Was it worth it?

I believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. For example the invention of the typewriter was big for the people and businesses. When the typewriters came out they were better for businesses because they were faster, more reliable and more durable. With all of the factories popping up around the United States, population was getting bigger. That was better for businesses because people would buy more things and would become more into their business. It also affected society because with all of the new people they needed more transportation. In a picture by Detroit Publishing Company I saw new railroad tracks being built. That shows how it affected society because with all of the new factories more people have to get around places. Kids can also have fun with the new technology. With all of the new bikes and toys coming out ids were having so much more fun. The money that was going towards tech was really giving kids the new tech and helping kids have more fun. If the technology never happened then we might not have phones and other gadgets like that. I think that it was worth the cost.  

Worth The Price?

I think that I was worth the price. The Interview with Harry Reece supports my argument because it made people more excited about the future and maybe it inspired more people to innovate the things the modern day technology brought to life. The typewriter ad supports my argument because at the time, it helped lots of people write and make letters. This helped businesses work more efficient so they can get other businesses notes or documents that could help them a lot. The factory supports my claim because it shows how far we have come in the industry with creating technology.  This will impact lots of people because it will make whatever the people need, faster and more efficient. That is why I think it was worth the Price.

The Industrialization Affect

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs becaue therre were so many affects that cause many probems in our country starting with the informational poster called Making Human Junk. Child labor wasn't rght because kids had to work everyday and they ot ill and injuried from being forced to do hard work. "There was a poster created in 1913-1914 by a man named Lewis Wicke Hine. He wanted to draw the attention to many people to inform the how child labor was very bad. Child Labor shouldn’t be allowed because children might end up with no future and low wages." Another example of industrialization was the article The Accident Report. Many people were getting very badly injured from industrialindization affecting our country. "The accident report was written in 1916 by a man named Paul Underwood Kellogg, and he wanted to inform people about industrialization. Too many human beings have been getting severely injured and industrialization has been costing many lives." My final example is Factory Smoke Stacks. Factory Smoke Stacks polluted the air causing many animals and plants to die and costing hmsn their live. "Factory smoke stacks were invented by the Library of Congress in 1890-1901 to inform people about pollution. There were too many factories polluting smoke in the air which was affecting humans, be cause humans got very ill from the pollution and many plants and animals have been dying." Industrialization was a bad affect in the U.S. because of some of those reasons.

Was Indrustrialization worth the cost.

I think that smokestacks are not worth the cost because the smoke that they have is
not nice for the air and also the nature. It’s harder to breath and also with the smoke will go everywhere like the ground .Also animals, if animals breath the air animals could die, and if the animals die we won’t have food.
I think that making human Junk are not worth the cost. Because people or kids get sick with the work that they do. They work at this place so they can race money to get food or buy a house, but they don’t get that many money. Many workers lots their lives because they didn’t get that many money to get food
I think bicycles don’t worth the cost because bicycles are not something really cool, bicycles are just for fun and just riding it.

Industrial Revolution:Ruining The World

I don't think that it was worst the costs and how the second industrialization impacted Humans.All of the pollution could affect people with the disease and also trees they would die that would mean the end of mankind. because everyone breaths and trees produce oxygen so if the trees get polluted it would be really bad for us.In the photograph smokestead it has a factory producing pollution that would harm the people working there because they don't have anything to protect them from the pollution. Kids working in factories to could get hurt because they are still learning about the world and forced into this bad labor and like it said in the poster named Human Junk it states they are normal kids but then once they take their job they become like nothing and treated badly and for those kids to feel that way is horrific because these kids suffered and died just so you can have a phone and tv and all these nice things we have today. These kids sacrificed their childhood so you guys could be happy.People have to work so hard to build things and get horrible diseases like black lung and some bad fevers.Everyday someone could die just trying to live and all of the pollution would hurt inside because of all of the machines that are probably not safe.

Risking it for the Right Reasons

The industrialization period was a good period for technology that technology was worth the cost. According to the article, “Wizard of Menlo Park,” the Wizard or Edison created a lot of new technology. His technology was a great step up for the United States. Edison created so many different things, the most useful was the electric light bulb. The electric light bulb made sure that no one had to use gas-filled lamps and have to be at risk of an explosion. In 1913-14 a man named Harry Reece was going to Chicago for his first time he couldn’t wait to see all the technology that there was. What he saw was the first electronic piece of transportation the trolley car. That was very important because that helped people by getting people places fast. It was very amazing for Harry Reece because he was a farmer boy so he hadn’t experienced this before. That is important because everyone should be to experience the new technology. The Detroit Publishing Co took a picture of a field and factories. This is important and was worth the costs because this showed new opportunity also new jobs. This was very good for businesses because it showed opportunity for trade and new jobs. The new jobs would be able to have everyone take care of their family and no one will be broke. Children became s happy with the new technology that was being created. Another piece of transportation was the bikes and the trikes this was another fast piece of transportation it also created jobs. This was important because children weren’t bored anymore and the bikes and trikes were able to keep them busy. These all were very important and they were worth the price. They were able to create new things and those things were able to become the technology we have today. That is why it was worth the cost.

