Posted on 08/20/2014 5:31:44 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
His march through Georgia has been gravely misunderstood ― as has Israel’s strategy in Gaza.
William Tecumseh Sherman 150 years ago took Atlanta before heading out on his infamous March to the Sea to make Georgia “howl.” He remains one of the most controversial and misunderstood figures in American military history. Sherman was an attritionist, not an annihilationist — a strategist who believed in attacking the sources that fuel and field an army rather than butting heads against the army itself. To review his career is to shed light on why the Israeli Defense Forces were both effective in Gaza and hated even more for being so effective.
Much of the South has hated William Tecumseh Sherman for over a century and a half, but not because his huge army killed thousands of young Confederate soldiers (it did not). Grant did that well enough in the horrific summer of 1864 outside Richmond. Rather, Sherman humiliated the plantationist class by staging three long marches during the last twelve months of the Civil War — from Tennessee to Atlanta, from Atlanta to Savannah, and from Savannah up through the Carolinas. In each of these brilliantly conducted invasions, Sherman, with a few notable exceptions, sought to avoid direct fighting with Confederate forces, either outflanking opposing armies that popped up in his way, or entrenching and letting aggressors wear themselves out against his fortified lines. He did enormous material damage, as he boasted that his enemies could do nothing to impede his progress — humiliation being central to his mission.
Instead of fighting pitched battles, Sherman was interested in three larger strategic agendas. War in his mind was not a struggle between militaries so much as between the willpower of entire peoples ....
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
First because of all the animosity that get stirred up.
Second, because the comparison is sketchy and not very clear or very close.
William Tecumseh Sherman 150 years ago took Atlanta..
***
He borrowed just long enough for the Confederates to destroy it.
Talk about Federal overreach, what the hell was the Fugitive Slave Act? The first time Congress interfered with state laws and the first time Federal law could force citizens to bow to their will.
You have selective history comprehension.
In 1860, most people knew secession would bring war. Your claims that “Secession is legal” were not the majority opinion even then. The only question then was if the loyal states would stand up to it or not. The arrogant Slave Power guessed wrong just as smart Southern leaders like Sam Houston warned them.
When the idiot Jeff Davis ordered the firing on Sumter, he drove the loyal states into supporting war. The other thing that amazes me about you guys is that you think that the US has sucked for the last 150 years. Why the hell are you still here if it sucks so bad?
Why am I here? I’m living in the South. Your ignorance about Sumter is typical. Public school?
What is my “ignorance” about Sumter? Please tell all wise guru.
The Civil War's over man ... (for almost 150 years now!) .... Sherman dropped the big one ...
NOTHING is over until WE say it is ............
I’m still waiting for you to detail my ignorance about the events at Sumter.
Um, nope. That would be Tzfat, not I.
“Hitler was a military moron, thank God.”
I on one of the NYT daily WWII threads that by mid 1944 the allies had no intention of trying to kill Hitler as he was too valuable for our side to lose.
“The purpose of an army is to kill people and break things. “
That’s a clever quip by a talk show host, it’s not military science. The purpose of an army is to impose your will, it’s an extension of politics. This can be accomplished by blockades and sieges. The first strategic move by the Union was Scott’s Anaconda, the blockade of southern ports.
Fans of Sherman and the Union in general should keep in mind that American citizens were the targets of their violence. Lincoln denied that the Confederacy existed. In his view there were no “Confederate citizens”, there were only rebellious citizens of the United States. And Congress didn’t declare war. It funded Lincoln’s use of the army to suppress an insurrection by American citizens in rebellious American states.
Someday a President like an Obama might declare that Americans who refuse to follow his executive orders are in rebellion. And in need of the sort of correction that was used in the past. Lincoln raised the army and blockaded ports and suspended habeus corpus all on his own, while Congress was not in session. If a President were to do this again I wonder if he would get his own Temple built in Washington DC and be hailed as the best President ever?
I'd remind you that Congress approved of every one of Lincoln's actions when they returned to Washington. If you want to make Lincoln the target of all your hatred, you ignore that Congress and the people of the loyal states supported and if fact demanded those actions.
“I’d remind you that Congress approved of every one of Lincoln’s actions when they returned to Washington.”
I never said they didn’t. But I do suspect they wouldn’t have been as precipitous in starting a war. They had the chance to do this in response to the Star of the West incident and they didn’t.
” If you want to make Lincoln the target of all your hatred, “
Please point out this ‘hatred’ you speak of. Criticism of Abe Lincoln isn’t ‘hatred’, except perhaps to those who regard him as a sort of divinity. Which is a considerable number considering that he has his own monument in the capital like the Temple to a Roman Caesar. They weren’t divine either despite the confusion in some Roman minds.
The Star of the West wasn't hit, just driven off. When Sumter was pounded into surrender, it was a different story. It inflamed passions in the North.
“The Star of the West wasn’t hit, just driven off. “
In fact it was hit by three shells. From wiki:
“Star of the West was given a warning shot across the bow and turned about to leave the harbor mouth. She was hit three times by what were effectively the first shots of the American Civil War.”
From history.com:
“When South Carolinians seceded from the Union on December 20, 1860, they demanded the immediate withdrawal of the Federal garrison at Fort Sumter. President James Buchanan refused to comply with this demand but was also careful not to make any provocative move. Inside the fort, Major Robert Anderson and his 80 soldiers needed supplies. The Buchanan administration decided to dispatch a civilian ship, the Star of the West, instead of a military transport, in order to keep tensions from flaring.
“The Star of the West left New York on January 5, 1861. After the ship was en route, Secretary of War Joseph Holt received a dispatch from Anderson saying that the garrison was safe and supplies were not needed immediately. Anderson added that the secessionists were building gun emplacements overlooking the main shipping channel into Charleston Harbor. Holt realized that the ship was in great danger and a war might erupt. He tried in vain to recall the Star of the West, and Anderson was not aware that the ship continued on its way.
“On the morning of January 9, Star of the West captain John McGowan steered the ship into the channel near the fort. Two cannon shots roared from a South Carolina battery on Morris Island. They came from gunner George E. Haynsworth, a cadet at The Citadel in Charleston. The shots, while poor, represented the opening salvo of the war. More shots were fired, and the ship suffered a minor hit. Anderson watched from Fort Sumter but did not respond in support of the ship. If he had, the war might have started on that day.”
There’s an interesting reprint at the following site from the January 19, 1861 Harper’s Weekly that includes letters between Ft Sumter’s Major Anderson and SC Governor Pickens:
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/major-anderson-ft-sumter_Dir/star-of-the-west.htm
The Vietnam War was a military victory for the United States until the enemy destroyed our willingness to fight.
Would surgery be less painful if they used a dull knife?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.