What's his alignment?

Is he chaotic evil

Or

Lawful evil

Other urls found in this thread:

nypost.com/2014/10/29/new-york-state-blesses-incest-marriage-between-uncle-niece/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I don't know man. The southerner in me wants to say, "Fuck Sherman!" than again the militaryfag in me says, " Hez brutally kunnin'".

Lawful Neutral.

/thread

Chaotic Good.

"I'll save people from suffering by doing as much harm as possible!"

Lawful good.

Anyone one works to kill you inbred racist confederate flag flying cousinfuckers is automatically Lawful Good.

I think he was more cunningly brutal.

this guy is firmly in the chaotic evil edge zone.

Leaning more towards (((neutral))) evil

>"Sherman, end the war"
>"Okey-doke"

>Villified for centuries for doing precisely what he was told to do.

You're not even American are you? The civil war was fought over many many different cultural reasons, but cousin fucking was one of the few things we agreed on. That and white people should only vote.

total war doesn't win you friends, in short
TOTAL WAR IS A FUCK
Kill Em All 1864
I am trash man
410,757,864,530 BURNT FARMS

>inbred
Stereotype perpetrated by Northerners focusing on impoverished, non-landowning sharecroppers who had nothing to do with slavery.

>racist
Yes, Yankee. Only people south of the Mason-Dixon line were racist. Yep. No such thing as racism in the Great White North. Irish and Italians aren't really races anyway, right?

>confederate flag
A battle flag, not the flag of the Confederacy. The only salient point you've so far raised.

Why are Yankees so fucking dumb?

Preferably white men who owned land so their decision were based on the communal good and not the benefit of rootless swindlers who could move on once their voted-upon policies had been exploited.

If you kill everyone who is an enemy, all that will be left is friends

Sothernbro, let us retire to the porch with our mint juleps. Don't mind the Yankee I'm sure he's miserable in whatever rust belt shithole he currently lives in.

Not gonna lie, I don't know who that is. Americans, mind enlightening me?

>A battle flag, not the flag of the Confederacy. The only salient point you've so far raised.
It's really not a good point. Southerners don't fly those flags because they want to secede, or because they believe in the confederacy's government, but because they want to remember all of the young Dixiemen who died under that battle flag.
Also, it looks way better than the government's flags.

Lawful neutral.

Fun fact: the South has the highest rates of poverty in the USA, and highest number of welfare recipients.

The south wanted a war and he gave them a war.

Fun Fact: This is largely due to how the North treated the South during Reconstruction.

The North gutted the South and made it so the effects of northern victory could be felt for decades to come.

So fuck off faggot.

Due largely to the oppressive Northern occupation of the Reconstruction-era, which punished aforementioned impoverished sharecroppers who had nothing to do with slavery.

This continued well into the 20th century with the rail and iron barons in the Appalachians, whose violence against striking workers gave rise to the phrase "rednecks," because those striking workers chose to wear red bandanas as a sign of solidarity.

Sorry, forgot.

>t. californiafag who knows history.

General William Tecumseh Sherman

Also known as Cummy or Cum to his family and friends.

Nothing he or his army did was out of the ordinary for an 19th century army.

nypost.com/2014/10/29/new-york-state-blesses-incest-marriage-between-uncle-niece/

Highest number of blacks too.

ok

Que?
Ehh, from my perspective as a foreigner it seems to primarily be about slavery. According to well-known source Wikipedia:
The declaration states the primary reasoning behind South Carolina's declaring of secession from the Union, which is described as:

... increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery ...[1

From an American standpoint, we did not fight a total war against Japan or Germany in world war 2,we did not fight a total war against Korea, against Vietnam, or against any of the various conflicts in the Middle East. The American civil war and the revolutionary war are the only times the US has fought a total war. Open a fucking dictionary.

A lot more to it than that. Most of the tension began with the Missouri Compromise, slavery was a focal point due to the way the states had to be permitted into the union.

Politically speaking slavery was a breaking point. But both the average northerners and southerners could give fuck about it. The common man in the South saw it as the North telling them what they could and couldn't do.

>we did not fight a total war against Japan or Germany in world war 2
destroying the entire Japanese merchant marine fleet then nuking it wasn't total war?