How will it help us now

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs. In a photograph by Detroit Publishing Co. It shows a factory with smoke. The smoke goes into the air, producing pollution into the earth. The pollution was so bad that people had to start using street lamps in the day. In the poster “Human Junk” by Hine Lewis Wickes there are kids looking sad and dirty. Through this time there was also child labor going on. Hine Lewis Wickers is saying that if you work these kids now, they won’t have a job after this. He is also saying that if you work them too hard then you’re making “Human Junk.” This means they can’t find jobs and they can’t work because they are all worked out. According to google discovery, the article,”Polluting the Environment,” says the pollution was really bad and started to get people sick. Plants started to die. People needed to use street lamps to see during the day. They were getting Typhoid fever and other diseases from pollution in the water. I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the costs.

Edison, the Innovation, the Technology... and Then There's "Human Junk."

Pollution from the Industrial Revolution was very drastic after the huge increase of factories. According to the article “Polluting the Environment,” in the early 1900’s, pollution was so bad that people needed streetlights to see in the daytime! The pollution from the factories got into the water supply because most cities had bad sanitation. The pollution then caused an outbreak of a disease called typhoid fever that infected many people.

After the big increase of factories happened, more workers were needed, so what better thing to do than call upon the almighty children. “Making Human Junk,” a poster created by Lewis Wickes Hine (1913-1914), shows how children are taken in perfect and happy, go through the process of working for awhile, then come out dirty, unhappy, and without a future. Essentially, “human junk.”

Not only children are workers. Men work too, providing for their family so that they can live. An accident report by Paul Underwood Kellogg (1916), 60% of dead workers had not reached their point of working life, meaning most were children. Also, Allegheny County had lost over 500 workmen every year. That’s around 40 workers every month which ends up being around 1 worker every day. That’s a lot of deaths, almost too much. Not only lives were they losing, but also human power.

It could've been good or bad...

I do not believe that industrialization was worth the cost, for three reasons. It gave off a lot of pollution, turned kids futures into junk, and the factories had many accidents that I don't believe were worth it. In 1890-1901 a picture was taken by the Detroit Publishing Company. This photograph shows that the factories let off a lot of pollution, by showing all of the smoke. I think pollution was not worth the cost of industrialization. According to the article “Polluting The Environment,” it said that air pollution became so bad in cities with factories that people needed streetlights to see during the day. Pollution caused many problems in this time period, and America is still trying to take away the amount of pollution in the air. Kids who worked in factories weren't payed much and were treated horribly. A poster created in 1913, called Making Human Junk, asked the question if the industry should be allowed to put the cost of working in factories on children and society. This poster by Lewis Wickes shows how kids who work in factories lose their future. It shows kids working in factories, and said that the children are good material at first when they start the job, but after they work their pay gets lowered and their future gets lost. The poster called the workers junk or trash because all they did was work in factories. Factory accidents were common during industrialization and caused many workers to die. In 1906-1907 there had been accidents in work factories that caused a lot of damage. 526 men were killed over the span of the year. I believe that these accidents were not worth the cost. In the report by Crystal Eastman, she said in the span of three months the hospitals received 509 men that had been injured from industrial accidents. Overall I think Industrial accidents were not worth the cost.

Factory After Factory, Destroying America.

This industrial revolution was not worth the cost. Many people got sick, hurt, and the factories polluted the environment. From the photograph Factory Smoke Stacks by Detroit Publishing Company, these new innovations needed factories to produce them. When more and more factories were built, a lot more pollution was spewed out of the stacks. This made for many sicknesses’ such as typhoid fever and many other diseases, according to the article “Polluting The Environment”. When so much pollution got into the atmosphere streetlights where needed during the daytime. I would feel really dirty all of the time with clouds of soot hovering over me. This industrial revolution also impacted young children, from the poster “Making Human Junk” by Hine, Lewis Wickes, many children were put to work in dangerous conditions. According to this poster factory work also ruined their futures because they were treated like items not like the young children they really are. Many men and women workers also got hurt or even died. “...over 526 men were killed by work accidents” (Taken from “Accident Reports” in Pittsburgh, 1907. Written by Eastman, Crystal). In all the industrial revolution was not worth the cost, many people got hurt, died, and pollution filled the sky. So, do you think it’s worth it?

Industrial revolution: Was it worth the cost ?

Typewriters helped the business industry a lot The typewriter helped business workers work super efficiently and they benefited companies. The typewriter let owners make so many important documents and make documents that prevent copyright for their innovations. There was a smoke picture of factories that could represents the growth of the U.S. Even though it shows the pollution that land was once it was Teepees than farm land and now factories that produce technology that helps us everyday.  In 10-30 years how will the landscape evolved with new technology. Harry Reece a western boy loved the industrial revolution. He explains that all of the new technology helped him get around and see things in a brighter view. The technology made from the industrial revolution made it easy for people to do things. THe industrial revolution was definitely worth the cost.

Industrialization: Was it Worth the Effort, Time, and Cost?

No, I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies from industrialization were worth the cost. In the picture of Factory Smokestack, pollution is filling the air and producing factory “trash”. People living around or near these factories are threatened and do not benefit from this pollution, they are harmed. For instance, these people would not have to plead for street lights to be able to see during the day otherwise it would be dangerous. Soot and smoke filled the air from burning coal that people used to heat their houses and other buildings. Water became polluted and caused diseases. For instance typhoid fever was caused from the water.
Businesses affected societies and the people in them. In the photograph of Making Human Junk, children are shown going through a process starting as perfectly fine kids then turning into mad, angry, and sad children. Low wages were problems with the working because these kids worked for many hours a day, with little pay. There was no future included in this working either. Nothing good came out of this for the children and their families that were suffering already too much. Kids at the age of 20 or under shouldn’t even be working in a factory that could kill you with the harmful smoke and machines.
The excerpt written about working accidents explains how 526 workmen were killed while working in Allegheny County, a country in Pittsburgh, in one year. During the active years of the Industrial Revolution, these factories of dangerous activities were something to fight about and not to forget at the time. Many people died in an unfair way, unnecessary amount of working hours and little cash to pay off that sweat. The industrial revolution was not worth the cost even with the benefits of the new technology to contribute to the environment that people were living.

Was Industrialization Worth Facing The Consequences?

I do not believe that the benefits of new technologies were worth the cost. I believe that the Industrial Revolution impacted people, business, and society negatively.

Industrialization factories had impacted the environment and society by emitting heavy air pollution. According to the article “ Polluting the Environment “  air pollution became so heavy people needed streetlights to see during the day. Adding on to the consequences Industrialization caused, Industrialization also impacted the water which then became polluted causing typhoid fever and other diseases. Another reason why Industrialization has been impacting people, business, and society negatively is the spreading of child labor. The time of Industrialization had largely increased the open opportunities of jobs even leading to child labor because of the need of more workers to help create new technologies. Arguments from Lewis Wickes claimed that children who start working at a young age would end up with no future and end up as worthless garbage. Children were paid low income after hours of brutal work. Child labor was already a main issue in the nation but because of the time of Industrial Revolution the problem might as well be ignored for all the exciting outcomes to appear during the time. One last reason why Industrialization was not worth the cost was because of the many accidental deaths of innocent people. When industrial activity was starting to grow at it’s height 526 men had already lost their lives by work-accidents in Allegheny County.  During 3 months, hospitals of the county had received over 509 men injured in such accidents. Risking human lives was not worth the benefits that were created.

This is why I believe the benefits of new technologies was not worth the cost because of the negative impacts it had on people, business, and society.

Ruining America One Invention At A Time

The benefits of industrialization were not worth the overall cost of damage to America. One of the damages to society was horrible pollution from factories. According to the article, “Polluting the Environment,” “ By the early 1900s, air pollution became so heavy in industrial cities that people needed streetlights to see during the day.” This badly affected the people living near factories because they could get injured or possibly die because of the polluted air.
Pollution was a huge issue that was also shown in a Detroit Publishing Company photograph of smokestacks. Smokestacks are basically funnels that come out of factories and ships to let out smoke, which leads to pollution. In the primary source photo, it is showing smokestacks in factories and the air being affected. Therefore, pollution has terrible effects on the environment and society.
Along with pollution, another big issue was child labor. This was where children were treated as low pay slaves. The poster “Making Human Junk,” created by Lewis Wickes Hines, shows the process of child labor. The poster says that by the end of the process, the children have no future and low wages. It says that they have no future, because of two reasons in my opinion. Reason one is that if they are not payed a good amount, then they cannot pay for certain things that will help the become successful. The other reason that the children in child labor would have no future, is that they are not used to another job, and so since child labor is bad, if they had another job, they would not know what a “good job” is. Pollution and child labor are just two of the negative aspects of industrialization. For all of these reasons, the benefits of industrialization were not worth the cost.

