• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

True American Hero

Rich2018 said:
"...Before the war, Sherman at times even expressed some sympathy with the view of Southern whites that the black race was benefiting from slavery, although he opposed breaking up slave families and advocated teaching slaves to read and write.] During the Civil War, Sherman declined to employ black troops in his armies...."

en.wikipedia.org

William Tecumseh Sherman - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

So a terrorist General and a racist to boot.
Click to expand...

Lol no, he wasn’t a “terrorist“. Under the laws of war in the mid 1860s he could have hung every good ole boy who took a potshot at a Union soldier and been perfectly within his rights.
 
beerftw said:
Well sheman is one of america's greatest monsters, his march won no favors and historically he is one of the most cruel generals having no issue going after civilians for military goals.

In the civil war you could have picked any other general, but you brought up the one that if a general today would have been imprisoned for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and in modern times would have fit better as a general for saddam hussein than america.
Click to expand...

He’s only a “monster” by the laughable standard Americans have, where property damage is considered the worst thing one can possibly do— far worse, in the minds of some folks, than kidnapping people and selling them into slavery.....which, by the way, is what that “gentleman” Robert E Lee allowed when his armies invaded the north.

Sherman didn’t let the fact that the people shooting at his men claimed to be “Americans” get in the way of defeating enemies of his country, or give the Confederate civilian populace the sort of special treatment they expected (despite them often being active combatants)......which is the real reason why people hate him.

Oh, and if you were imprisoning folks for war crimes you’d have to toss a hell of a lot of the various Confederate Army commanders in prison.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Lol no, he wasn’t a “terrorist“. Under the laws of war in the mid 1860s he could have hung every good ole boy who took a potshot at a Union soldier and been perfectly within his rights.
Click to expand...


Under German law in 1945, the Nazis had committed no crimes.
 
Rich2018 said:
Under German law in 1945, the Nazis had committed no crimes.
Click to expand...

Under the laws of war as they existed, they had committed numerous war crimes. Which is why they were tried and convicted.

In 1864 and 1865, however, the laws of war were still effectively in their infancy and there was not, in fact large scale protections for civilians, especially civilians who sought to conduct military operations without being in the military. Under the laws of war Sherman could have hung every last southerner who took a potshot at his men and been perfectly in the rignt—- just like the Prussians hung French partisans a few years later.

But he didn’t, which makes your premise rather laughable.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Under the laws of war as they existed, they had committed numerous war crimes. Which is why they were tried and convicted.
Click to expand...

No, they were tried and convicted under some laws that had not previously existed in addition to war crimes. The Holocaust, for instance, was not a war crime::

"The crimes charged before the Nuremberg courts were crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes. In all, 199 defendants were tried at Nuremberg, 161 were convicted and 37 were sentenced to death... "

encyclopedia.ushmm.org

The Nuremberg Trials

Trials of top surviving German leaders for Nazi Germany’s crimes began in Nuremberg after World War II. Read about the Nuremberg trials.
encyclopedia.ushmm.org encyclopedia.ushmm.org
.
 
Rich2018 said:
No, they were tried and convicted under some laws that had not previously existed in addition to war crimes. The Holocaust, for instance, was not a war crime::

"The crimes charged before the Nuremberg courts were crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes. In all, 199 defendants were tried at Nuremberg, 161 were convicted and 37 were sentenced to death... "

encyclopedia.ushmm.org

The Nuremberg Trials

Trials of top surviving German leaders for Nazi Germany’s crimes began in Nuremberg after World War II. Read about the Nuremberg trials.
encyclopedia.ushmm.org encyclopedia.ushmm.org
.
Click to expand...

Which is nothing like the military campaign waged by Sherman.
 
Rich2018 said:
No, they were tried and convicted under some laws that had not previously existed in addition to war crimes. The Holocaust, for instance, was not a war crime::

"The crimes charged before the Nuremberg courts were crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes. In all, 199 defendants were tried at Nuremberg, 161 were convicted and 37 were sentenced to death... "

encyclopedia.ushmm.org

The Nuremberg Trials

Trials of top surviving German leaders for Nazi Germany’s crimes began in Nuremberg after World War II. Read about the Nuremberg trials.
encyclopedia.ushmm.org encyclopedia.ushmm.org
.
Click to expand...

Crimes which had been established under the various Geneva Conventions, which is what they were sentenced for. As I stated, they violated the existing laws of war.

Sherman, on the other hand, did not violate the existing laws of war.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Crimes which had been established under the various Geneva Conventions, which is what they were sentenced for. As I stated, they violated the existing laws of war.
Click to expand...

Where do crimes against peace or crimes against humanity appear in any Geneva convention ?
 
Rich2018 said:
Where do crimes against peace or crimes against humanity appear in any Geneva convention ?
Click to expand...

They were convicted of crimes committed against POWs, violations of the rights of neutral nations, and crimes against civilians, amongst other violations of the laws of war as laid out, first in The Hague and later in Geneva.
 
