Thread: Was Robert E. Lee a good general?

BillyBlastoff - 8/23/2017 at 04:51 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/05/19/the-truth-abou t-confederate-gen-robert-e-lee-he-wasnt-very-good-at-his-job/?tid=a_inl& ;utm_term=.e0572d8e4b80

What's to memorialize?


gina - 8/23/2017 at 10:40 PM


He was a Southern gentleman and a man of honor. How dare all of those besmirch his memory.

With regards to those who want his statue down, if there are going to be statues taken down in this country, take them all down, so there is no more partisanism. No more statues. God said not to make idols carved in stone. But don't take some of them down and leave others up. Unilateral across the board take down of statues and monuments or leave them all alone and stop revisionist history!


Chain - 8/23/2017 at 10:58 PM

General Longstreet wasn't particularly a big fan. Especially after Gettysburg


pops42 - 8/23/2017 at 11:26 PM

quote:

He was a Southern gentleman and a man of honor. How dare all of those besmirch his memory.

With regards to those who want his statue down, if there are going to be statues taken down in this country, take them all down, so there is no more partisanism. No more statues. God said not to make idols carved in stone. But don't take some of them down and leave others up. Unilateral across the board take down of statues and monuments or leave them all alone and stop revisionist history!


pops42 - 8/23/2017 at 11:27 PM

quote:

He was a Southern gentleman and a man of honor. How dare all of those besmirch his memory.

With regards to those who want his statue down, if there are going to be statues taken down in this country, take them all down, so there is no more partisanism. No more statues. God said not to make idols carved in stone. But don't take some of them down and leave others up. Unilateral across the board take down of statues and monuments or leave them all alone and stop revisionist history!
Did you know him personally?. his great-grandson doesn't care if the statue comes down,why should YOU?.


2112 - 8/23/2017 at 11:31 PM

I don't understand the memorials to losers. General Custer seems to be the only other exception to the memorials for losers phenomenon.


StratDal - 8/24/2017 at 03:08 AM

quote:

He was a Southern gentleman and a man of honor. How dare all of those besmirch his memory.

With regards to those who want his statue down, if there are going to be statues taken down in this country, take them all down, so there is no more partisanism. No more statues. God said not to make idols carved in stone. But don't take some of them down and leave others up. Unilateral across the board take down of statues and monuments or leave them all alone and stop revisionist history!


As opposed to Northern gentlemen who were also men of honor?

Lee was a very capable general and was loved by his soldiers. He also was a traitor to the United States who betrayed the oath he took at West Point. He also was the first parishioner in his church to take communion with a freed slaved who approached the alter when no other parishioners would.

The Confederacy was about keeping the institution of slavery legal. Statues and monuments honoring people and events of the Civil War need to be considered at the local level. I do think that Confederate statues and monuments on any government properties should be moved to private establishments.

From the late Winston Churchill, “Thus ended the great American Civil War, which must upon the whole be considered the noblest and least avoidable of all the great mass conflicts of which till then there was record.”

[Edited on 8/25/2017 by StratDal]


BIGV - 8/24/2017 at 05:54 PM

quote:
He also was a traitor to the United States who betrayed the oath he took at West Point


Within this comment lies the argument against the war being 100% about slavery. Not only was Lee an incredible tactician and battlefield genius, he also felt the pull of the obligation of defending his home state of Virginia. Check out his family tree and find the roots of his family go back to the Revolutionary war and beyond. His brilliance on the field is highlighted by his performances at Chancellorsville & Sharpsburg. Also of note are the 7 days, Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor and his ability to judge ground and lead his men. Granted, as mentioned above it can be argued that Gettysburg is his one black eye...had he listened to Longstreet and had Jackson not been been killed the outcome of the war and history itself might be quite different.

On a side note as a Civil War buff, count me amongst those who believe the values of yesterday and those who truly believed them can not be held up to the same light we use to see today. Are there exceptions on both sides of the history timeline? Most certainly there are. But history can not be re-written or merely pushed aside because some are ignorant of the total picture.

Are Confederate soldiers who fought and most likely were not slave owners as guilty as past Presidents who actually owned and sold people? Symbolism be damned. If you remove the statues of Southern soldiers; Washington, Jefferson and Grant should come down as well, The hypocrisy is alarming...


sixty8 - 8/24/2017 at 06:19 PM

Memorializing people such as Lee in the first place was the mistake and I have no problem with correcting mistakes. Take them down because they should have never existed. People can learn about our history warts and all in books and in museums where their proper place in history and what wrong they did can be put into proper context and these figures are portrayed in the negative light that they deserve. They should not be memorialized as anything positive and never should have been. They stand for a shameful time in our country's history and should be remembered that way.