The Industrialization Has Put People In The Dust

The benefits of new technologies from industrialization were not worth the costs because it was harmful to people, the society and the environment. The photograph called Factory Smokestacks by the Detroit Publishing Company shows the smoke that factories are emitting. The smoke is polluting our air. According to ”Polluting the Environment,” “By the early 1900s, air pollution became so heavy in industrial cities that people needed streetlights to see during the day.” The air is so polluted that even during the day, it is dark outside. In order to see you had to use street lights. Likewise, the Making Human Junk poster by Lewis Wickes Hine draws attention to child labor. The picture proves child labor should not be allowed because they will end up with lower wages and no future. Also known as “junk”. The children get very dirty in these factories and don’t even make that much money. Want to know what they do get? Sick. They get sick from being in these factories. Related to this, the Accident Report by Crystal Eastman written in 1916 tells us that so many men are getting killed in industrial accidents. The report states, “During three months, April, May, and June, of the same year, the hospitals of the count received over 509 men injured in such accidents…” This quote shows us that many people have died in factory accidents. That was just in 3 months. Imagine how many people would die at that same rate throughout the whole entire year.  This report really lets us know what is going on inside the cement walls of factories. Accidents and people dieing were not worth the cost.

Was the Industrial Revolution worth the cost? Yes, It was

The Industrial Revolution was an important part of history. You many think it was a terrible time because of all of the bad things, but without this revolution, you wouldn't be able to read this text because computer would never exist. Everything that turns on would not be available if the industrial revolution never happened. Back Then, most people were amazed by all this new technology. In the interview with Harry Reece, It says that people were amazed by the new technology. Also with our picture of the typewriter ad, It tells us about hout the new inventions are helping, and making things faster. And finally, the Picture of the kids shows the new technology that would benefit the children. (The reason they look unhappy is because they have been sitting there for 10 minutes, they did not have instant cameras back then) The industrial revolution was a big benefactor

Industrial Revolution: Killer or Keeper?

IN the article “human Junk” by Lewis Wickes Hines shows that children are “good material” at first, but then they are put though “the process”, which is working in a factory. Then they come out of the factory “junk, ” with no future and low wages.
This shows and reveals the effects of the industrial revolution on children. This lead to human accidents.

In tan accident report by Crystal Eastman, He talk about how there “is no bright side to this situation.” He states that “allegheny County [in the Philadelphia area] lost “500 workmen every year, of whom nearly half were american born,  70 per cent are workmen of skill and training, and 60 percent have not reached the prime in their working life.” This also shows that industrialization is a killer. The environment is affected as well.

In the article “polluting the environment,” it states that “air pollution became so heavy that people needed streetlights to see during the day.” THi shows that the pollution and industrial revolution has a negative impact. This also shows that pollution was so bad the the sun was blocked. These sources combined shows how the industrial revolution was not only negative, but it ruined the earth.

Is Killing Our World And The People In It Worth It For Industrialization?

Industrialization isn’t worth the cost that it puts on the world. In a picture by the Library of Congress titled Factory Smoke Stacks (1890-1901), it shows factories polluting the environment with their smoke. This affects the environment and the society because it pollutes a lot, and there is such heavy pollution it isn’t good for anyone. If there is so much pollution, people won’t want to go out, and maybe stores might get shut down because they aren’t getting business. Also, all the pollution could make people sick, and it could be really dangerous. This shows how much industrialization costs us, and how much it affects the world around us. Likewise, the poster titled “Making Human Junk” by Lewis Wick Hine, (1913-1914) impacts children in awful ways. These children are good material at first, but then they are used for child labor. The labor they are put through changes them, and they end up with no future and considered as “junk”. They are paid such low wages, that the cost that industrialization is putting on them isn’t worth all the new technology. In addition, an accident report by Paul Underwood Kellogg (1916) tells us about all the statistics about people being killed in factories working. So many people are being affected by industrialization, and it isn’t right. People are practically sacrificing their lives for new technology. Industrialization is killing men, 60% who haven’t even reached the prime of their working life. That means that they are really young, and because of industrialization, people that young are dying. Industrialization has too many effects on the ecosystem, society, and people, so I think it was not worth the cost.

Was it Worth the Struggle?

