Wow, talk about sour grapes. For so many years, the perception was the Union was reluctant to even shoot at any Confederate soldier. We heard of the hard decisions poor ol Abe had to make to carry out the war to bring the Confederacy back "into the fold". Soo, sad. Not much was said in the mainstream teachings about him getting impatient and a bit miffed because his Generals were all losing most of the time. What was not said was he was having hissy fits every time the Confederacy had a victory. What wasn't explained really well was his choice of a replacement to 'seal the deal', so to speak. He picked Grant, so if he failed there would be an easy explanation for his failure. I mean, everyone knew he'd had a little 'problem'.

What's funny is the two 'misfits' in the Union army were the most effective. Grant and Sherman were both driven by demons. They would have been real good had they joined the 'right' side.

It's not just Grant and Sherman's possiblility of failure that's not mentioned but the Unions treatment of the Confederate prisoners and a few other choice details. It for sure was a dang Yankee who wrote the history books about that part of US History.

It's unfortunate that there were a lot of arms, ammo and other things that could have been helpful to the South if they could have just gotten them delivered. The Arsenal at Agusta was slopped full of stuff. The Quartermaster was trying to give it away but there was no possible means to deliver it once Sherman started his march. I guess we can play woulda, coulda, shoulda all day long but it won't change the outcome.

Pam