Robert E. Lee Day

[The East Marches]

I'll agree with that.

We have to study important figures in history - even those who were on the wrong side and defended horrible things.

His duty was to the United States of America, in whose army he was an officer and whose Constitution he had taken an oath to preserve and protect.

If your government does betray the Consitition as Lincoln did by suspending Habeaus Corpus without the assent of Congress in 1861, then I would say he was fully justified in protecting his people against tyranny from an illegimate government :^)

[The East Marches]

He was an exceptionally talented general who did his duty. Public holiday is a bit much but to destroy his memory and lose the lessons within as some are suggesting is foolish.

I'll agree with that.

We have to study important figures in history - even those who were on the wrong side and defended horrible things.

The other question is why we then overlook the slave states which fought on the side of Union? I don't believe it was a single dimensional war which makes so interesting as a conflict to read up about.

[USS Monitor]

But he chose that. He was offered leadership in the Union Army and declined to fight for his state. It's well-documented that he didn't believe in any part of the CSA cause, but he was loyal to his state, which on it's own should be commended in some way.

^This. It's really unfortunate that history tends to paint all Confederates the same color (don't you dare). The war was fought for abhorrent reasons, but most Confederate soldiers were fighting for their homelands. Sherman's March to the Sea makes it kind of hard to fault that viewpoint, given most of them weren't even slaveholders.

Sherman's March to the Sea was late in the war. The excuse that people were reacting to Sherman's March does not explain all the people that fought for the Confederate cause from 1861 through the summer of 1864.

[Neutraligon]

His duty was to the United States of America, in whose army he was an officer and whose Constitution he had taken an oath to preserve and protect.

If your government does betray the Consitition as Lincoln did by suspending Habeaus Corpus without the assent of Congress in 1861, then I would say he was fully justified in protecting his people against tyranny from an illegimate government :^)

It was only after he suspended Habeaus Corpus that this was determined, before that there was no court case to make that decleration. It was not determined by the Supreme Court if this was true until much later.

[Galloism]

I'll agree with that.

We have to study important figures in history - even those who were on the wrong side and defended horrible things.

The other question is why we then overlook the slave states which fought on the side of Union? I don't believe it was a single dimensional war which makes so interesting as a conflict to read up about.

Well, heh, that does complicate things a bit.

It's worth noting those that those states didn't find slavery so important that they were willing to forsake the union they joined on the notion that they got a president they didn't like (it's also unlikely that, barring the civil war itself, Lincoln would have done much to change the status quo).

[Neutraligon]

I'll agree with that.

We have to study important figures in history - even those who were on the wrong side and defended horrible things.

The other question is why we then overlook the slave states which fought on the side of Union? I don't believe it was a single dimensional war which makes so interesting as a conflict to read up about.

The reason for them leaving was due to slavery (among a few other causes, but the focus for them was on this). The reason for the union fighting was not about slavery, it is partially due to this, partially due to politics from Washington, partially due to pragmatism, and a few other reasons why these slave states did not leave the Union.

[Neanderthaland]

I'm not sure he was exceptionally talented.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a bad general, but what did he do exactly do deserve the cult that's been built up around him?

Frankly, the coolest thing he ever did was personally run reconnaissance in Mexico.

Either he was exceptionally talented or we were exceptionally incompetent. I prefer to be charitable to my own side personally.

Not really though. He was good against McClellan, I guess.

[The East Marches]

The other question is why we then overlook the slave states which fought on the side of Union? I don't believe it was a single dimensional war which makes so interesting as a conflict to read up about.

Well, heh, that does complicate things a bit.

It's worth noting those that those states didn't find slavery so important that they were willing to forsake the union they joined on the notion that they got a president they didn't like (it's also unlikely that, barring the civil war itself, Lincoln would have done much to change the status quo).

So does the whole "emancipation proclamation" really only applying to non-Union areas. I find that is an interesting part overlooked as well. Like the Spanish Civil War, I doubt there is a single definitive reason, instead we are left with varying factions and ideas bound together by convenience. Boy, I am glad our upper history courses don't white wash things. There is one solid part of American education we should not change.

