What could I say in an editorial about whether Sherman's actions in his March to the Sea were justified or cruel?

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

In this editorial, I would argue that the actions of Sherman's own troops were justified.  I would argue that, so long as the war was justified, Sherman's actions were too.

Sherman's actions were no different (and considerably less deadly) than the bombing of various Japanese and German cities in WWII. ...

See
This Answer Now

Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.

Get 48 Hours Free Access

In this editorial, I would argue that the actions of Sherman's own troops were justified.  I would argue that, so long as the war was justified, Sherman's actions were too.

Sherman's actions were no different (and considerably less deadly) than the bombing of various Japanese and German cities in WWII.  The whole point of what Sherman did was to break the South's will to fight and its ability to supply its armies.  This is a valid thing to do in war.

In war, cruel things happen.  They are done to try to end the war more quickly.  This is what Sherman was doing and his actions were therefore justified.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team