Recommend
17 
 Thumb up
 Hide
160 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [7] | 

Wargames» Forums » General

Subject: Billy the Torch rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Hunga Dunga
Canada
Coquitlam
British Columbia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/150-years-later-wrestli...

To any number of Southerners, the Civil War general remains a ransacking brute and bully whose March to the Sea, which began here 150 years ago on Saturday, was a heinous act of terror. Despite the passage of time, Sherman remains to many a symbol of the North’s excesses during the Civil War, which continues to rankle some people here.

Yet this week, Atlanta became the site of a historical marker annotating Sherman folklore to reflect an expanding body of more forgiving scholarship about the general’s behavior. One of the marker’s sentences specifically targets some of the harsher imagery about him as “popular myth.”
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lance Runolfsson
United States
Medford
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
The door is a jar.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Neat another ACW argument thread started!!!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim F
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
Who knew trench warfare could be such fun?
badge
Ashwin in front of Tiger 131
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

To me he will always be a tank.
23 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Owen
United States
Norwich
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LanceRunolfsson wrote:
Neat another ACW argument thread started!!!


No doubt. To any number of southerners slavery was just a peculiar institution of in-kind wages and work performance and wasn't even the cause of the war in the first place.

Maybe in another 59 years we will begin to be able to have sober discussion of ACW issues that revolve around facts.

7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Runs with scissors
United States
Vancouver
Washington
flag msg tools
The die is cast.
badge
You say OCD like it's a bad thing.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was looking for specific examples of where he directed anything that could be termed war crimes, and couldn't find anything in the article. From my understanding his intent was to destroy morale, as well as anything militarily useful and he certainly succeeded at that.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Owen
United States
Norwich
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
autumnweave wrote:
I was looking for specific examples of where he directed anything that could be termed war crimes, and couldn't find anything in the article. From my understanding his intent was to destroy morale, as well as anything militarily useful and he certainly succeeded at that.


The entire epicenter of the war was over property, specifically the property represented by the slaves. Sherman targeted property explicitly. In addition, wherever Federal armies roamed slaves took the opportunity to flee. Until Sherman's march this was mostly a factor in the coastal areas and border states, he brought it to the heart of the Confederacy. I don't think anything he did was a war crime by 20th Century standards.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.L. Robert
United States
Sherman Oaks
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Follow me for wargames!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I guess it's different when Russians do the same thing to their own land?

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth DeCato

Clearfield
Utah
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wargamer55 wrote:
autumnweave wrote:
I was looking for specific examples of where he directed anything that could be termed war crimes, and couldn't find anything in the article. From my understanding his intent was to destroy morale, as well as anything militarily useful and he certainly succeeded at that.


The entire epicenter of the war was over property, specifically the property represented by the slaves. Sherman targeted property explicitly. In addition, wherever Federal armies roamed slaves took the opportunity to flee. Until Sherman's march this was mostly a factor in the coastal areas and border states, he brought it to the heart of the Confederacy. I don't think anything he did was a war crime by 20th Century standards.


no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union. Slavery was one reason for the separation but the war was not started because of the slaves. The emancipation proclamation was just used as another means to hamper the south by getting slaves to revolt and for raising more troops in the north.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yodlaf Peterson
United States
Ohio and West Texas
Пиндостан
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lazytribe wrote:

no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union.


The war decided one issue- when a state joins the union it may not later leave.

Slaves in states which did not secede (Maryland, Delaware and Kentucky) were not freed until later; they were not included in the Emancipation Proclamation
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ashiefan wrote:
To me he will always be a tank.

Or Mr. Peabody's sidekick.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lazytribe wrote:
no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union.

And why did they want to leave the Union? Because they feared that the Union would end slavery. Remember that the Confederates started the shooting at Fort Sumter.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Stuart
United States
Los Alamos
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hungadunga wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/150-years-later-wrestli...

To any number of Southerners, the Civil War general remains a ransacking brute and bully whose March to the Sea, which began here 150 years ago on Saturday, was a heinous act of terror. Despite the passage of time, Sherman remains to many a symbol of the North’s excesses during the Civil War, which continues to rankle some people here.

Yet this week, Atlanta became the site of a historical marker annotating Sherman folklore to reflect an expanding body of more forgiving scholarship about the general’s behavior. One of the marker’s sentences specifically targets some of the harsher imagery about him as “popular myth.”