The industrial revolution resulted in some amazing inventions but many people had to pay a huge price. To keep the factories running they needed kids to do some of the typical tasks. A poster composed by Hine Lewis Wickes (1912-1914) shows how kids were affected. At first, it shows a bunch of kids smiling who appear to be clean. It also shows what happens to the kids after working at the factories for a long time. Most factories used different types of machines and some of the kids had jobs monitoring the machines. These events result in sad, tired, kids who were dirty. These kids worked very hard even though their work resulted in low wages. Sometimes they had no choice because they needed to support their families. The Industrial Revolution affected the world too in many ways. According to the article "Polluting the Environment," by Discovery Education, the text says “For example, coal mining produces chemicals such as iron sulfates that enter streams and kill plants and animals living in the area.“ This means that the essential resources needed to run the factories caused lots of problems. These problems resulted in pollution, deaths of plants and animals, and more. That’s just the pollution before the factories use the resources. The photograph “Factory Smokestacks” taken by Detroit Publishing Company shows that the factories produced lots of air pollution. It shows about 6 factories producing air pollution near locals which most likely affects them too.  I know this affected lots of thin because the article "Polluting the Environment," on the Discovery Education website, “This process threatened other untouched natural areas, such as pure water springs, waterfalls, and swamps.“ In my opinion I’d rather have less technology if it would result in more happy kids and less pollution. In the end the Industrial Revolution is not worth the cost in my opinion and I think we could've found other ways to produce technology.

Was The Total And Siege Necessary Or Not???

A Siege is to cut off all supplies from entering an area, forcing a surrender. A Total War is to destroy all civilian and military resources. I think the total war and siege were necessary for the the Union to use because the war would never come to an end and the war would keep going on.

What was a siege and total war, did it affect the war

 A siege was a major part of the unions strategy.  A siege is blockading all of the supplies from coming in. Total War was also a very big part of the Unions strategy.  Total War was going full on war and destroying anything the opponent has in your sight. The big question about these two strategy was, was it fair. In my opinion it was fair cause without it the war would continuously keep going on. Battle after battle and if the war never ended we might have slavery. That why Total War and a Siege is important to American History.

Was Siege and Total War really Necessary

I think using siege was necessary but using total war wasn't. I feel like the siege was a tactic to help the Union win the war because it stopped the Confederates from getting their kind of advantage. But I don't think that using total war was the best tactic to help win the war, it did kill innocent people too, but it was too harsh for the Union to burn down there houses while they're already poor and leave them homeless, injured, sick, or killed. This is what I feel about the siege and total war, the siege helped them and gave them a huge victory in Vicksburg. But the idea of using total war was unnecessary and even though it did help the Union have more of an advantage, I feel like they've gone way too far an shouldn't have used that strategy at all, killing innocent women, men, and children was just causing murder. This is what I think about the siege and total war.

Was Sieging Necessary? Your Choice?

In my honest opinion, I feel that it was necessary to siege, in this instance. Although the innocent people of Atlanta had to suffer very badly, like eating rats and horses, the South treated African Americans very poorly and gave them bad food and bad living conditions. This whole war started because the South was treating their slaves horribly, so maybe the people of the South should have a taste of there own medicine.

Total War and Siege: Was It Necessary?

I think that everyone in the Union and CSA wants this war to be over. The Civil War keeps getting worse and worse and I think everyone just wants it to be over. So in my opinion, using siege and total war was necessary because it would bring us closer to the end of the war and closer to the south surrendering. What I don't think is right, is that Sherman burnt down people's houses and innocent civilians were left living in caves, eating rats and horses. Although, like I said, I agree with this action of total war and siege because it will bring the war closer to the end.

Total war and siege

I think that total war and siege was not necessary. I think that because it sounds so harsh. People not having any food or not having a house. If you lived in a war area and you had to eat rats and horses what would you think. I would not be happy. If you were used to eating nice food and you lived in a nice house I wouldn't want to live in a cave eating rats. Especially when it is total war because then you don't know what will happen will you run out of food water. You also wouldn't know what was going on because you would be hiding. I think that siege and total war was not necessary.

Yes I kind of think it's nessecer

First they won the war. It was good that they turned up the north got rid of the train tracks because now the south can't get materials. I do also think that having fires on houses that's not good and getting rid of houses and killing people I don't like this, but i'm glad that they won the war.

Total War and Siege? Fair?

I think that total war and siege is fair because it is not the Union's fault that the people who were civilians who live in the south are for the Confederate. Total war and siege is fair because the southerners picked their side and they are going to get what they asked for. Also Sherman and Grant did what was right because if they wanted to win the war they would do what they thought was right. Also the southern civilians are doing what they think is right but that doesn't always mean safe. Also sometimes playing it safe doesn't mean its the right thing.

Siege And The Total War Is It Justified

Do I think using siege and total war was necessary? siege is to block off all the supplies from going somewhere. I do think it was necessary because If you think about it how would have the war ended. If the south won the war would we still have slaves because they think it's still fine to have them. I also really do think it was justified to do this tactics.You have to do anything to win battle.

Killing Innocent Families in Siege? Is This Justified?

