Well, I remember watching video clips of the Manhattan project and the testing of the first bomb and if you notice they had soldiers march right into the mushroom cloud. We had no idea that the atomic age would also bring about atomic radiation and death over the course of decades. I do think that it would have been less "appealing" to Truman if they knew of the other curse of the nuclear age. Dan

In a message dated 8/31/03 1:14:02 PM !!!First Boot!!!, aprildan@geyer.com writes: > When Truman > authorized the dropping of "little man" and "fat Boy" on Hiroshima and > Nagasaki it was a means to an End. No one said Truman was a bad man and > that he should be brought up on war crimes charges. Oh it has been said, frequently, but trying to see the cost of lives taking all the 'small' islands and looking at fighting thru the "home" land. I have to wonder which is worse horror over days, months and years or in one fell swoop. That aside I have to agree with you. Almost everyone of my ancestors alive then moved from the state they had been in many ending in Texas and all refusing to talk about it, Eliz

Thank you all for your positive posts. I was not expecting to get that. Thank you again. and you are all welcome. Dan

Scott, If you go to http://www.cyndislist.com/hist-us.htm#Presidents you'll probably find something helpful. I notice among the many links, a Master Index to Presidents' Genealogical Data. Nancy From: Scott K. Williams To: CIVIL-WAR-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [CIVIL-WAR] Civil War-WWII Connections I am putting together a presentation on the Civil War for a reunion of World War II veterans (Co L 386th Infantry), only three weeks away in St. Louis, Mo. In the talk I want to give family ties of some of the most famous World War II soldiers to Civil War soldiers. So far I have a short list but it is weighted on the Confederate side. The only Union one I have is Douglas MacArthur and his father Gen. Arthur MacArthur who received the medal of honor. Can anyone give me other WWII leaders that have Union soldier parentage/ancestry to add to this list ? If I can get two-three more examples the list will be evenly balanced. Also, does anyone know of President Harry Truman (I am aware of his mother's confederate connections ) having a Union Army ancestor ? (there is a Union soldier Harry Truman listed in Union roster from KC area) And what about Franklin D. Roosevelt ? Here is what I have: 1) Lt. Gen. Simon B. Buckner, Jr was killed during the Invasion of Okinawa. He was the son of Confederate General, Simon Bolivar Buckner. 2) Nathan Bedford Forrest, III was killed June 13, 1942 during a B-17 raid over the submarine yards of Kiel, Germany. Grandson of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest. 3) Gen. George S. Patton, the fighting general of World War II, was the grandson of a Confederate officer killed in action. George Smith Patton, Colonel of the 22nd Virginia Infantry. 4) Gen. Douglas MacArthur, father Arthur MacArthur was formerly Colonel of the 24th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry, seeing action at Chickamauga, Stones River, Chattanooga, the Atlanta Campaign and Franklin. He was awarded the Medal of Honor for service at Missionary Ridge.

Scott, For a terrific picture of Audie Murphy with all of his medals, go to the bottom of the page at: http://www.grunts.net/legends/audiemurphy.html Alice Scott K. Williams wrote: > I am putting together a presentation on the Civil War for a reunion of World War II veterans (Co L 386th Infantry), only three weeks > away in St. Louis, Mo. In the talk I want to give family ties of some of the most famous World War II soldiers to Civil War > soldiers. So far I have a short list but it is weighted on the Confederate side. The only Union one I have is Douglas MacArthur and > his father Gen. Arthur MacArthur who received the medal of honor. > > Can anyone give me other WWII leaders that have Union soldier parentage/ancestry to add to this list ? If I can get two-three more > examples the list will be evenly balanced. Also, does anyone know of President Harry Truman (I am aware of his mother's confederate > connections ) having a Union Army ancestor ? (there is a Union soldier Harry Truman listed in Union roster from KC area) And what > about Franklin D. Roosevelt ? > > Here is what I have: > > 1) Lt. Gen. Simon B. Buckner, Jr was killed during the Invasion of Okinawa. He was the son of Confederate General, Simon Bolivar > Buckner. > > 2) Nathan Bedford Forrest, III was killed June 13, 1942 during a B-17 raid over the submarine yards of Kiel, Germany. Grandson of > Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest. > > 3) Gen. George S. Patton, the fighting general of World War II, was the grandson of a Confederate officer killed in action. George > Smith Patton, Colonel of the 22nd Virginia Infantry. > > 4) Gen. Douglas MacArthur, father Arthur MacArthur was formerly Colonel of the 24th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry, seeing action at > Chickamauga, Stones River, Chattanooga, the Atlanta Campaign and Franklin. He was awarded the Medal of Honor for service at > Missionary Ridge. > > Scott K. Williams -- Pennsylvania in the Civil War http://www.pa-roots.com/~pacw/

Scott, Audie Murphy's maternal great-grandfather, Curtis Gill, was a Confederate soldier during the Civil War. He died in 1863 on way home to Monroe County, TN. Sorry I don't know the unit. http://www.audiemurphy.com/biograph.htm Alice Gayley Scott K. Williams wrote: > I am putting together a presentation on the Civil War for a reunion of World War II veterans (Co L 386th Infantry), only three weeks > away in St. Louis, Mo. In the talk I want to give family ties of some of the most famous World War II soldiers to Civil War > soldiers. So far I have a short list but it is weighted on the Confederate side. The only Union one I have is Douglas MacArthur and > his father Gen. Arthur MacArthur who received the medal of honor. > > Can anyone give me other WWII leaders that have Union soldier parentage/ancestry to add to this list ? If I can get two-three more > examples the list will be evenly balanced. Also, does anyone know of President Harry Truman (I am aware of his mother's confederate > connections ) having a Union Army ancestor ? (there is a Union soldier Harry Truman listed in Union roster from KC area) And what > about Franklin D. Roosevelt ? > > Here is what I have: > > 1) Lt. Gen. Simon B. Buckner, Jr was killed during the Invasion of Okinawa. He was the son of Confederate General, Simon Bolivar > Buckner. > > 2) Nathan Bedford Forrest, III was killed June 13, 1942 during a B-17 raid over the submarine yards of Kiel, Germany. Grandson of > Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest. > > 3) Gen. George S. Patton, the fighting general of World War II, was the grandson of a Confederate officer killed in action. George > Smith Patton, Colonel of the 22nd Virginia Infantry. > > 4) Gen. Douglas MacArthur, father Arthur MacArthur was formerly Colonel of the 24th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry, seeing action at > Chickamauga, Stones River, Chattanooga, the Atlanta Campaign and Franklin. He was awarded the Medal of Honor for service at > Missionary Ridge. > > Scott K. Williams > > -- Pennsylvania in the Civil War http://www.pa-roots.com/~pacw/

I would like to just add a few points to this issue if I might. First of all, I would like to say I had ancestors serve on both sides of the war and just as simple privates. I do not want to get across that I condone any actions taken by anyone but there are more barbarous acts that have taken place in history than Shermans march through Georgia and South Carolina. My ancestors them selves lost many-a crops and houses and slaves(not condoning slavery either) when Shermans men marched through Orangeburgh and columbia SC. But the fact that Sherman himself said that "We need to take this war to the people, to the families, so that it would be a 1000 generations before they thought of civil war again". is worth it alone. To point out a mans faults is one thing but to point out what he did or did not do is another. We can go through every general that Lincoln put in place up to Grant and Sherman and sheridan and they were all complete failures. And lincoln had enough. Total war is the only option. We lost Vietnam because Johnson would not release the generals in charge to wage war. And War my fellow listers is HELL. I have seen my share of what war does to people and it is humbling. Oh and remember that History is written by the winners not the losers. But that is beside the point. Sherman condemned the actions he took himself in later years but still said he would have done it again to achieve the result. And that result was the end of the war. By all definitions the War ended when Sherman burned Atlantia(which he didn't really do). One more thing. Just a question you all should ponder. When Truman authorized the dropping of "little man" and "fat Boy" on Hiroshima and Nagasaki it was a means to an End. No one said Truman was a bad man and that he should be brought up on war crimes charges. But you say that Sherman was a bad man. Lincoln authorized "total War" and that is what Sherman delivered. It ended the Blood shed. Estimates where that to attack Japan by invasion would have cost over a Million American Lives. Was the bombing worth it? I say YES. Was Shermans march to the Sea worth it? I say YES. Well that is my opinion anyway. Dan Geyer Esq.

Alice The OR, CMH, SHSP are all silent on this unit. The only thing I could find was this website which indicated a Gitner´s Brigade in John Hunt Morgan´s Division: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~gmfrontporch/civil.htm Do you have a context? Mike

Scott Subject: Civil War-WWII Connections There is a book out called The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt which attributes some of Teddy´s aggressiveness to the fact his father Theodore senior (age 18 in 1861) payed for a substitute during the Civil War. The following Roosevelts were listed at HDS: Cornelius Roosevelt Priv NY 19 New York City, NY Cornelius Roosevelt Priv NY 28 New York City, NY George Roosevelt Qtr Master NY 35 New York City, NY George W Roosevelt Sergeant PA Chester County,PA Wilton C Roosevelt Priv MI 18 Flint, MI There is no reason to suspect that any one of these soldiers would not be tied back to the Roosevelt families of New York. Mike

You make some valid points, Dan. Jim Gilmer -------Original Message------- From: CIVIL-WAR-L@rootsweb.com Date: Sunday, August 31, 2003 08:13:08 AM To: CIVIL-WAR-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [CIVIL-WAR] William Tecumseh Sherman I would like to just add a few points to this issue if I might. First of all, I would like to say I had ancestors serve on both sides of the war and just as simple privates. I do not want to get across that I condone any actions taken by anyone but there are more barbarous acts that have taken place in history than Shermans march through Georgia and South Carolina. My ancestors them selves lost many-a crops and houses and slaves(not condoning slavery either) when Shermans men marched through Orangeburgh and columbia SC. But the fact that Sherman himself said that "We need to take this war to the people, to the families, so that it would be a 1000 generations before they thought of civil war again". is worth it alone. To point out a mans faults is one thing but to point out what he did or did not do is another. We can go through every general that Lincoln put in place up to Grant and Sherman and sheridan and they were all complete failures. And lincoln had enough. Total war is the only option. We lost Vietnam because Johnson would not release the generals in charge to wage war. And War my fellow listers is HELL. I have seen my share of what war does to people and it is humbling. Oh and remember that History is written by the winners not the losers. But that is beside the point. Sherman condemned the actions he took himself in later years but still said he would have done it again to achieve the result. And that result was the end of the war. By all definitions the War ended when Sherman burned Atlantia(which he didn't really do). One more thing. Just a question you all should ponder. When Truman authorized the dropping of "little man" and "fat Boy" on Hiroshima and Nagasaki it was a means to an End. No one said Truman was a bad man and that he should be brought up on war crimes charges. But you say that Sherman was a bad man. Lincoln authorized "total War" and that is what Sherman delivered. It ended the Blood shed. Estimates where that to attack Japan by invasion would have cost over a Million American Lives. Was the bombing worth it? I say YES. Was Shermans march to the Sea worth it? I say YES. Well that is my opinion anyway. Dan Geyer Esq. ==== CIVIL-WAR Mailing List ==== To unsubscribe from list mode, email CIVIL-WAR-L-REQUEST@rootsweb.com and in the text area of the message, type only the word unsubscribe .

Well thought out. More fact and less emotional, used the fact that TOTAL WAR must be waged and That Politicians make the worst soldiers because they interFEAR to appease everyone. Use the professional soldier, he is trained and 99.9% never want to go to war, but if it is inevitable let him do his job. We as a "CIVILIZED" nation follow the RULES of war and want the other side to also follow the RULES. Today TERRORISM is the COMPLETE DISREGARD of the "CIVILIZED RULES." We must realize that we must fight a different type of war with NEW RULES. Just as earlier wars were waged under the so call RULES OF THE TIME, how can we judge by our present RULES? What was true of that time, is not now true now. Getting off the soap box for today. Richard Callard -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Geyer and Family. [mailto:aprildan@geyer.com] Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 6:13 AM To: CIVIL-WAR-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [CIVIL-WAR] William Tecumseh Sherman I would like to just add a few points to this issue if I might. First of all, I would like to say I had ancestors serve on both sides of the war and just as simple privates. I do not want to get across that I condone any actions taken by anyone but there are more barbarous acts that have taken place in history than Shermans march through Georgia and South Carolina. My ancestors them selves lost many-a crops and houses and slaves(not condoning slavery either) when Shermans men marched through Orangeburgh and columbia SC. But the fact that Sherman himself said that "We need to take this war to the people, to the families, so that it would be a 1000 generations before they thought of civil war again". is worth it alone. To point out a mans faults is one thing but to point out what he did or did not do is another. We can go through every general that Lincoln put in place up to Grant and Sherman and sheridan and they were all complete failures. And lincoln had enough. Total war is the only option. We lost Vietnam because Johnson would not release the generals in charge to wage war. And War my fellow listers is HELL. I have seen my share of what war does to people and it is humbling. Oh and remember that History is written by the winners not the losers. But that is beside the point. Sherman condemned the actions he took himself in later years but still said he would have done it again to achieve the result. And that result was the end of the war. By all definitions the War ended when Sherman burned Atlantia(which he didn't really do). One more thing. Just a question you all should ponder. When Truman authorized the dropping of "little man" and "fat Boy" on Hiroshima and Nagasaki it was a means to an End. No one said Truman was a bad man and that he should be brought up on war crimes charges. But you say that Sherman was a bad man. Lincoln authorized "total War" and that is what Sherman delivered. It ended the Blood shed. Estimates where that to attack Japan by invasion would have cost over a Million American Lives. Was the bombing worth it? I say YES. Was Shermans march to the Sea worth it? I say YES. Well that is my opinion anyway. Dan Geyer Esq. ==== CIVIL-WAR Mailing List ==== To unsubscribe from list mode, email CIVIL-WAR-L-REQUEST@rootsweb.com and in the text area of the message, type only the word unsubscribe --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Surfside Internet]

Yes, "Bloody" Bill Anderson went around with Union Men's scalps tied around his neck. Horrible indeed. William Anderson however, was not in charge of a whole theatre of operation.

I am putting together a presentation on the Civil War for a reunion of World War II veterans (Co L 386th Infantry), only three weeks away in St. Louis, Mo. In the talk I want to give family ties of some of the most famous World War II soldiers to Civil War soldiers. So far I have a short list but it is weighted on the Confederate side. The only Union one I have is Douglas MacArthur and his father Gen. Arthur MacArthur who received the medal of honor. Can anyone give me other WWII leaders that have Union soldier parentage/ancestry to add to this list ? If I can get two-three more examples the list will be evenly balanced. Also, does anyone know of President Harry Truman (I am aware of his mother's confederate connections ) having a Union Army ancestor ? (there is a Union soldier Harry Truman listed in Union roster from KC area) And what about Franklin D. Roosevelt ? Here is what I have: 1) Lt. Gen. Simon B. Buckner, Jr was killed during the Invasion of Okinawa. He was the son of Confederate General, Simon Bolivar Buckner. 2) Nathan Bedford Forrest, III was killed June 13, 1942 during a B-17 raid over the submarine yards of Kiel, Germany. Grandson of Confederate Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest. 3) Gen. George S. Patton, the fighting general of World War II, was the grandson of a Confederate officer killed in action. George Smith Patton, Colonel of the 22nd Virginia Infantry. 4) Gen. Douglas MacArthur, father Arthur MacArthur was formerly Colonel of the 24th Wisconsin Volunteer Infantry, seeing action at Chickamauga, Stones River, Chattanooga, the Atlanta Campaign and Franklin. He was awarded the Medal of Honor for service at Missionary Ridge. Scott K. Williams

>Nothing the South did can compare with the cruel and inhumane > treatment to mankind by man than that which was perpetrated by the "animal" (no > offense to the animal world intended), that Sherman was. I am no big fan of Sherman but yes, there were men in the South that did equally horrible things. How many unarmed boys in the early to mid teens that were executed at Lawrence Kansas by Quantrill's men ? Sherman had points about him that were admirable, just like Quantrill. They have their place in history and that must be preserved. We may not like their whole person but our feelings are beside the point. They were notable men of the Civil War however horrible their acts may have been. --Scott Williams

These records begin in VA in 1608, with the execution of George Kendall for "spying/espionage" and go to 1987. To say that the early records are fascinating is an understatement (you just don't run into many executions for piracy or witchcraft anymore). But they have value for family researchers, too. Even if you don't have reason to suspect that any of your ancestors were "outlaws," there are records of executions for espionage & treason, especially important during the American Revolution and the Civil War, and there are many records of executions for "slave revolts," which might be helpful to African-American researchers. Be patient, it takes a few minutes to download and you'll need a reader, such as an Acrobat. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ESPYdate.pdf Nancy, researching: Baldridge, Cain, Courtney, Curtis, Carmichael, Dawkins, Doty, Garmon, Garrett, Jackson, McCormick, Matthews, Osborne, Stampley, Stringer, Warren.......and many more! 12th MS Inf; 42nd GA Inf www.geocities.com/twincousin2334 www.thepastwhispers.com

With all due respect, the Geneva Convention concerns the treatment of Prisoners of War. In that aspect there were, to use your own words, " SANCTIONED acts of barbarianism committed" by both sides--North and South. That is the point I was addressing; no other. Alice Gayley -- Pennsylvania in the Civil War http://www.pa-roots.com/~pacw/

It seems to me that Sherman wasn't partical, he shot up the north as well as the south, it's a wonder that he didn't have both sides shooting at him. I'm glad my gramp wasn't with him, he was with Rousseau in Ala. Have a musket, " ball"! Ken.

In a message dated 08/30/2003 3:08:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time, agayley@dgs.dgsys.com writes: > > Yes, that's true. What is also true is that hundreds > on both sides would have been guilty of war crimes > Hi List, I believe James was referring to SANCTIONED acts of barbarianism committed by the North. Nothing the South did can compare with the cruel and inhumane treatment to mankind by man than that which was perpetrated by the "animal" (no offense to the animal world intended), that Sherman was. Both the North and the South had renegades and guerrilla activity. Selena Part of the account of destruction of Sherman's March: In Early December of 1864, Major General William Tecumseh Sherman and his 65,000-man army reached the Atlantic Ocean concluding their successful and much-heralded “March to the Sea” through Georgia. As the Union general waited for the inevitable surrender of Savannah, the men in his ranks were guessing what their next move would be.1 Sherman had “no doubt whatever as to (his) future plans” after Savannah. “I have thought them over so long and well that they appear as clear as daylight. I left Augusta untouched on purpose, because the enemy will be in doubt as to my objective point, after crossing the Savannah river, whether it be Augusta or Charleston, and will naturally divide his forces.”6 Columbia was Sherman’s real target. General Ulysses S. Grant, commander –in-chief of the Union Army, dashing his plans. Grant directed Sherman to establish a base on the coast and “with the balance of (his) command, come (to Grant) by water with all dispatch.”7 Sherman responded quickly with three letters to Grant within six days respectfully arguing for his plan. December 16 –“Indeed, with my present command I had expected, after reducing Savannah, instantly to march to Columbia, South Carolina, thence to Raleigh, and thence to report to you.”8 December 18 –“With Savannah in our possession, at some future time, if not now, we can punish South Carolina as she deserves…I do sincerely believe that the whole United States, north and south, would rejoice to have this army turned loose on South Carolina, to devastate that State… it would have a direct and immediate bearing on your campaign in Virginia.”9 December 22 –“I have now completed my first step, and should like to go on to you via Columbia and Raleigh…You know better than anybody else how much better troops arrive by land march than when carried by transport.”10 Ironically, two days after Grant wrote his letter to Sherman with the directive for a water route and before receiving Sherman’s first response, Grant changed his mind due to other military victories and the lack of available ships to transport Sherman’s army.11 On December 24, 1864, Sherman received the change in orders12 and immediately wrote to Major General Halleck in Washington saying that he was now “free to make a broad swath through South and North Carolina”. “The truth is, the whole army is burning with an insatiable desire to wreak vengeance upon South Carolina. I almost tremble at her fate, but feel that she deserves all that seems in store for her.”13 Sherman transported the right wing of his army by ship to Beaufort where the heavy rains made the roads impassable. “Mules and wagons actually (sank) out of sight.”23 Sherman joined General Oliver Howard in Beaufort on January 2124 while the left wing of his army, under the Command of General Henry Slocum, struggled through the rain up the flooding Savannah River. By January 24th the weather improved25 and on January 30, 1865, “the actual invasion of South Carolina” began.26 “There was a grim determination on the part of the men in the ranks to visit a severe judgment on South Carolina…We practically burned a swath 60 miles wide across…The Commanders were powerless…This destruction of property was a matter of revenge.”31—Private John C. Arbuckle, Company K, Fourth Iowa Veteran Volunteer Infantry XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX To read the rest of the account go to; http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/redir?src=websearch&requestId=1ab55676c99fcf02& clickedItemRank=1&userQuery=SHERMAN%27S+MARCH& clickedItemURN=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shermansrevenge.com%2F "It was the most monstrous barbarity of the barbarous march" Whitelaw Reid