BoytonBrother - 8/24/2017 at 06:30 PM

quote:
Are Confederate soldiers who fought and most likely were not slave owners as guilty as past Presidents who actually owned and sold people? Symbolism be damned. If you remove the statues of Southern soldiers; Washington, Jefferson and Grant should come down as well, The hypocrisy is alarming...


Whose hypocrisy specifically? The left's? The right's? Mine? Yours? Your key word there is "past" presidents who owned slaves. The whole point is that they realized it's wrong and fought to have it abolished while the other side did not. Everyone is a hypocrite but you are only alarmed by the left's. What a surprise.


BillyBlastoff - 8/24/2017 at 08:45 PM

quote:
Within this comment lies the argument against the war being 100% about slavery. Not only was Lee an incredible tactician and battlefield genius, he also felt the pull of the obligation of defending his home state of Virginia. Check out his family tree and find the roots of his family go back to the Revolutionary war and beyond. His brilliance on the field is highlighted by his performances at Chancellorsville & Sharpsburg. Also of note are the 7 days, Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor and his ability to judge ground and lead his men. Granted, as mentioned above it can be argued that Gettysburg is his one black eye...had he listened to Longstreet and had Jackson not been been killed the outcome of the war and history itself might be quite different.

On a side note as a Civil War buff, count me amongst those who believe the values of yesterday and those who truly believed them can not be held up to the same light we use to see today. Are there exceptions on both sides of the history timeline? Most certainly there are. But history can not be re-written or merely pushed aside because some are ignorant of the total picture.

Are Confederate soldiers who fought and most likely were not slave owners as guilty as past Presidents who actually owned and sold people? Symbolism be damned. If you remove the statues of Southern soldiers; Washington, Jefferson and Grant should come down as well, The hypocrisy is alarming...


Howdy Big V!

It can be argued that in Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville it was Hooker's failings more than anything that gave Lee his victories. Granted, he was incredibly outnumbered but Hooker, who had recently given up alcohol, kept retreating. Many speculate that had Hooker still been on the battle he would have had the liquid courage to attack instead of retreat.

I disagree that the monuments to Jefferson and Washington are in the same category as those of the Confederates. The Confederates were traitors to the Union. Jefferson and Washington founded the Union. To put the founders and the traitors in the same camp is ridiculous.


IPowrie - 8/24/2017 at 10:29 PM

quote:
quote:
He also was a traitor to the United States who betrayed the oath he took at West Point


Within this comment lies the argument against the war being 100% about slavery. Not only was Lee an incredible tactician and battlefield genius, he also felt the pull of the obligation of defending his home state of Virginia. Check out his family tree and find the roots of his family go back to the Revolutionary war and beyond. His brilliance on the field is highlighted by his performances at Chancellorsville & Sharpsburg. Also of note are the 7 days, Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor and his ability to judge ground and lead his men. Granted, as mentioned above it can be argued that Gettysburg is his one black eye...had he listened to Longstreet and had Jackson not been been killed the outcome of the war and history itself might be quite different.

On a side note as a Civil War buff, count me amongst those who believe the values of yesterday and those who truly believed them can not be held up to the same light we use to see today. Are there exceptions on both sides of the history timeline? Most certainly there are. But history can not be re-written or merely pushed aside because some are ignorant of the total picture.

Are Confederate soldiers who fought and most likely were not slave owners as guilty as past Presidents who actually owned and sold people? Symbolism be damned. If you remove the statues of Southern soldiers; Washington, Jefferson and Grant should come down as well, The hypocrisy is alarming...


I think the Confederacy would have eventually lost unless they captured Washington D.C. The north was better more industrialized and had more people. They also eventually had the south under blockade and controlled the Mississippi River.


Jerry - 8/25/2017 at 03:35 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
He also was a traitor to the United States who betrayed the oath he took at West Point


Within this comment lies the argument against the war being 100% about slavery. Not only was Lee an incredible tactician and battlefield genius, he also felt the pull of the obligation of defending his home state of Virginia. Check out his family tree and find the roots of his family go back to the Revolutionary war and beyond. His brilliance on the field is highlighted by his performances at Chancellorsville & Sharpsburg. Also of note are the 7 days, Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor and his ability to judge ground and lead his men. Granted, as mentioned above it can be argued that Gettysburg is his one black eye...had he listened to Longstreet and had Jackson not been been killed the outcome of the war and history itself might be quite different.

On a side note as a Civil War buff, count me amongst those who believe the values of yesterday and those who truly believed them can not be held up to the same light we use to see today. Are there exceptions on both sides of the history timeline? Most certainly there are. But history can not be re-written or merely pushed aside because some are ignorant of the total picture.

