Re: Sheridan vs. Lee
The big difference was that Lee's, and that goes for any of the Confederate appropriations, were for the most part temporary inconveniences to the local inhabitants. Whereas the Union forces habit of complete destruction not only starved soldiers but civilians alike and the effects carried on for months. The Confederate destruction of property was mostly confined to water vessals, trains, railroads, cotton and bridges and the rare building of public property but the Union forces destruction could be and was against house, out house, gin, barn, mill, factory, trains, water vessals, bridges, railroads crops of all kinds and whole towns and cities. The taking of foods was practiced on both sides but the Union army loved taking all they found and anything of value. They loved stealing bailed cotton. The largest amount of stealing of slaves, horses, mules, goats, pigs, chickens, and oxen from civilians has to go the Union forces by far. I don't mean "freeing slaves" but taking the men for a work force and military conscription. Now, there are cases where Confederates burned population centers but it is a very small faction of the total amount. All armies cause suffering to the local populations where ever they go, but, wherever the Union forces marched in the Confederate South, the probability was that the damage was much worse, and according to the Union commanding officer, much crueler.