If Operation Downfall is your idea of total war then you're mistaken. America fought Japan with it's arm tied behind its back because it wasn't needed to fight it. The Japanese were incompetents that thought protecting escorting convoys with destroyers was cowardly work and their entire strategy was based around supplying islands thousands of miles apart.

>Revolutionary war
>total war
????

Not him, but it was really about economics. Slavery was sen as the most profitable way to handle things, plus, many wealthy and influential Southerners would have lost money if their slaves were freed, since they did pay for them.
They fought for slavery because it was seen as necessary for the Southern economy, not because they believed all niggers deserved to be simple farm animals.

My father's side has two Civil War veterans in the family tree, Union of course, GO BLUE!

One fought under General Sherman and had fun burning the South while the other was a drummer boy for a New York regiment. He was about 14 when he was captured and sent to a POW camp, not Andersonville, and survived hellish conditions. When he finally made it home the doctors said he wouldn't live longer then 3 months...he died seventy years later.

"All those doctors said I wouldn't make it three months, so I decided to outlive them all, and I did."

I'd say Sherman was Neutral, he was sought complete destruction of the enemy to ensure the most expedient end to the war.

>rom an American standpoint, we did not fight a total war against Japan or Germany in world war 2,we did not fight a total war against Korea, against Vietnam, or against any of the various conflicts in the Middle East. The American civil war and the revolutionary war are the only times the US has fought a total war. Open a fucking dictionary.
The American-English Dictionary defines total war as "war that is unrestricted in terms of the weapons used, the territory or combatants involved, or the objectives pursued, especially one in which the laws of war are disregarded."

And armies at the time were evil, your point?

There are two whole boards for this type of discussion, and Veeky Forums is neither of them. Get the fuck out.

It had to do with state's rights through the lens of slavery.

They felt that as states they had the right to enslave other human beings should they choose.

In short, it was about slavery though they certainly had other gripes.

>not because they believed all niggers deserved to be simple farm animals.

Can't really have one without the other. You had free slaves being successful but you also had racism. The two just tried to ignore each other but in the end you can't have both.

>alignments aren't Veeky Forums

Do you realize how stupid you are?

He didn't go full death-squad on civilians so he's firmly in Neutral territory.

>armies at the time were evil
That's a stupid thing to say.

WW2 Eastern Front is about as closest you will get to a Total War, followed by the last Punic War.

If that was what was being discussed, sure. It's not.

Just about any tribal war is far worse than any war fought by civilizations.

And if you look east of the Caucasus, you'll find the Mongols, expansionist China and the golden age of islam's expansion to bangladesh

>statistics are skewed by raw number data
Your chart is lacking in basic math.

>Why are Yankees so fucking dumb?
It's not their fault.
They're conditioned to be that way, so as to better serve as disposable laborers. Bless their hearts, they still don't understand that interchangeable day labourers are just more economical, and easier to replace, than slaves.

>Just about any tribal war is far worse than any war fought by civilizations.

You're using percentages dumbass, if you have a smaller population of course the percentage will be higher. Jivaro are a single tribe while Europe and the US are in the hundreds of millions.

>
There's plenty of statistics on the deaths of hunter gatherer/tribal societies.

and only small percentages of the total European/American population died in those gigantic wars.

The Thirty Years War was more devastating to Europe than WW1 or 2.

I think in terms when I hear minimum wage should be 15 or 20 an hour.

>slavery is bad
>the people I work for need to provide for my every need

It's a fact.

>threads need to stay on topic

You are in fucking Veeky Forums. Are you new?

All of human history was "evil" before the bubble of time that we're living in with no major conflict? That's not a fact.

>Mongols
They did the whole slaughter of entire towns as mostly scare tactics to get other towns surrender without a fight, They where conquerors first and foremost and wanted to have populations that could pay taxes to them, dead people can't do that.

You honestly believe that slave owners provided for their slaves, don't you?

All of human history isn't war, user.

But they had no reservations about using any tactic against any population center. Anyone who stood up to them was annihilated with tactics that today be considered war crimes. The number of people they didn't kill was a testament to their terror, not their restraint.

Lawful Neutral. Southern opinions don't count because there is a cultural bias ingrained in them since infancy and thus cannot be impartial.

Seriously, southerners, get over the Civil War.

We don't need /pol/ and Veeky Forums on Veeky Forums when it's entirely unrrlated to Veeky Forums at all.