What I find interesting (= outrageous) is this: the people who were behind secession -- the people who engineered it -- didn't care how much blood was shed, northern or southern. What they did care about, however, was the destruction of their property. So, the bloodiest battles of the Civil War -- how noble! Sherman, however, hit them where it really hurt. His march through the South was notable for two things: the deliberate destruction of the property of the wealthy landowners, and a deliberate avoidance of battle except when it was absolutely necessary.


38 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David M
United States
Huron
Ohio
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:


What I find interesting (= outrageous) is this: the people who were behind secession -- the people who engineered it -- didn't care how much blood was shed, northern or southern. What they did care about, however, was the destruction of their property. So, the bloodiest battles of the Civil War -- how noble! Sherman, however, hit them where it really hurt. His march through the South was notable for two things: the deliberate destruction of the property of the wealthy landowners, and a deliberate avoidance of battle except when it was absolutely necessary.




Word.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim P.
United States
Champaign
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
"Oh, uh, there won't be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness." So I got that goin' for me, which is nice.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Nice summation.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Owen
United States
Norwich
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
lazytribe wrote:
wargamer55 wrote:
autumnweave wrote:
I was looking for specific examples of where he directed anything that could be termed war crimes, and couldn't find anything in the article. From my understanding his intent was to destroy morale, as well as anything militarily useful and he certainly succeeded at that.


The entire epicenter of the war was over property, specifically the property represented by the slaves. Sherman targeted property explicitly. In addition, wherever Federal armies roamed slaves took the opportunity to flee. Until Sherman's march this was mostly a factor in the coastal areas and border states, he brought it to the heart of the Confederacy. I don't think anything he did was a war crime by 20th Century standards.


no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union. Slavery was one reason for the separation but the war was not started because of the slaves. The emancipation proclamation was just used as another means to hamper the south by getting slaves to revolt and for raising more troops in the north.


That was Lincoln's legal justification but the cause of the war was the dispute over slavery. We know this is so because the Confederates explicitly told us so in four secession conventions, the Cornerstone Speech, many newspaper editorials and together public pronouncements, as well as the relevant sections of the Confederate constitution.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Owen
United States
Norwich
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sapa inca wrote:
lazytribe wrote:

no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union.


The war decided one issue- when a state joins the union it may not later leave.

Slaves in states which did not secede (Maryland, Delaware and Kentucky) were not freed until later; they were not included in the Emancipation Proclamation


Yet the war really did decide that issue as well. The difference in MD, dE and KY and MO was that the slave-holding interests were not strong enough to override the interests of the pro-Union portion of the polity. It was clear that slavery would not survive the war if the federals won. The only question was the terms under which it would end. The short-sightedness of the slave holders was epic. I believe that well into 1862 Lincoln tried to negotiate a compensated emancipation but found no interest.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.L. Robert
United States
Sherman Oaks
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Follow me for wargames!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
*sigh* Here we go again...
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sommers
United States
Clinton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
wargamer55 wrote:
LanceRunolfsson wrote:
Neat another ACW argument thread started!!!


No doubt. To any number of southerners slavery was just a peculiar institution of in-kind wages and work performance and wasn't even the cause of the war in the first place.

Maybe in another 59 years we will begin to be able to have sober discussion of ACW issues that revolve around facts.

You mean facts like Lincoln's support for the Corwin amendment, which would have guaranteed that slavery was permanent?

What caused the war was Lincoln's determination to undo secession. There can be no real dispute about that.

What caused secession was largely, but not exclusively, slavery, but secession did not have to lead to war.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
Si non potes reperire Berolini in tabula, ludens essetis non WIF.
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tms2 wrote:
wargamer55 wrote:
LanceRunolfsson wrote:
Neat another ACW argument thread started!!!


No doubt. To any number of southerners slavery was just a peculiar institution of in-kind wages and work performance and wasn't even the cause of the war in the first place.

Maybe in another 59 years we will begin to be able to have sober discussion of ACW issues that revolve around facts.

You mean facts like Lincoln's support for the Corwin amendment, which would have guaranteed that slavery was permanent?

What caused the war was Lincoln's determination to undo secession. There can be no real dispute about that.

