Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Sherman's March

After learning about Sherman's "March to the Sea" in 1864, do you feel Sherman's strategy of "total war" was necessary and/or morally acceptable?  If Sherman had not used this strategy, might the outcome of the war have been different?


22 comments:

  1. After reading about Shermans march to the sea in 1864 i do fell his strategy was necessary if he did not use his total war than the south might have ended up winning the war the only way to defeat them was to use total war. I do think most of the total war strategy was morally acceptable except the killing of innocent people.
    -Jason per 2-3b

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that Sherman's strategy of "Total War" was unnecessary. I feel that there could have been a better way to end the war, while keeping the outcome the same. Although his plan did work and the Union won the war, i believe that he could have been less violent by not completely destroying all of Atlanta.
    Jenna R. Per 2/3 B

    ReplyDelete
  3. After reading about Sherman's march, I think it was neccesary to have tottal war. it was the only way to force the south to lose. If Sherman had not marched, we wouldn't of won the war. It would have gone on for maybe four more years.
    Parick.K 2/3 B

    ReplyDelete
  4. After learning about Sherman's "March to the Sea" in 1864, I do feel that this strategy was necessary for the Union to push forward and win the war. This was a very good strategy, for it cut off all of the necessities that the Confederates had. For example, during this march Sherman derailed the train tracks; cutting off the Confederates only way to get supplies. Also, Sherman's army either took or burned all of the other supplies, leaving the Southerns with nothing to move forward with. Therefore, without the use of Sherman's plan, I did not believe that the Union would have won the war.
    Mallory M. 2-3B

    ReplyDelete
  5. After reading about the Sherman's "March to the Sea" in 1864, I think it was necessary to do total war. It was necessary because if we didn't do this we would've lost the war. It was a good strategy because also during the war Sherman had also derailed the train tracks for he could cut off Confederates supplies. They used the supplies or burned them. If he hadn't have done this I do not think the union would have beaten the Confederates.
    -Rosy.D 8-10A

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. After reading about Sherman's march I feel this was an unnecessary course of action. While it did shorten the war and take out valuable Confederate Military and transportation hubs like Atlanta, and Savannah, Georgia the state was destroyed and they're crops and plantations burned and similarly destroyed, taking out the south's main source of economy. this makes me believe this move was to far.\
    Evan G. 8-10B

    ReplyDelete
  9. After learning more about Sherman's March. I think that his strategy "Total War" was necessary. I think this because if he did not follow the Confederates to finish them off we would not have as many victories as we do now. The Southerners could have regrouped and attacked again if Sherman didn't stop the,.
    Alan B. Period 8-10B

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ian Burke p 8-10B
    After reading about Sherman's march, i believe that this strategy was necessary for the end of the war.Because he burned supplies and buildings, even family homes,he destroyed the Confederate morale and will to fight.

    ReplyDelete
  11. After reading Sherman's March to the Sea I feel his strategy was necessary. The war would have gone on so much longer and roughly if he had not done that. There would have been more deaths and starvation if he had not.
    Gabby G
    Period: 8-10B

    ReplyDelete
  12. After reading about Sherman's March to the sea, I do believe that his strategy was necessary. If this didn't happen, the war probably would have been so much longer. If we didn't do this, we probably would have lost the war. Death; starvation. Imagine having at least 10x more deaths without the Shermans March to the Sea.
    Natasha M. Period 8/10 B

    ReplyDelete
  13. After learning about Sherman's March to the Sea" in 1864, I feel Sherman's strategy of "total war" was necessary. If he hadn't done so the Confederates might have done the same to the Union and the Confederates would've have surrendered. If Sherman didn't use his strategy of "total war" the Confederates would still be able to fight the Union and the war would've dragged on much longer and there'd be many more casualties. Though, I don't think it was morally acceptable. They killed innumerable people and the South had to start from scratch after what happened. If Sherman hadn't used this strategy, the South might've won. If that happened, slavery might still exist today and African American's would never have the rights they deserve.

    Jennica L.
    Period 2/3 B

    ReplyDelete
  14. I feel that the strategy "Total War" was a plan that greatly contributed to the Union victory. However, I do feel that there could have been another way that the Union could have won without all of the destuction of the Confederates, but it would have taken a while longer to do this.
    Brian G
    Period 5/9 A

    ReplyDelete
  15. This strategy was a great strategy because the south would never know it was coming and if they wanted to react to all the damage they are doing they cant. Everything will be destroyed so what are they going to defend them selves with? Thats why it was a great plan for north
    Blake F
    Period 5/9 A

    ReplyDelete
  16. After reading about Sherman's March to the Sea, I feel that "total war" was a very good strategy and necessary in war. This march weakened the Confederates so much, destroying major cities, buildings, crops, and supplies for the Confederate army. It was much easier for the Union to attack the Confederacy after this march, since they were so much weaker. They had less supplies, the major cities of Atlanta and Savannah were destroyed, and many people were starving to death because of the lack of crops. Another major, intelligent act done by William T. Sherman to the South was to rip up the railroad tracks to cut off transportation. William Tecumseh Sherman made the right choice of total war, which made it easier for the Union to win the Civil War. I wonder what the outcome of the war would have been if there was no Sherman's March to the Sea.
    Colin B.
    Period 5/9 A

    ReplyDelete
  17. After learning about Sherman's March to the Sea, I believe that his strategy "Total War" was necessary and did benefit the Union. By completely destroying the South it made them weaker and if it wasn't for this strategy I'm sure the war would have lasted longer. By destroying their supplies and crops they got very weak because they didn't have food in their system which gave them no energy to fight. Also, by stealing their supplies they had less to fight with. This was a good strategy because the Confederates never expected it which made them even more confused which led to us winning. I don't think that we would have had such a great victory if it wasn't for the "Total War". I wonder what it would be like if we didn't do this strategy during the war.
    Miranda B
    Period 2-3 A

    ReplyDelete
  18. After learning about Sherman's "March to the Sea" in 1864,I feel Sherman's strategy of "total war" was necessary because Sherman was desperate. Yes Sherman was was that desperate to destroy all the civilian's property. Sherman had to do something or he knew he would have been defeated. I do believe that if Sherman had not used this strategy he would have been defeated because this is a very useful tactic that he used but I do believe he shouldn't have invaded civilian's home.

    Jason B 5-9 A-Day

    ReplyDelete
  19. I feel that "Total war was very unnecessary. I think this because it was just marching into Georgia (Atlanta) destroying everything in sight. Although, he would've been defeated, he shouldn't have went into peoples merchandise, Houses or Stores. For no reason! I thought generals had class

    ReplyDelete
  20. Comment Above by Kian C. 5/9 (A)

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sherman's total war strategy was very unnecessary. It was because you could win a war without actually cutting off their supply and food and other needed supplies to live and fight a good war. so in my opinion the whole "total war" thing was ridiculous.
    Jordan Buckland Period 5/9

    ReplyDelete