If your government does betray the Consitition as Lincoln did by suspending Habeaus Corpus without the assent of Congress in 1861, then I would say he was fully justified in protecting his people against tyranny from an illegimate government :^)

It was only after he suspended Habeaus Corpus that this was determined, before that there was no court case to make that decleration. It was not determined by the Supreme Court if this was true until much later.

But they were right in the end :^)

Thus he did do his duty

[The East Marches]

Either he was exceptionally talented or we were exceptionally incompetent. I prefer to be charitable to my own side personally.

Not really though. He was good against McClellan, I guess.

When you are forced to have whole corps of an Army speaking other languages because you need more meat for the grinder due to your defeats, you've made some very serious mistakes. The war was really won by the campaigns in the West. I read an interesting book on the matter if you are interested.

[Neutraligon]

Well, heh, that does complicate things a bit.

It's worth noting those that those states didn't find slavery so important that they were willing to forsake the union they joined on the notion that they got a president they didn't like (it's also unlikely that, barring the civil war itself, Lincoln would have done much to change the status quo).

So does the whole "emancipation proclamation" really only applying to non-Union areas. I find that is an interesting part overlooked as well. Like the Spanish Civil War, I doubt there is a single definitive reason, instead we are left with varying factions and ideas bound together by convenience. Boy, I am glad our upper history courses don't white wash things. There is one solid part of American education we should not change.

It was only after he suspended Habeaus Corpus that this was determined, before that there was no court case to make that decleration. It was not determined by the Supreme Court if this was true until much later.

But they were right in the end :^)

Thus he did do his duty

Only when it was later confirmed. I will admit though that the things he did during and after the law where highly questionable. I will not say they where doing there duty by rebelling however.

[Galloism]

Well, heh, that does complicate things a bit.

It's worth noting those that those states didn't find slavery so important that they were willing to forsake the union they joined on the notion that they got a president they didn't like (it's also unlikely that, barring the civil war itself, Lincoln would have done much to change the status quo).

So does the whole "emancipation proclamation" really only applying to non-Union areas. I find that is an interesting part overlooked as well. Like the Spanish Civil War, I doubt there is a single definitive reason, instead we are left with varying factions and ideas bound together by convenience. Boy, I am glad our upper history courses don't white wash things. There is one solid part of American education we should not change.

The emancipation proclamation had one purpose:

To raise an insurrection against the insurrectionists in the most ironic way possible.

That being said, it also had a number of secondary effects. Fugitive slaves that were being held by the union that were from affected areas were freed, and land subsequently conquered recaptured by the Union had the terms of the proclamation put into effect in those areas.

[The East Marches]

So does the whole "emancipation proclamation" really only applying to non-Union areas. I find that is an interesting part overlooked as well. Like the Spanish Civil War, I doubt there is a single definitive reason, instead we are left with varying factions and ideas bound together by convenience. Boy, I am glad our upper history courses don't white wash things. There is one solid part of American education we should not change.

The emancipation proclamation had one purpose:

To raise an insurrection against the insurrectionists in the most ironic way possible.

That being said, it also had a number of secondary effects. Fugitive slaves that were being held by the union that were from affected areas were freed, and land subsequently conquered recaptured by the Union had the terms of the proclamation put into effect in those areas.

Thats not what we are taught in schools, at least the vast majority of children. Indeed there is a common misconception that this was some great act of bravery meant to free them all. Though I do agree that was a clever ploy and good economic sabotage.

[Morvalistan]

Wasn't today mlk day?

[Grave_n_idle]

Wasn't today mlk day?

The third Monday of January is both MLK and Robbie Lee day.

It's unlikely to be an accident. I like to think it's calendar-level trolling.

[Morvalistan]

Wasn't today mlk day?

The third Monday of January is both MLK and Robbie Lee day.

It's unlikely to be an accident. I like to think it's calendar-level trolling.

Well I only celebrate MLK day.

[Minzerland II]

He may have been a great general. He may have had some noble traits. But he fought for the bad guys. Bad guys don't get holidays.

