Replies

He did the equivalent of bombing German factories in WWII.

Not quite. We were targeting industrial facilities and their workforces because they were contributing to the war effort against us. What Sherman did was far more akin to the incendiary bombing of civilian targets in Japan, or the firebombing of Dresden. It was pure carnage. The destruction of Atlanta's industry probably did shorten the war, but Southerners have always had that 'fight to the last man' attitude, so killing so many civilians probably didn't bring an end to the war much faster, if at all. The destruction of the industry in the city, however, did shorten the war significantly.

Agreed it was indiscriminant. It extended into the plantation system which limited the ability to fund and feed an army as well as the civilians in their midst. Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended up being quite indiscriminant too.

What Sherman did was far more akin to the incendiary bombing of civilian targets in Japan, or the firebombing of Dresden. It was pure carnage.

The firebombing of Japan was not destruction for its own sake. I've read the autobiography of General Curtis LeMay, who designed that campaign, and commanded the units who carried it out. He did it for the same reason we bombed the German factories, to stop war production. The Japanese had decentralized their production after our initial attempt to follow the same strategy as the 8th Air Force did in Europe. (The Brits OTOH, did the "indiscriminate" night bombing thing, because they felt that it was much lower risk to their crews and planes). After the war, touring the burned out areas of Tokyo and other Japanese cities, he saw drill presses and other machinery sticking up out of the rubble of residential neighborhoods, and knew that he had made the right call.

(OTOH he's also the source of the Bomb 'Em Back To The Stone Age" quote in regards to taking care of North Vietnam. Sort of anyway, LeMay stole it from an Art Buchwald column lampooning the Goldwater Republican's supposed attitude toward Vietnam.

Not quite. We were targeting industrial facilities and their workforces because they were contributing to the war effort against us. What Sherman did was far more akin to the incendiary bombing of civilian targets in Japan, or the firebombing of Dresden. It was pure carnage. The destruction of Atlanta's industry probably did shorten the war, but Southerners have always had that 'fight to the last man' attitude, so killing so many civilians probably didn't bring an end to the war much faster, if at all. The destruction of the industry in the city, however, did shorten the war significantly.

You seem confused.

Aerial bombardment was a lot more destructive of civilian lives than anything that Sherman did.

Targets weren't pinpointed in WWII and it was difficult to avoid or escape the fires that followed bomber attacks.

In order to have carnage don't you need dead people? Sherman may have burned anything that supported the confederate war effort but your implication that he went around slaughtering anyone who moved is ridiculous. I'd like to know just how many civilians you think he killed?