Monday, February 13, 2017

Was Siege and Total War necessary?

I think that siege and total war was not necessary to win the war because it was unfair to the people at Vicksburg, Siege means to cut of all supplies, and total war means to destroy all military and civilian resources. I think that total war and siege was not necessary in the war.
Posted by at

10 comments:

  1. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:49 AM

    If they did not use siege and total war do you think they still would have won the war?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:51 AM

      Hmm. Didn't think about that, but I agree with you, Hannah

      Delete
  2. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:49 AM

    I disagree but I get the point that you feel bad for the people in Vicksburg.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:50 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:50 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:53 AM

    The civilians that were being harmed were on the opposite sides of whoever was using the tactics. So, technically they were the enemy and deserved it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:56 AM

    But if there were more battles so one side could win the war, even more people would die.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:57 AM

    I disagree. The faster the North won, the more lives were saved so it was necessary

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 11:58 AM

    I disagree the point of the battle was to keep the union together and for that to happen the UNion needed to win.

    ReplyDelete
  9. AnonymousFebruary 13, 2017 at 12:00 PM

    I agree with Jack and I would have said that.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)