Especially not holidays on the same day as heroes.

But he was white. Lee can't be a bad guy if he was white.

[Galloism]

The emancipation proclamation had one purpose:

To raise an insurrection against the insurrectionists in the most ironic way possible.

That being said, it also had a number of secondary effects. Fugitive slaves that were being held by the union that were from affected areas were freed, and land subsequently conquered recaptured by the Union had the terms of the proclamation put into effect in those areas.

Thats not what we are taught in schools, at least the vast majority of children. Indeed there is a common misconception that this was some great act of bravery meant to free them all. Though I do agree that was a clever ploy and good economic sabotage.

Credit where credit's due, and all that.

[Minzerland II]

What does the civil rights movement have to do with Robert E. Lee?

The celebration of Lee's birthday, like so many ostentatious displays of support for the Confederacy, is mostly about being covertly("covertly") racist.

Of course it is, bud.

[Neanderthaland]

Not really though. He was good against McClellan, I guess.

When you are forced to have whole corps of an Army speaking other languages because you need more meat for the grinder due to your defeats, you've made some very serious mistakes. The war was really won by the campaigns in the West. I read an interesting book on the matter if you are interested.

Alright, but specifically Lee did what?

He managed to scare off McClellan in the Peninsula Campaign. Is that the brilliant thing he did that's so brilliant he's clearly the best general in the war? Because that's when all the Confederate newspapers start treating the guy like a hero. But that's not really that impressive, McClellan just got cold feet. And a lot of Confederate soldiers died.

Lee has other victories too. Fredericksburg wasn't nothing. But the legend of Lee isn't justified by his record.

[The Twelve Isles]

Well, as a southerner myself I have nothing but respect for Robert E Lee, but I think that if we are going to have a holiday for him, the least we could do is move it so that it doesn't overlap with MLK day, which truly does celebrate one of the most influential people in our nations history, weather you believe in the Civil Rights movement or not.

[Neanderthaland]

The celebration of Lee's birthday, like so many ostentatious displays of support for the Confederacy, is mostly about being covertly("covertly") racist.

Of course it is, bud.

Your incredulity is a little less compelling when you look at the OP.

[Minzerland II]

Of course it is, bud.

Your incredulity is a little less compelling when you look at the OP.

A single OP? I'm convinced, sir, I'm convinced! The holiday is surely racist! How could I ever have any doubt?

[USS Monitor]

Had he accepted to lead the war on the union side then it would have been over in months.

Not really. The Confederacy had other competent generals, and a lot of what slowed the Union down was just getting mobilized and dealing with the geographic scale of the conflict. The South had a lot of territory, which meant it took a while to occupy. McClellan's leadership wasn't brilliant, but that wasn't the only reason why the war took so long.

Lee was a good general, but he wasn't God.

[The East Marches]

When you are forced to have whole corps of an Army speaking other languages because you need more meat for the grinder due to your defeats, you've made some very serious mistakes. The war was really won by the campaigns in the West. I read an interesting book on the matter if you are interested.

Alright, but specifically Lee did what?

He managed to scare off McClellan in the Peninsula Campaign. Is that the brilliant thing he did that's so brilliant he's clearly the best general in the war? Because that's when all the Confederate newspapers start treating the guy like a hero. But that's not really that impressive, McClellan just got cold feet. And a lot of Confederate soldiers died.

Lee has other victories too. Fredericksburg wasn't nothing. But the legend of Lee isn't justified by his record.

He kept a force alive that was consistently outmanned and outgunned leading them to victory. He shrekt us at Seven Day's, made Pope look like a chump at Second Bull Run, Frederickville, Chancellorville, etc. It was excellent fighting tactics and strategy. We made serious serious mistakes.

[Neanderthaland]

Your incredulity is a little less compelling when you look at the OP.

A single OP? I'm convinced, sir, I'm convinced! The holiday is surely racist! How could I ever have any doubt?

Well, given that most people have never heard about it...

And, coincidentally, Aryan Nation decides to bring it up...

In this case, yeah, that's definitely what's happened.