Total Warfare Too Much?

Sherman's March Too Harsh - Paul Miller - Core 3

Total warfare is when one side makes the sacrifice basically anything in order to get a complete victory. One perfect example of this is Sherman's March. On Sherman's March, Sherman ordered his men to destroy economic and political buildings, as well as plantations, crops, stores, and basically people's lives in the South. How would you like it if a major war general came by and destroyed everything you owned, and you weren't even a part of the war? That is how it happened for lots of people when they found their plantations destroyed. War is unfair, harsh, and brutal, but it is unacceptable to destroy people's lives back home. There are other war strategies that could have worked, but I do not think destroying normal citizens' property was the best way. Sure, it may have created an economic advantage for the Union, but did it really require destroying their food source? That is why I think Sherman's March was too harsh. Many people have said WWI is an example of total war. The reason for this is that there were countless resources poured into the war. During WWI, entire cities were destroyed by bombs, battle, etc. and there were many civilian deaths as well as military deaths. Everyone made sacrifices during WWI, whether they wanted to or not. That's how it was in Sherman's March. Sacrifices were made unwillingly, destroyed by Sherman and his men. That is how WWI and Sherman's March were similar.

Comment Stream