The winning side gets to set the rules but if the current trend of judging 19th century adventures by modern standards holds true it sems that Grant's generals would have been hanged for war crimes.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
All world leaders since time immemorial are and have been war criminals. The leaders of nations of men think not in terms of the welfare of the individual or of even hundreds of individuals, but think nothing of spending thousands, ten thousand or millions of lives if doing so serves their cause. The original idea of countless people living together in cities, kingdoms and nations was never meant to be in service of the common good or wealth but rather enrichment of the rulers who lorded over them. Belief in the kindness, goodness or morality of any world leader over another is the height of naïveté. Mankind only raises tyrants to lord over him. Been that way for many, many millennia. Putin is a partial throwback to tyrants of a more honorable if not civilized era. Naked tyranny will turn up again in the world, sooner than most people would or want to believe. After that happens, the Joe Bidens, Donald Trumps, and Justin Trudeaus of the world will seem like tranquil Sunday afternoons by comparison. Perhaps our world needs a modern-day Attila, Hannibal or Genghis to set things straight.
You need to seriously go fuck yourself. Putin is murdering thousands to restore an empire.Biden and others going on about Putin being a war criminal must never have heard tell of Sherman's March to the Sea and the whole "I can make this march and I intend to make Georgia Howl" thing.
Not to mention the sacking of the Shenandoah Valley and Gen. Sheridan quipping "A carrion crow in his flight across must either carry his rations or starve" during "The Great Burning" in 1864.
The Burning: Shenandoah Valley in Flames (U.S. National Park Service)
Both operations had the full support and blessing of both Grant and Lincoln, countless thousands suffered the effects of "scorched earth" at the hands of "invaders".
So were they they all war criminals or is it one of those "Oh, well that's different" type of things?
And Lincoln's armies killed thousands to restore the Union.....Not much difference from where I sit.You need to seriously go fuck yourself. Putin is murdering thousands to restore an empire.
Then you sit in the land of the insane. Ukraine is a separate country. Always has been. Good to see you are on the side of tyranny.And Lincoln's armies killed thousands to restore the Union.....Not much difference from where I sit.
Putin certainly underestimated the Ukrainian People....was it just stupidity or did his intelligence operatives feed him faulty information?....I tend to think a combination of the two.Is Putin a war criminal, only when it can be proved that during the war or occupation he purposely slaughtered unarmed people, or has the definition of war criminal changed? His unprovoked invasion of Ukraine doesn’t in my opinion make him a war criminal only another communist exercising Stalinistic behavior on his weaker neighbors in the attempt to reclaim what the USSR once was under Stalin. He underestimated the resolve of Ukrainians who knew their history and what life was like under communist rule. What the idiot did accomplish was to awaken and strengthen NATO in Europe and need for Ukraine to clean up its act so that it possibly could be asked to join NATO, exactly the opposite of what he set out to do. He should never had kicked the sleeping dog.
It was legal to own slaves but many at that time even Southerners did not think it was moral.Exactly and that has always been the case. It was moral to own slaves 200 years ago but no longer. It is call change and anyone who says there is an absolute moral code is kidding themselves.
The citizens of the South declared as such and got invaded for our trouble.Then you sit in the land of the insane. Ukraine is a separate country. Always has been. Good to see you are on the side of tyranny.
They were fighting a war, against a hostile nation that waged it against the United States.Biden and others going on about Putin being a war criminal must never have heard tell of Sherman's March to the Sea and the whole "I can make this march and I intend to make Georgia Howl" thing.
Not to mention the sacking of the Shenandoah Valley and Gen. Sheridan quipping "A carrion crow in his flight across must either carry his rations or starve" during "The Great Burning" in 1864.
The Burning: Shenandoah Valley in Flames (U.S. National Park Service)
Both operations had the full support and blessing of both Grant and Lincoln, countless thousands suffered the effects of "scorched earth" at the hands of "invaders".
So were they they all war criminals or is it one of those "Oh, well that's different" type of things?
So what gave Lincoln the right to invade another nation?They were fighting a war, against a hostile nation that waged it against the United States.
Grant and Sherman knew exactly how to win the war, the only way was to take away the Confederates means of support. And that's what they did. Sherman, Grant, and Lincoln are all HEROES.
Fuck the Confederacy, and fuck you for supporting it.
Why debate alternate history?So what gave Lincoln the right to invade another nation?
Now if he did not see the Confederacy as a nation then why did he not just invade SC when they (state troops) fired on Ft. Sumter instead of calling for 75K volunteers two days later with a eye on invading Virginia, which he did three months later culminating in the Battle of First Manassas?
I'll grant you that we should have picked our own cotton.Why debate alternate history?
In your mind, the Confederacy was justified in breaking from the United States, and in starting a war against the United States. Lincoln was not only the great emancipator, he was also wise in his decision to not seek vengeance against the traitorous south, although I'm not so sure, 150 years later, that this was the right strategy. Perhaps he should have burned the Confederacy to the ground, all of it. These states have perpetuated racism and division in this great country since that war ended.
I say again: Fuck the Confederacy.
These states have perpetuated racism and division in this great country since that war ended.
Yea, the country would be a little different today, wouldn't it? No ugly legacy of slavery, and not still dealing with the fallout of having a permanent underclass in America.I'll grant you that we should have picked our own cotton.
You're delusional. The Southern states were ready to go to war to protect that peculiar institution.It was legal to own slaves but many at that time even Southerners did not think it was moral.
Mr. Lincoln could have fostered a gradual elimination of slavery ......first by stopping the importation of slaves, then in deep consultation with the Southern States arrive at an agreement to gradually eradicate that peculiar institution.
So you'd tax the Northerners to pay 'reparations' to the South? Right.This could have been accomplished by re-imbursing the owners of slave by buying them back on a gradual basis
Too ignorant to even address. Of course we could have sent the Europeans back to Europe and solved the problem that way.and sending the freed slaves back to Africa(they are just too different to ever live in our socity in a peaceful and equitable manner)
That is exactly what Eli Whitney believed until it turned out it was exactly the opposite.this coupled with advancing technology that was eliminating the necessity of slaves to operate plantations would have ended slavey in a peaceful manner and prevented all the racial problems we have today.
You're delusional. The Southern states were ready to go to war to protect that peculiar institution.
So you'd tax the Northerners to pay 'reparations' to the South? Right.
Too ignorant to even address. Of course we could have sent the Europeans back to Europe and solved the problem that way.
That is exactly what Eli Whitney believed until it turned out it was exactly the opposite.
I'll grant you that we should have picked our own cotton.
Poor white wage earners up north led miserable lives and often starved....black slaves on the plantation had everything provided for them....good healthy food, clothes, housing and medical care....had many children and lived to ripe old ages......because the slaves were very valuable and plantation owners being good businessmen understood the necessity of taking good care of their valuable property.Poor Whites and Slavery in the Antebellum South: An Interview with Historian Keri Leigh Merritt
Her well-timed new book is "Masterless Men: Poor Whites and Slavery in the Antebellum South."historynewsnetwork.org