Did Sherman have to burn Atlanta?

Nook · Sep 13, 2011

weslinder said: ↑

Did he have to? No. He had defeated Atlanta, occupied it, and it was then a Union city. The Union was winning soundly at the time, and the Confederacy had little military will left to break. His actions were about ensuring that the South's will was broken to the point that they weren't a political threat to the North when the War was over. Don't forget that after the war, he campaigned for genocide against the Sioux. From the 150 years later, Sherman sure looks like an evil man.
Click to expand...

Sherman was an evil man.

liljojo · Sep 13, 2011

torque said: ↑

WRONG! Atlanta is a wonderful, soulful city.
Click to expand...

By soulful, do you mean black?
And by black, do you mean ghetto?

*liljojo ducks and covers

Forums

Did Sherman have to burn Atlanta?

Nook Member

liljojo Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!