Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Myth or Truth of Sherman's March

Expand Messages
  • Ricky Washburn
    Whoa thats a bit far there...Many secesh houses were indeed buned....This Meridian town and out lying areas...including houses, churches, hospitals, we
    Message 1 of 90 , Aug 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Whoa thats a bit far there...Many secesh houses were
      indeed buned....This Meridian town and out lying
      areas...including houses, churches, hospitals, we
      leveled, only 3 houses were left even barly standing
      there....

      The money issue....Union sypathisers created
      counterfeit money to spread throughout the south so
      that the money there became worthless, there was no
      need to rob any backs, they did however, steal cotton
      and sold it to foreign contries....


      And no terrorist fires....thats a hard one... there
      was a war going on you see and things did happen...On
      both sides...and many involved fire...not just in
      NY...

      No but there was an attept to starve them to
      death...I dont know which id rather have done....

      And about the slavery, I recently read of a "trail of
      tears" for the south were the Yanks force marched
      southern displaced refugees to the north....maybe not
      slavery but maybe kidnapping?

      --- jaydee2065 <jaydee2065@...> wrote:


      > No citzens were taken from their homes and sold into
      > slavery, unlike
      > the AoNV in PA in 1863.
      >
      > No towns were given the option of paying tribute or
      > being burned,
      > unlike Early in MD in 1864.
      >
      > No banks were robbed, unlike St. Albans VT
      >
      > No terroist fires were set, unlike New York City.
      >
      > No attempt was made to spread yellow feaver.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >








      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com
    • Bill Bruner
      Tony, I didn t read Mr. Huddleston as saying that Meridian was a fiasco but only that it was an instance where Sherman was in independent command. Also wasn t
      Message 90 of 90 , Aug 7, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Tony, I didn't read Mr. Huddleston as saying that Meridian was a
        fiasco but only that it was an instance where Sherman was in
        independent command. Also wasn't Sherman in independent at
        Chickasaw Bluffs?
        Bill Bruner





        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Gunter"
        <tony_gunter@...>wrote:
        >
        > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Huddleston"
        > <huddleston.r@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Keep in mind., also, that neither man had been in independent
        command.
        > > Thomas' only independent command had been with a small number
        leading
        > up to
        > > Mill Springs two years before and Sherman's had been a fiasco in
        > Kentucky
        > > early in the war and more recently, I guess, the Meridian
        Campaign.
        >
        > I don't see how the Meridian Campaign can be considered a fiasco.
        > Halleck would not allow Sherman to re-allocate the troops under
        his
        > command. Rather than have them sitting idle, he proposed a two-
        prong
        > raid to clear out the Mississippi River Valley. One wing of that
        raid
        > would strike out for Meridian in the winter, and return to
        Vicksburg in
        > time to assist in the second wing's strike on Shreveport.
        >
        > Given these parameters, the Meridian Campaign was a success. The
        only
        > secondary objective I pick up on in Sherman's correspondence is
        that he
        > would have liked to have drawn Polk into a battle. However, he
        felt
        > that Sooy Smith's failure to show up allowed Polk to flee faster
        than
        > Sherman could bear upon him.
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.