BuryYourDuke wrote:You're right. He didn't want to kill all southerners. He wanted to kill more than 1 in 4 males, and terrorize the civilian population into subservience. He only wanted to set back a region of the country for more than a hundred years. He only oversaw the endorsement of mass rape of southern women and the murder of slaves.
To use cold hard numbers 25% is a whole lot less than 100%. In war you sorta want your enemies to become subservient.
And what is this endorsement of rape you keep mentioning? General order 28?
As for setting a region of the country back 100 years, what's your point? Depriving your enemy of food shelter and supplies is a tactic of war. What defeated enemy HASNT been set back after losing a war? Do you suggest they should have politely asked the surprised, out numbed ill equipped troops to kindly surrender? Warfare is an ugly business. While Sherman's March can be classified as harsh, it was successful, and shortened the war by breaking Southern spirit. There is a reason it is studied today.