This thread had a few posts about alignment, but now it's just /pol/ and Veeky Forums arguing inanities. That's not Veeky Forums last I checked. I don't have to tolerate shit from assholes who don't tolerate things I like.

You honestly believe anyone who was invested in farming and agriculture let their investments in tools and farm animals rot, don't you?

So you do realize they treated slaves like animals.

Anatomically modern humans have been around for 200,000 years and recorded civilization didn't start until around 6000BC. All of human history is war, organized or unorganized groups of humans have banded together to kill other groups of humans for resources.

Eh, this was good discussion. Now it's starting to take a bit of a /pol/ turn. We'll see how it goes.

Again, you're using percentages with populations that differ by a huge margin. The population of the world in the 1600s was roughly 500-580 million and at the ned of the 20th century it was 6 billion.

So
Hiw woukd the cultural borders in the confed look?
Which would be dixie and which would be independent
I think florida,texas, and louisiana would all be culturally distinguished and all the rest would fall under dixielander

You know the phrase "War is Hell." Sherman's the one who coined it, years before the Civil War while desperately trying to explain to a secessionist colleague why war with the North would be an awful, terrible thing.
Not only that, he was also a major stabilizing figure in the reconstruction. And, fought far more fires than he started during the war itself.

Chaotic good
fuck those inbred fags, I wish dixie stayed roasted

How so with a quote like this.

A village losing 50/60% of its men is more devastating to their population than a nation losing 3% of its men.

If we went into wars with the same percentages of homicide rates as those tribes WW1/2's death toll would have been in the billions.

> All of human history is war,

A literal lie.

Villains and cowards hide behind percentages. It makes killing 100,000 seem not that bad.

>I’ve been where you are now and I know just how you feel. It’s entirely natural that there should beat in the breast of every one of you a hope and desire that some day you can use the skill you have acquired here.
Suppress it! You don’t know the horrible aspects of war. I’ve been through two wars and I know. I’ve seen cities and homes in ashes. I’ve seen thousands of men lying on the ground, their dead faces looking up at the skies. I tell you, war is Hell!

You gotta find joy in life.

It's a good thing then that our "total wars" were not as brutal and aggressive as the percentages shown in warlike tribes.

Nobody dnies that WW1/2 were ghastly affairs, but they could've been much much worse.

He believed the best course of action was to bring a swift end to the war through scorched earth tactics. He wanted to make Georgia an example, that the south might surrender before more damage could be done elsewhere in the country.

uhhh ACKTUALLY

So you want to feel better about millions dying? Is that what this is all about?

>Most of the tension began with the Missouri Compromise
Which was about containing slavery.

>Not him, but it was really about economics.
The economics of slavery

You can wrap it up how you want, but the root of the conflict runs back to slavery as an institution.

You need to do more reading on the Pacific theatre.

Reminder that the south didn't give a single fuck about states rights until they lost control of the federal government

Reminder that the fugitive slave acts were the greatest violations of state sovereignty in American history

Reminder that Lee did the same shit Sherman did, except was far more brutal. And also enslaved every free black he caught

better millions than billions.

No it wasn't based on the institution of slavery. It was Northern Republicans and Southern Democrats fighting over political influence. Slavery was used as a way to attack the South and diminish their influence, the South in turn played the "muh northern aggression" card. NO ONE gave a fuck about philosophical merits of slavery.

Keep singing that Dixie tune, revisionist. Bloody Kansas says otherwise.

You can read up on the man to find out. Sherman didn't like war, he thought it horrifying and disgusting. But he didn't pussyfoot around. You bring a swift end to the war by destroying your enemies ability to wage war. Destroy his infrastructure, his ability to feed his troops, his manufactories and his economy and you will bring him to the bargaining table and end up saving more lives in the process by bringing the war to a swifter end. If you don't you get WWI where both sides just mash all the men and equipment their countries produce as fast as they are able to against each other and get nothing but 100s of miles of bloody mud. Neither side could stop the other's deliver of men and materials to the front line.

you would be incorrect. The abolitionist movement at the time was kind of a big deal, and like the other user said, bloody kansas shows this.

You mean that border war that was fought because the guys without slaves were worried that the guys with slaves would fill up the lands with blacks and leave them no work?

Yeah real freedom fighters.