war would.
ComradeMoreau 2 years ago 8
youcannot say sherman was more important than grant because they fought in diffrent theaters and had diffrent objectives. shermans was to take control of key southren strongholds and grants was to capture the mississippi river. plus grant was shermans superior.
craneschoolhouse 2 years ago
They were both equally important in their own ways. Neither could have won the war without the other. They were lost without each other. As Sherman himself put it. "Grant stood by me when I was crazy, and I stood by him when he was drunk, and now we stand by each other."
USPSAman 2 years ago
absolutely great ! The song really takes me back to the civil war. Sherman was an important person in the war, more important than Grant I'd say.
wisserke 2 years ago
Brilliant,
timnolan1972 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Sherman was garbage. Never faced a standing army of any significance whatsoever, but he sure was a bad man against women, children, and old men, burning homes, robbing, pillaging, and turning the civilian populations on their ears. Real tough guy, let me tell ya.
mikedatigah 2 years ago
mikedatigah--Sherman faced significant CS armies plenty of times--Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chattanooga, the whole Atlanta Campaign, and Bentonville. And more often than not, he won. The only reason he didn't face a standing army on the March to the Sea and the Carolinas was because of Hood's harebrained decision to invade Tennessee instead of staying in front of Sherman to protect the people and resources of Georgia. Had Hood done this instead, it's likely that march would not have been made.
galoon 2 years ago
General Sherman ended the civil war. He lived in the South and warned them to not secede. He told them that they would lose in a war. They ignored him. Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was one of his pall bearers. Sherman played a big part in California and San Francisco history before the Civil War. He was instrumental in the Gold Rush of 1848-49. He fought against the San Francisco vigilantes. Study history! The Southern hate against Sherman goes against the facts of history.
mars5 3 years ago 26
@mars5 You suck he didnt live in the south he killed thousand of women 10 of thousands of children and (Black and white) you know Sherman your a terrorist
ChristheAussie 1 year ago
@mars5,It's so funny that the south made a villainous picture of Sherman,but at the same time,the southern blacks were whipped to pick up the cotton fields and were treated less than human beings.
98bigbutt 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The quote below was made by Wade Hampton in a letter to Sherman (Hit the 500 character mark)
TheBoberton 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mars5
And you ignore the facts of history.
William Tecumseh Sherman burned down a sixty mile wide swath of Georgia, starting with Atlanta. Many cities that existed before 1864 are no longer on the map because of that man. As he went along, foraging MIGHT (Big might there) have been ok, if he had not allowed his men to steal everything that wasn't bolted down.
Ever heard of Roswell, Georgia? It was just one of many places that had no inhabitants after Sherman marched through.
(Cont)
TheBoberton 1 year ago
@TheBoberton good.
tbonesays 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(Cont)
All of the women of the city were shipped north, many of them raped by his men along the way.
Looking at the real facts I must say this:
Death to all foragers
TheBoberton 1 year ago
@mars5 Sherman was far better then Grant was. He defended a Union fort of 300 men against a rebel cavalry attack of over 3000. If you ask me...Sherman should have been in charge in the West. A shitload less people would have died. Grant sent that number through the roof with his careless tactics.
SoulKiller7Eternal 1 year ago 2
@mars5
Indeed. The hate for sherman is misplaced, most likely born of resentment for the humiliation he brought on them. Of course, from there it was greatly exaggerated. Never once do they realize that his actions saved lives by reminding the South of the futility.
Mahbu 9 months ago
"War is hell and not a popularity contest". Sherman's tactics were cruel yes, but he ultimately strove for a quick ending to the bloodshed. Without his march the war could have went on for years resulting in hundreds of thousands of more deaths. Like when Truman dropped the atomic bomb on Japan, it was cruel but it saved countless lives as Japan immediately surrendered making an invasion of the mainland uneccessary. In the long run Sherman actually saved lives by ending the war quickly.
camprandle 3 years ago 4
Im doing a report on Sherman! Great Video!
teckstuf 4 years ago
Thanks
FeildMusician123 4 years ago
great video
XoDynaoX 4 years ago