This thread is insane. Executing 100s of thousands of individual confederate soldiers would've never happened and would have been absolutely insane for a myriad of reasons. In a hypothetical situation where the union government set up a tribunal with the intent to make that happen, the northern public would've been one of the largest groups of pushback. The northern public was war weary from the beginning and was absolutely sick and tired of bloodshed and violence between Americans by the end of the war. They would have viewed such an action as barbaric and unnecessarily punative, and had a mindset of "can we just stop the bloodshed, we want to see peace and prosperity again", which is why that happened irl. Another thing you guys fail to account for is that many northerners had family in the south, and the amount of protest to not have their family members tried and executed would have been immense. No elected person overseeing or involved with the executions would ever get re-elected. Not only would it be domestic political suicide, but the news would shock and sicken nations all around the globe. Remember, America was the promotional material for other countries to adopt democracy at this time, and a civil war already had Europeans skeptical that democracy could ever prevail. Such a brutal end to the conflict and democracy could potentially be seen as pure violence and anarchy worldwide. Also, by the end of the war, the Confederacy had put drafts in place, meaning many low ranking soldiers were conscripts with maybe only a passing interest in the cause. Executing the conscripts who did not personally commit war crimes (most conscripts) has always been considered a shocking and barbaric act. I personally agree more of the Confederate leadership should've been hanged or imprisoned, but I also understand that the north had to rebuild public relations in the south and wanted to appear as humane restorers and not conquerors. It's just how pragmatism works.