Tigerace117 said:
They were convicted of crimes committed against POWs, violations of the rights of neutral nations, and crimes against civilians, amongst other violations of the laws of war as laid out, first in The Hague and later in Geneva.
Click to expand...


I was talking about the Nuremburg trials....not too many defendants saw a POW camp

Who was convicted of "violations of the rights of neutral nations" or "crimes against civilians"

They were convicted of crimes against peace and/or crimes against humanity - neither of which appear in any Hague or Geneva conventions. The "crimes" were invented by the allies for the trial.
 
Rich2018 said:
I was talking about the Nuremburg trials....not too many defendants saw a POW camp

Who was convicted of "violations of the rights of neutral nations" or "crimes against civilians"

They were convicted of crimes against peace and/or crimes against humanity - neither of which appear in any Hague or Geneva conventions. The "crimes" were invented by the allies for the trial.
Click to expand...

The Malmedy massacre trial.....which was part of the Dachau trials, to name just once example.

en.wikipedia.org

Malmedy massacre trial - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The wars of aggression were violations of the rights of neutrals......and therefore crimes against peace.

Oh, and there were a lot of Nazis convicted for committing atrocities against civilians.

But none of this has anything to do with Sherman.
 
Tigerace117 said:
The Malmedy massacre trial.....which was part of the Dachau trials, to name just once example.
Click to expand...

Yes there were German war crimes and yes, there were a lot of trials for them

But they weren't part of the Nuremberg trials


The wars of aggression were violations of the rights of neutrals......and therefore crimes against peace.
Click to expand...

But as I keep saying to you, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity didn't exist until after the war when they were invented by the allies

There is no such crime as "violations of the rights of neutrals" in international law Btw
You might be confused with violation of neutrality rights


Oh, and there were a lot of Nazis convicted for committing atrocities against civilians.
Click to expand...

Yes, but not at Nuremberg


But none of this has anything to do with Sherman.
Click to expand...

Why, he and his men were just as guilty as those Nazis when committing atrocities against civilians.
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes there were German war crimes and yes, there were a lot of trials for them

But they weren't part of the Nuremberg trials




But as I keep saying to you, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity didn't exist until after the war when they were invented by the allies

There is no such crime as "violations of the rights of neutrals" in international law Btw
You might be confused with violation of neutrality rights




Yes, but not at Nuremberg




Why, he and his men were just as guilty as those Nazis when committing atrocities against civilians.
Click to expand...

I’d address your little rant, but it has nothing to do with Sherman(who did not commit “Nazi-esque crimes against civilians”).

If you want to talk about the Nazis, make a thread about them.

But the fact remains that Sherman did not violate the laws of war as of 1864- 1865.

Nor was he akin to the Nazis.
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes he did

The Nazis did not violate German law

That there was no law of armed conflict at the time, doesn't change how we should view Sherman's actions
The were criminal and terrorist in nature
And Nuremberg established that people can be charged with crimes did didn't actually exist at the time

Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII.
Click to expand...

Did Sherman intentionally slaughter millions of civilians?

Where are Sherman's ovens?

The death camps ran by Sherman?
 
Tigerace117 said:
I’d address your little rant, but it has nothing to do with Sherman(who did not commit “Nazi-esque crimes against civilians”).
Click to expand...

Yes he did

Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII.


But the fact remains that Sherman did not violate the laws of war as of 1864- 1865.

Nor was he akin to the Nazis.
Click to expand...

The Nazis did not violate German law

That there was no law of armed conflict at the time, doesn't change how we should view Sherman's actions
The were criminal and terrorist in nature
And Nuremberg established that people can be charged with crimes did didn't actually exist at the time
 
Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII.
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes he did

Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII.




The Nazis did not violate German law

That there was no law of armed conflict at the time, doesn't change how we should view Sherman's actions
The were criminal and terrorist in nature
And Nuremberg established that people can be charged with crimes did didn't actually exist at the time
Click to expand...

😂

Not even close.

When did Sherman execute entire towns?

When did Sherman execute hundreds of Confederate POWs?

When did Sherman enslave Confederates and force them to build weapons?

Your claims are laughable.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Not even close.

When did Sherman execute entire towns?

When did Sherman execute hundreds of Confederate POWs?

When did Sherman enslave Confederates and force them to build weapons?

Your claims are laughable.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension failure

I said "Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII."

ie: a lot of what German troops did in WWII, was done by Sherman's troops.
 
Last edited:
Rich2018 said:
When did Sherman execute entire towns?

When did Sherman execute hundreds of Confederate POWs?

When did Sherman enslave Confederates and force them to build weapons?

Your claims are laughable.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension failure

I said "Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII."

ie: a lot of what German troops did in WWII, was done by Sherman's troops.
[/QUOTE]

And I pointed out that your claims are laughable....which they are.
 
Tigerace117 said:
And I pointed out that your claims are laughable....which they are.
Click to expand...

Because of your reading comprehension failure



I said "Sherman's actions were entirely comparable with a lot of what the Nazis did in WWII."

ie: a lot of what German troops did in WWII, was done by Sherman's troops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom