Destruction for Preservation?

Does destruction help to preserve a country? The Civil War, which took place in 1861-1865, answers this question without a doubt. During the Civil War, a Union general, T. Sherman, led a march along the coast of the Atlantic Ocean. Sherman and his regime burned down houses, destroyed crops, and massacred Southern citizens with the upmost force. This costly event for the South was called Sherman's March and took place during the fall of 1864. This caused much devastation for the South because this destroyed the source of their economy, crops, and left many people homeless and suffering at the loss of family and friends. This piled onto many other previous losses such as the Battle of Gettysburg and spelled disaster for the South.
As stated before, does destruction upon a nation help to preserve that nation? Prosperity and progress may help in preservation, but attacking another part of nation only to add to the already suffering losses of a war is certaintly not the way to go. Having to repair land and replant crops is not only a hassle, but it takes money. War also destroys ties between groups not only in nation, but outside a nation such as when ties with England were damaged during the war and that's where much of our economy processes through. No good can come of destruction when trying to preserve a nation, it's pretty much defeating the purpose of preservation.