What caused secession was largely, but not exclusively, slavery, but secession did not have to lead to war.


Unsubscribed. This shit gets old.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sommers
United States
Clinton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
sapa inca wrote:
lazytribe wrote:

no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union.

The war decided one issue- when a state joins the union it may not later leave.

Brute force is always the best way to answer a constitutional question.

Quote:
Slaves in states which did not secede (Maryland, Delaware and Kentucky) were not freed until later; ...

You left out Missouri and DC. DC, Maryland, Missouri, West Virginia, and Tennessee abolished slavery on their own, before the war ended.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dale Stephenson
United States
Buford
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
wargamer55 wrote:
That was Lincoln's legal justification but the cause of the war was the dispute over slavery. We know this is so because the Confederates explicitly told us so in four secession conventions, the Cornerstone Speech, many newspaper editorials and together public pronouncements, as well as the relevant sections of the Confederate constitution.


We know from the Confederates that *secession* (at least of the original confederate states) was about slavery. We know from Lincoln that the war was about *union*. The CSA would not have invaded the North if Lincoln had let them go peacefully, Lincoln would not have accepted secession even if accompanied by emancipation.

Here in the Atlanta area I heard a teacher describe Sherman as "worse than Hitler", but she wasn't completely serious. I'm a great admirer of Sherman myself.
9 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sommers
United States
Clinton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
Eric Brosius wrote:
lazytribe wrote:
no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union.

And why did they want to leave the Union? Because they feared that the Union would end slavery. Remember that the Confederates started the shooting at Fort Sumter.

Is that a general proposition, that whoever shoots first is to blame for every war?
3 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sommers
United States
Clinton
New Jersey
flag msg tools
wifwendell wrote:
tms2 wrote:
wargamer55 wrote:
LanceRunolfsson wrote:
Neat another ACW argument thread started!!!

No doubt. To any number of southerners slavery was just a peculiar institution of in-kind wages and work performance and wasn't even the cause of the war in the first place.

Maybe in another 59 years we will begin to be able to have sober discussion of ACW issues that revolve around facts.

You mean facts like Lincoln's support for the Corwin amendment, which would have guaranteed that slavery was permanent?

What caused the war was Lincoln's determination to undo secession. There can be no real dispute about that.

What caused secession was largely, but not exclusively, slavery, but secession did not have to lead to war.

Unsubscribed. This shit gets old.

What really gets old is the oft-repeated false propaganda claim that slavery caused the war. The sole purpose of this propaganda is to make the victors look better, cloaking their war of naked conquest with a thin veneer of morality. Remember, Congress passed an amendment that would have prohibited the feds from abolishing slavery. They didn't do that and then, a few weeks later, go to war to abolish slavery.

What also gets old is people who stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALALALALALALA" when faced with inconvenient facts.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Sager
United States
San Diego
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tms2 wrote:
Eric Brosius wrote:
lazytribe wrote:
no the center of the war was about the southern states leaving the union.

And why did they want to leave the Union? Because they feared that the Union would end slavery. Remember that the Confederates started the shooting at Fort Sumter.

Is that a general proposition, that whoever shoots first is to blame for every war?


My god, you get old.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wendell
United States
Yellow Springs
Ohio
flag msg tools
Si non potes reperire Berolini in tabula, ludens essetis non WIF.
badge
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tms2 wrote:
wifwendell wrote:
tms2 wrote:
wargamer55 wrote:
LanceRunolfsson wrote:
Neat another ACW argument thread started!!!

No doubt. To any number of southerners slavery was just a peculiar institution of in-kind wages and work performance and wasn't even the cause of the war in the first place.

Maybe in another 59 years we will begin to be able to have sober discussion of ACW issues that revolve around facts.

You mean facts like Lincoln's support for the Corwin amendment, which would have guaranteed that slavery was permanent?

What caused the war was Lincoln's determination to undo secession. There can be no real dispute about that.

What caused secession was largely, but not exclusively, slavery, but secession did not have to lead to war.

Unsubscribed. This shit gets old.

What really gets old is the oft-repeated false propaganda claim that slavery caused the war. The sole purpose of this propaganda is to make the victors look better, cloaking their war of naked conquest with a thin veneer of morality. Remember, Congress passed an amendment that would have prohibited the feds from abolishing slavery. They didn't do that and then, a few weeks later, go to war to abolish slavery.