I don't think that using siege and total war is completely necessary. They were already cut off from the Mississippi River because of the Anaconda plan, so I don't think they needed total war to win. They were burning innocent people's houses, and taking families food! They were killing innocent people, just to make the South surrender. The Union was making children and their families eat rats because they didn't have any more food. William Tecumseh Sherman vowed to "make everything from Atlanta to Savannah an example of total war." This pretty much meant burning houses, stores, factories, and anything that they thought would help the confederates win. I don't think Sherman was a very good person, and I don't think it was justified.

Total War and How it Effected Civilians

In the south during the Civil War the Union soldiers decided to use strategies for example a siege which blocks off all the souths resources which also let's nothing leave or come in. I think this was bad but it was necessary to win the war. They also used a total war strategy which meant burning their houses and everything around it. This affected everyone at it was very bad and hardcore. I think they should of not have used the total war strategy at all and use the siege strategy but less hard core. In my opinion these war tactics aren't justified but sometimes you have to sacrifice things to win wars. In my opinion it is not justified to let woman and kids starve or die but maybe the Union could of targeted just the army camps instead which would justified in my opinion.

Is Siege Necessary?

I think that siege in total war is not necessary. The reason why I think that is because civilians that live there, don't need to go through that pain. There were thousands of people on the ground waiting for a doctor to come to them. There were only so many doctors, and they had to wait in the hot sun with no water or food while being sick. The North invaded the South and took all their food and necessary things, then they burned down their house. The Southerners then had to walk with no food or water to get to Virginia after all of the disaster happened. This is the reason why I think the Northerners didn't have to do all of this damage to the South and the people living there. 

Siege and total war in the civil war?

I think that the Union using total war, and siege is definitely not fair to all of the civilians peacefully living near battlefields, and the action of the war. From the people in the movie I saw that what Sherman did was really not fair to all of the innocent people in the Southern towns when you look at it from the south's point of view. Sherman could have just blocked all of the ports and took of train tracks, but they definitely didn't have to set houses on fire and leave civilians homeless. Doing all of this was good for the Union though because after all of the things Sherman and his troops were doing, the Confederates surrendered. I don't think this is justified, with burning houses.

Is using siege and total war justified? Yes it is.

There are many reasons why siege and total war are justified, but there is one big one. In war, you have one goal, to win. Anyone on the enemy side is enemy. The tactics may be gruesome, but the succeeded at winning the war. There is no such thing as civilised war.

No rules of real war

Yes, I think using siege and total war was necessary. People claimed "this is violating the rules of war" but in my opinion, there are no true rules of war. Maybe setting fires on everything was a little over the top it still got confederates to leave and that upped the union chances of winning the war because of the lack of food supplies. The siege did affect the entire war because the union was able to take control of the Mississippi river. This cut off all supplies and recourses from the confederates.  This was basically payback for slave owners because slave owners treated their slaves worse then war treated them.

Siege and total war: Necessary or not?

Siege and total war: Necessary or not?

I think that the siege and total war is unnecessary for ordinary civilians to go through. At least Sherman could have set the military camps on fire, instead of setting ordinary people's homes on fire. It is not fair to them, especially if they don't want anything to do with the war. Another option for Sherman to do could be to plan a surprise attack, involving soldiers, not innocent people. 

Siege made it unfair for civilians as well, because they were starving, and if they were lucky, they could eat a rat. Ew! 

Overall, in my opinion, I don't think that siege and total war is right, nor fair.

Total War and Siege: Is it war strategy or murder and stealing?

I think siege and Total war are not justified because you should not make civilians suffer. Siege is when you make sure no supplies can get in or out of a city. total war is burning everything and taking all enemy supplies . If you were going to make a siege, only siege supply depots with nobody in them. that means you will not kill people and you will still be destroying enemy supplies

John Brown : Murder or Martyr? What do you think.? Right a comment below.

I think he is a murder because he killed 5 men . It’s not very good and it’s not a solution to the problem. When people are killing other people it’s really bad. In my opinion he killed 5 men and I don’t like that. If he was a martyr he would not have killed  5 men .

Was John Brown A Martyr

John Brown was a martyr. He went to battle trying to capture slaves and bring them back to the North knowing that he can die. He killed a lot of people but he did it for his cause, because he was a extreme abolitionist. That’s why I think he is a martyr because when he died he died doing something he believes in strongly. He was honored by the North and that's also why he was a martyr.

Martyr or Murderer? The True Story of John Brown

I think that John Brown is a martyr and not a murderer. In my opinion he was a martyr, he died for slaves to be free and went all out for it. He wanted to abolish slavery and he thought god told him the he needed to do it himself. He got his point through to the south that the abolitionists wanted slavery to be abolished and they would not stop until they had the deed done. In his mind he thought it was horrible that human beings were considered as property, and property that was treated very poorly. Overall he was a martyr and is remembered to this day for his actions on the issue of slavery.

