Total war and seige is this fair

Total war consists of two main details: one, burn everything so your opponent can't use it and two, take all the food and things useful to you. This was used by a Union General  William Sherman. This is super unfair and cruel because in the process of total war they  killed so many people and you should not be able to take others food and burn their stuff down. Siege is also wrong because you surround and then you don't let supplies enter the city or town. These are both wrong war tactics they are not good for the people. These are not fair war tactic no matter what.  

was total war and siege necessary?

I do not think it was ok that total war and and siege were used to make Vicksburg surrender. I think that siege and total war mad General Grant look bad because they kind of took the easy way out and cheated in the battle. I think that the union, the north, should win but I do not think this is the way they should've won the battle. Since they used total war and siege this made a ton of soldiers ill, which is why they had to surrender. Total war and siege is not justified. For this reason,  this is why I think it was a poor decision that siege and total war was used in the civil war.

Is Total War Necessary?

William Tecumseh Sherman was a man who used total war as a strategy. Total war is a strategy that involves destroying all civilian and military resources. During the Civil War, the Union thought that total war was a necessary and smart strategy. I don't agree with the North's choice of using total war as a strategy because many innocent civilians died from lack of resources or from burning building, crops, and railroads. All of these actions were not necessary because the Union could have successfully finished the Anaconda PLan without destroying innocent people's property. Also, the south would get very upset after the war was over because of the Union's strategy of using total war and siege. These two plans were not necessary. Siege is a blockade that blocks off resources and makes armies surrender because of it. These two acts weren't necessary and overall, they were very bad choices.

Siege, necessary or not?

I think, that in the Civil War, the siege wasn't necessary. Yes, I know that we could possibly not be the country we are today without it, but, was it really necessary to kill and suffer so many innocent people? I think that tearing apart the railroads was definitely necessary to win, because of transportation reinforcements for Richmond, but they really didn't need to burn everything in Atlanta, total war wasn't necessary. I think that these harsh tactics were used to win the war were not justified, people were starved to death! Imagine if that was you in Vicksburg, starving to death with no home, because the Union was blocking the Mississippi river, surrounding the town. I think that the siege and Total War were definitely not necessary.

Siege is wrong!

            I do not think that it was necessary to use siege and total war in order for the union to win this war. People were running out of food, they were starving. They also had to live in caves, since their houses were burnt down. I do not think it was okay that they allowed people to go through this, just because they wanted to succeed. They could have used other strategies such as using the anaconda plan, and just fighting to win.

Siege and total War.

I think that siege and total war wasn't necessary in order for the Union to win the war. The Union was attacking normal men, women and children. The southern people suffered by eating rats, mules and tree bark. They also had to sleep in caves because their houses were burnt down. The Union could have just won the war by using the Anaconda Plan and also fighting strongly. Even though the Union hurt and made innocent people suffer, I think they deserved to win the Civil War.

Was it necessary?

I think the siege and total war was not necessary. I don't understand why that would want to ruin towns and kill people. I don't think that they'll have ruined towns to get a victory and ill innocent people. Many people suffered and personally I don't think that this was necessary to siege. That's not necessary to kill so many people. I think it was not right to siege Vicksburg or use total war.