What also gets old is people who stick their fingers in their ears and go "LALALALALALALALA" when faced with inconvenient facts.


Well here is a god-damned inconvenient fact for you that has been presented before in this forum, and always ignored or danced around because Lincoln bad yadda yadda yadda. I won't bother going through the constitutions of the Confederacy AND of the individual Confederate states with their bald statements that they founded the Confederacy to protect SLAVERY. Because you and others of your ilk don't want to hear it. So read the damn thing yourself and then have a good time making your usual stupid rationalizations over how these statements don't mean anything, etc.

Modern History Sourcebook:
Alexander H. Stephens (1812-1883):
Cornerstone Address, March 21, 1861

Alexander H. Stephens, the VICE PRESIDENT OF THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA wrote:

We are in the midst of one of the greatest epochs in our history. The last ninety days will mark one of the most memorable eras in the history of modern civilization.

... we are passing through one of the greatest revolutions in the annals of the world-seven States have, within the last three months, thrown off an old Government and formed a new. This revolution has been signally marked, up to this time, by the fact of its having been accomplished without the loss of a single drop of blood. (Applause.) This new Constitution, or form of government, constitutes the subject to which your attention will be partly invited.

In reference to it, I make this first general remark: It amply secures all our ancient rights, franchises, and privileges. All the great principles of Magna Chartal are retained in it. No citizen is deprived of life, liberty, or property, but by the judgment of his peers, under the laws of the land. The great principle of religious liberty, which was the honor and pride of the old Constitution, is still maintained and secured. All the essentials of the old Constitution, which have endeared it to the hearts of the American people, have been preserved and perpetuated.... So, taking the whole new Constitution, I have no hesitancy in giving it as my judgment, that it is decidedly better than the old. (Applause.) Allow me briefly to allude to some of these improvements. The question of building up class interests, or fostering one branch of industry to the prejudice of another, under the exercise of the revenue power, which gave us so much trouble under the old Constitution, is put at rest forever under the new. We allow the imposition of no duty with a view of giving advantage to one class of persons, in any trade or business, over those of another. All, under our system, stand upon the same broad principles of perfect equality. Honest labor and enterprise are left free and unrestricted in whatever pursuit they may be engaged in ....

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other-though last, not least: the new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the Constitution, was the prevailing idea at the time. The Constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly used against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it-when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. [Applause.] This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It is so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North who still cling to these errors with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind; from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is, forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics: their conclusions are right if their premises are. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights, with the white man.... I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the Northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery; that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle-a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of man. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds we should succeed, and that he and his associates in their crusade against our institutions would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as well as in physics and mechanics, I admitted, but told him it was he and those acting with him who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

In the conflict thus far, success has been on our side, complete throughout the length and breadth of the Confederate States. It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly planted; and I cannot permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of a full recognition of this principle throughout the civilized and enlightened world.

As I have stated, the truth of this principle may be slow in development, as all truths are, and ever have been, in the various branches of science. It was so with the principles announced by Galileo-it was so with Adam Smith and his principles of political economy. It was so with Harvey, and his theory of the circulation of the blood. It is stated that not a single one of the medical profession, living at the time of the announcement of the truths made by him, admitted them. Now, they are universally acknowledged. May we not therefore look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first Government ever instituted upon principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many Governments have been founded upon the principles of certain classes; but the classes thus enslaved, were of the same race, and in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. The negro by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, [note: A reference to Genesis, 9:20-27, which was used as a justification for slavery] is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite-then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is the best, not only for the superior but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in conformity with the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances or to question them. For His own purposes He has made one race to differ from another, as He has made "one star to differ from another in glory."

The great objects of humanity are best attained, when conformed to his laws and degrees [sic], in the formation of Governments as well as in all things else. Our Confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders "is become the chief stone of the corner" in our new edifice.

Source:

Alexander H. Stephens, "Cornerstone Address, March 21, 1861 " in The Rebellion Record: A Diary of American Events with Documents, Narratives, Illustrative Incidents, Poetry, etc., vol. 1, ed. Frank Moore (New York: O.P. Putnam, 1862), pp. 44-46.

edit: quote fail fixed
38 
 Thumb up
1.80
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [7] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.