To Be a Martyr Or To Be a Murderer

I  think that John Brown is a martyr because he wasn’t killing people for no reason he was killing them to help slaves become free people. John Brown was a martyr in the north because the north understood that the slaves shouldn’t be slaves they should be free. The south thinks he is a terrorist because he is trying to stop them from having slaves so they hate him. John Brown is a free person so the southerners can’t tell him what or what not to do. John Brown is allowed to have his own beliefs. If he believed slavery should end, he has a right to try to end it. Also if people want to call him a hero for what he did then they can because they have a right. He is a martyr because he died trying to help end the slave population and turn them free.

John Brown: The Extreme Abolitionist

John Brown an extreme abolitionist would stop at nothing to end slavery. Some might say he is a terrorist. He had a plan to break into a armory and get guns for the southern slaves so he can lead a slave rebellion but before this he killed five people at a creek with his five sons. He led the raid and he hoped that when the word got out that slaves would join him and his five sons, but when they went in, no slaves joined and it was basically a suicide mission. They wouldn’t go down without a fight, but then Colonel Robert E. Lee sent in troops and he was caught and went to prison. His sons died and he was sentenced to death on December 2 1859. To me John Brown is martyr because he fought for the cause of slavery and fought for his beliefs.

Is John Brown Truly a Martyr or a Murderer?

In my opinion I think John Brown is a martyr, in the year of 1859 in Harpers Ferry, he says he will not stop to abolish slavery and believes he’s fighting in a holy war. A martyr means a person who is killed because of their religious beliefs. This is exactly what John Brown thought, he believed that slavery was wrong and would stop at nothing until slavery was abolished. He isn’t a murderer since he didn’t kill for no cause but he killed for his own beliefs, and was willing to die for their cause. He was considered a martyr in the North because they know slavery was wrong, while the South considered him as a murderer, but the south back then thought their was nothing wrong with slavery. This is why I think John Brown is a martyr instead of a murderer.

IS JOHN BROWN A MARTYR OR A MURDERER???

I think that John Brown is a murderer because he killed five men because they had different opinions than him. John Brown was so worried and upset about there being slaves that he took it to far and decided the only way to fix this problem is by killing people. Frederick Douglass had once warned John Brown that attacking a federal building was a mistake and would get him killed, but John Brown would do anything to try and stop slavery.  John Brown had once said “I John Brown am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood.” The statement John Brown is saying means this problem will never be solved unless there is war.

Was this Extreme Abolitionist, By The Name of John Brown, a Martyr or a Murderer?

John Brown is a true martyr to the North and a dangerous murderer to the South. To me, John Brown is a martyr because I don’t believe in slavery and if I was living in 1859, I would be a free soiler. Even though John Brown heard voices in his head and was a crazy psycho, he was taking action to stand up for what he believed in. John Brown was an extreme abolitionist who went into the south, Harpers Ferry, Virginia at midnight  with his 5 sons hoping to start and lead a slave rebellion. It was a suicide mission. The slaves didn’t join in and the locals attacked and trapped Brown. After John Brown and his 5 sons have been killed, John said, “I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood.” This quote means that slavery won’t just vanish, but there will be a war between the states to decide whether Kansas and Nebraska will become a slave state or a free state. This was true and the war over slavery has just begun. To me, John Brown is a martyr. What is he to you? A murderer or a martyr?

John Brown: Killer or Savior?

John Brown was an extreme abolitionist. He became famous for “Bleeding Kansas” attack and the Harper’s Ferry, Virginia attack. He killed almost over 200 white people. He led an attack with his 5 sons on Harper’s Ferry, Virginia and was captured after the townspeople rebelled against him. The US Marines were called in and that finished off John Brown’s rally.

I think John Brown was a murderer rather than a martyr. A martyr is someone who is killed for their religious beliefs. Yes, John Brown was an extreme abolitionist, but that doesn’t mean he could go and kill 200 people to prove his belief. Instead, he could have gone straight to the south and freed slaves directly from plantations, done protesting, anything but killing. Murdering was unnecessary.

John Brown Murder or Martyr.....

I think John Brown was a murder. He went out and killed 5 men by the creek  just because they didn't have the same beliefs as him. It was right that he wanted to fight for what he believed, but killing people is not the religious thing to do.  He could of shown his beliefs by writing in the press, or talking to people. He didn't have to bring guns into the fight.  He lead a rebellion and killed the people that had different beliefs than him, and that was just the beginning of the fight against slavery.