Yes, that's true. What is also true is that hundreds on both sides would have been guilty of war crimes under the Geneva Convention. Alice Gayley Fyodor45@aol.com wrote: > Under modern international law, Sherman's actions in the Atlanta campaign > would surely have had him facing charges of war crimes against civilians. -- Pennsylvania in the Civil War http://www.pa-roots.com/~pacw/

Nadine, In the late summer / fall of 1864, Sherman had a General whos mission was to distroy the rail lines coming out of Macon Georgia. His name was Stoneman and he asked Sherman for permission,,,while he was there...to liberate those officers held in the Macon POW stockade ( Camp Oglethorpe.) Stoneman also asked for permission to continue here to Andersonville and liberate the more than 33000 soldiers held here. Sherman gave permission to liberate those in Macon but NOT to go onto Andersonville as this would deplete the resources needed to cut Georgia in two,,,,shortening the war,,,and the freedom of those here at Andersonville would follow. Stoneman did head for Macon but was indeed confronted in battle and was severly whipped. He was captured along with several hundred soldiers of which many did end up here at Andersonville. May I ask the name of the soldier that your looking for and any other info you have such as state/Reg/Co. The reason I ask is that I have a copy of the National Park database here at Andersonville which has several thousand names of those held here that the online databases do not have. The online sites are supplied the information from here at the Andersonville archives, however, their updates come many many months after getting the information as they do not put it to any priority. Ill be happy to do any research and lookups for anyone who suspects,,or knows they had ancestors held here. The database I have has more than 41000 prisoners listed. Kevin The sound of FREEDOM is something you will never hear.......until its gone. ( UNKNOWN ) Please visit my website dedicated to those Americans who were imprisoned and died in captivity while in the service to our country Kevin Frye Local Andersonville Historian / National Park Service Volunteer http://www.angelfire.com/ga2/Andersonvilleprison/index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: <TSNI843@aol.com> To: <CIVIL-WAR-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 2:27 PM Subject: [CIVIL-WAR] Re: Shermans March > My husbands great grandfather was in Merrill's Horse Unit. He always claimed > that he participated in the march and was captured and was in Andersonville > prison. A relative went to Andersonville and did not find him listed as a > prisoner. I have accessed their online site and also did not find any mention of > his name. I also found some of his records, where I guess it was records for > your pay period, and I saw nothing about his being imprisoned. He was sick > once with the measles or mumps, but that was about it. I have also read some of > the information about Merrill's Horse Unit and found nothing to indicate that > unit participated in the march. My guess is that it just made a good story > for him to tell. And no one around to disprove it. > > Nadine > > > ==== CIVIL-WAR Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from list mode, email CIVIL-WAR-L-REQUEST@rootsweb.com > and in the text area of the message, type only the word > unsubscribe >