Are Confederate soldiers who fought and most likely were not slave owners as guilty as past Presidents who actually owned and sold people? Symbolism be damned. If you remove the statues of Southern soldiers; Washington, Jefferson and Grant should come down as well, The hypocrisy is alarming...


I think the Confederacy would have eventually lost unless they captured Washington D.C. The north was better more industrialized and had more people. They also eventually had the south under blockade and controlled the Mississippi River.


In hindsight, the war would have been over quickly, if at all started, if the Confederates had placed a battery of artillery on Lee's plantation. If you've ever been to Arlington, look down on Washington and see what would have been in range of the cannons available at that time.


BIGV - 8/25/2017 at 05:22 PM

quote:
quote:
Are Confederate soldiers who fought and most likely were not slave owners as guilty as past Presidents who actually owned and sold people? Symbolism be damned. If you remove the statues of Southern soldiers; Washington, Jefferson and Grant should come down as well, The hypocrisy is alarming...


quote:
Whose hypocrisy specifically?


Anyone in favor of removing only statues pertaining to the Confederacy. The Confederacy was around for how many years?...And slavery existed under the Stars and Stripes for how many decades? Slowly dissolved by the North's growing industrial strength, it remained a big part of the Souths' "Culture" because of Cotton. Yes, it ended in 1863 with Lincoln' proclamation, but was around for how long prior to that?

quote:
Your key word there is "past" presidents who owned slaves.


Correct, Was Lincoln part of that past? He was the reason this all ended, finally someone stood up for the eradication of this evil. How about the 15 Presidents who preceded him and did nothing? Are they part of this same past? It is all part of History, you can not selectively choose which part of the "Past" fits your agenda....Fact. Presidents owned slaves and they are celebrated on Currency, in History books and with Holidays.

Is there a difference between actually owning a person and taking up arms in defense of said behavior?

I sure as Hell think so.


gina - 8/25/2017 at 10:55 PM

quote:
Memorializing people such as Lee in the first place was the mistake and I have no problem with correcting mistakes. Take them down because they should have never existed. People can learn about our history warts and all in books and in museums where their proper place in history and what wrong they did can be put into proper context and these figures are portrayed in the negative light that they deserve. They should not be memorialized as anything positive and never should have been. They stand for a shameful time in our country's history and should be remembered that way.


Should we do the same to memorials honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, who wanted revolution using civil disobedience to bring the nation to it's knees to effect change and increase the rights of one group of affected people, whose roots were being under oppression. Yes he called for people to be judged on their character rather than their color, but his movement was all about advancing the rights of one group of people. Those who call for revolution now are regarded as terrorists, treasonous troublemakers, just like during the American Revolution when rabble rousers were determined they were going to secede from their rulers, England and start their own govt.


pops42 - 8/25/2017 at 10:58 PM

quote:
quote:
Memorializing people such as Lee in the first place was the mistake and I have no problem with correcting mistakes. Take them down because they should have never existed. People can learn about our history warts and all in books and in museums where their proper place in history and what wrong they did can be put into proper context and these figures are portrayed in the negative light that they deserve. They should not be memorialized as anything positive and never should have been. They stand for a shameful time in our country's history and should be remembered that way.


Should we do the same to memorials honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, who wanted revolution using civil disobedience to bring the nation to it's knees to effect change and increase the rights of one group of affected people, whose roots were being under oppression. Yes he called for people to be judged on their character rather than their color, but his movement was all about advancing the rights of one group of people. Those who call for revolution now are regarded as terrorists, treasonous troublemakers, just like during the American Revolution when rabble rousers were determined they were going to secede from their rulers, England and start their own govt.
Get your mental problems in check.


gina - 8/25/2017 at 10:59 PM

quote:
quote:

He was a Southern gentleman and a man of honor. How dare all of those besmirch his memory.

With regards to those who want his statue down, if there are going to be statues taken down in this country, take them all down, so there is no more partisanism. No more statues. God said not to make idols carved in stone. But don't take some of them down and leave others up. Unilateral across the board take down of statues and monuments or leave them all alone and stop revisionist history!
Did you know him personally?. his great-grandson doesn't care if the statue comes down,why should YOU?.


I liked him that's why; but I am making a concession here saying I we as a nation are going to start taking down statues, then we need a policy to take down ALL statues, monuments, so that one person is not glorfied above another one. I know there has been controversy about sandblasting the images on Stone Mountain, and Mount Rushmore, well, how far do we take the idea of no memorials?


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
http://www.allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
http://www.allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=145118