Martyr John Brown Gets Killed For His Rage Against Slavery

Martyr John Brown gets killed for his rage against slavery. October 1859 in Harpers Ferry, Virginia on a dark night John and his five sons go out to try to arm all southern slaves with rifles to form a rebellion against slavery. Then comes the rebellion night, but no slaves join. John won’t go down without a fight. The military catches John just for his religious beliefs to take revenge on white slaveholders who whip their slaves and may even kill them. He used aggressive techniques to hold this rebellion. He was harsh because he wanted to give worse punishments than they gave to the slaves. He is caught by a soldier and gets put in jail waiting to get executed. He is executed December 2, 1859, as a martyr to remember.

John Brown: Martyr or Murder?

A martyr is someone who is killed because of their religious beliefs. I think John Brown is a murderer, not a martyr. He was a bad man with good intentions. “He thinks he is Jesus's ‘chosen one’”.  He wants to free the slaves, but he murders so many people. “He wants to lead a slave rebellion” Brown was killed for breaking in and killing other people, and he knew it was a suicide mission. When soldiers got there, he tried killing them to escape but he couldn’t. Instead, he gets thrown in jail and hanged. John sacrificed his sons' lives just for this cause. I don’t think it is fair for him to sacrifice his sons' lives because they were still young, and he knew that it was a suicide mission, so why did he do it? That is why John Brown is a murderer.

John Brown; Murderer Not Martyr

John Brown would die for his cause. But, he was known as a terrorist to his town and outside of his town. Using the help from his 5 sons, they killed about 5 people. His 5 sons all killed, John Brown was executed for his murdering. The reason why John Brown was killing and hurting people was because he believed that slaves should be free. He was triggered because a group of people who wanted slavery to be a thing burned down a hotel. This made John Brown very mad so this was the revenge that he gave to people. Also, this triggered and had to do with part of the Civil War. John’s plan was not as sneaky as he thought it would be. He sacrificed his own life, but killed many people too. Therefore, he is should be known as a terrorist and a murderer.

John Brown: A good intent, a bad choice.

John Brown Is most definitely a murderer, because of his choice killing people for the cause of destroying slavery. His plan involves killing a lot of people, and he isn't just a little crazy. He killed many men for the cause of destroying slavery, but he did not think his plan through. Harper's Ferry was a big mistake, because he did not send out a way to get reinforcements. There are many different ways to do this, and he could have used any of them. But killing others only ever brings war and never peace. He fought for a cause that was meant to be fought with words, not guns. Violence always leads to more violence, and in his case, the civil war

John Brown: Hero for the Slaves

John Brown

John Brown believed strongly against slavery, as an extreme abolitionist. In my opinion, John Brown is a martyr, because he was willing to die, and kill people for his beliefs. He was known as a terrorist, but that wasn’t his intention. John Brown’s mindset, was to capture people that were for slavery, just to save the slaves. John was willing to get violent in order to protest to free the slaves. He did kill people, but not for no reason, which is what a murder would do, meaning that they just kill people. Since Brown had good reasoning to his plan of killing the army, he was a martyr because he had strong beliefs to free the slaves.

Who Is John Brown A Martyr Or A Murderer?

John Brown is in my opinion a murderer. He killed multiple people for his beliefs and he could of found other ways. He thought he was doing the holy thing by helping slaves escape and to fight beside them. He had the right idea I think but did the wrong thing. He killed people so therefore he is a murderer and even though he died he made other people die first so he is a murderer. His plan was not very thought out and that's why it failed but that nonetheless considers him a martyr. A martyr is someone who is killed because they believe things that other people don’t. He may fit some of the qualifications to be one but he still killed multiple people so he is a murderer. His original goal was to get revenge on the pro-slavery people back in Kansas by the creek and that is definitely not holy in my opinion.

John Brown Murder or a Martyr...

Depending on where you live or what you believe in he could be a martyr or a murder. Personally I would call him a murder. I would call him that because he was killing people just so African Americans could be free. John Brown said that he would not stop until the town was all dead and burnt to the ground. I would call that a murder. Also from all of the research that I have done it said that he killed 5 people by the creek just to prove his beliefs. At this time in history killing someone means you are a murder. That is why I think he is a murder not a martyr.       

John Brown, Martyr at Harpers Ferry

  

A martyr is a person who is killed because of religious beliefs. John Brown is totally a martyr even though he is considered a terrorist in our modern times. He is a very dangerous man, leading a very good cause. I really don't think he should have killed people for the cause. I don't think he should have relied so heavily on slave reinforcements when he stormed Harpers Ferry. He should have not gone into the armory. I think he is a hero who made the wrong decisions. I think he should have been better in his plan to storm the armoury, maybe have done it peacefully, stole weapons, given them to slaves, and helped from the side. He had the right idea. John brown is a martyr who made the wrong decisions.