It's Robert E. Lee Day, January 19th: How Will You Celebrate This Hero, Southern Pride And Heritage?

[mdk]

Just for the record, these might be the most intelligent conversations I've ever had in a Steve thread. lol

 

[Camp]

On January 19th, Americans will celebrate a true hero, a national treasure of Southern Pride and White Heritage. Robert E. Lee is a true icon and he should be remembered as such. How will you celebrate this remarkable gentleman?

Robert E Lee was one of the greatest generals in American history.......which has absolutely nothing to do with your contemporary agenda.

He made one of the dumbest moves in American military history when he insisted on Pickett's Charge. He lost the entire Battle due to dumb mistakes and poor Generalship.

 

[Liminal]

The Confederates had better Generals

The Union probably had more than enough officers qualified to command. Unfortunately many Union officers received their commissions through a corrupt system based on political favoritism which prevailed at the time.

 

[mdk]

The Confederates had better Generals

The loss of Jackson to friendly fire at Chancellorsville was an enormous setback.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The Confederates had better Generals

I disagree

As a whole the Confederacy had better generals but Sherman's campaign was as groundbreaking as it was controversial.

The loss of Stonewall Jackson was a great loss to the South. I read a book on him, interesting person. Totally devout to God but ruthless on a battle field and a great strategist

 

[Mr Natural]

On January 19, let's have a day of rememberance for the people who started a war to prove they were better than the slaves and lost.

 

[August West]

Lee surrendered like a gentleman and dismissed calls for guerrilla warfare which would have only prolonged the suffering of the war. I didn't agree with his cause or some of his politics but only a fool would deny his military capabilities.

This is all true but shame on Lee for not surrendering after Gettysburg. He was smart enough to know it was over. Historians mostly agree that he held on in hopes that Lincoln would be defeated in November of 64 but when that didn`t happen.....the thousands of deaths to follow were just murders IMO.

Gettysburg and The Fall of Vicksburg the next day pretty much sealed the fate of The Confederacy. I don't fault Lee for not surrendering any sooner b/c Davis would have replaced him in a heart beat with some whom would have prolonged the war even further.

Union morale and political will to continue fighting was at it's lowest ebb in 1864. The siege at Petersburg nearly broke the Union Army as well. The outcome seemed far from certain at the time.

Low morale indeed in 1864 until Sherman took Atlanta in July. The game was over when the union army showed the rest of the world they could go where ever they wanted and do whatever they wanted. Some Georgia residents told Sherman to give S.C. a severe hammering for what they brought on the South.

 

[mdk]

On January 19th, Americans will celebrate a true hero, a national treasure of Southern Pride and White Heritage. Robert E. Lee is a true icon and he should be remembered as such. How will you celebrate this remarkable gentleman?

Robert E Lee was one of the greatest generals in American history.......which has absolutely nothing to do with your contemporary agenda.

He made one of the dumbest moves in American military history when he insisted on Pickett's Charge. He lost the entire Battle due to dumb mistakes and poor Generalship.

I got stung in the balls once while running Pickett's Charge. My professor jokingly said I was one of the last casualties of the battle. lol

 

[Liminal]

On January 19th, Americans will celebrate a true hero, a national treasure of Southern Pride and White Heritage. Robert E. Lee is a true icon and he should be remembered as such. How will you celebrate this remarkable gentleman?

Robert E Lee was one of the greatest generals in American history.......which has absolutely nothing to do with your contemporary agenda.

He made one of the dumbest moves in American military history when he insisted on Pickett's Charge. He lost the entire Battle due to dumb mistakes and poor Generalship.

He lost the battle because he didn't gain the high ground to begin with. Lee's desired strategy was to draw the enemy into attacking his prepared defensive positions. Once the enemy had the high ground Lee should have withdrawn.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

On January 19th, Americans will celebrate a true hero, a national treasure of Southern Pride and White Heritage. Robert E. Lee is a true icon and he should be remembered as such. How will you celebrate this remarkable gentleman?

Robert E Lee was one of the greatest generals in American history.......which has absolutely nothing to do with your contemporary agenda.

He made one of the dumbest moves in American military history when he insisted on Pickett's Charge. He lost the entire Battle due to dumb mistakes and poor Generalship.

Many believe Lee had suffered a heart attack prior to Gettysburg and wasn't 100% nor of clear mind. It was uncharacteristic of him to do that

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

It will pass un noticed as it should. The man was a traitor and deserves his place of infamy in History.

Are you proud of your White heritage

The Confederates had better Generals

The Union probably had more than enough officers qualified to command. Unfortunately many Union officers received their commissions through a corrupt system based on political favoritism which prevailed at the time.

Like George Armstrong Custer.

 

[Liminal]

Lee surrendered like a gentleman and dismissed calls for guerrilla warfare which would have only prolonged the suffering of the war. I didn't agree with his cause or some of his politics but only a fool would deny his military capabilities.

This is all true but shame on Lee for not surrendering after Gettysburg. He was smart enough to know it was over. Historians mostly agree that he held on in hopes that Lincoln would be defeated in November of 64 but when that didn`t happen.....the thousands of deaths to follow were just murders IMO.

Gettysburg and The Fall of Vicksburg the next day pretty much sealed the fate of The Confederacy. I don't fault Lee for not surrendering any sooner b/c Davis would have replaced him in a heart beat with some whom would have prolonged the war even further.

Union morale and political will to continue fighting was at it's lowest ebb in 1864. The siege at Petersburg nearly broke the Union Army as well. The outcome seemed far from certain at the time.

Low morale indeed in 1864 until Sherman took Atlanta in July. The game was over when the union army showed the rest of the world they could go where ever they wanted and do whatever they wanted. Some Georgia residents told Sherman to give S.C. a severe hammering for what they brought on the South.

Yes, low morale, political protest movements all across the north to end the war, fed by constant speculation in the press and active political opponents in Congress.

 

[mdk]

The Confederates had better Generals

I disagree

As a whole the Confederacy had better generals but Sherman's campaign was as groundbreaking as it was controversial.

The loss of Stonewall Jackson was a great loss to the South. I read a book on him, interesting person. Totally devout to God but ruthless on a battle field and a great strategist

Rebel Yell: The Violence, Passion, and, Redemption of Stonewall Jackson might be the best book I've ever read about him. It is a superb biography.

 

[Unkotare]

People who haven't studied the Civil War have no idea how close the Confederate States came to achieving independence recognized by England and France. If Gettysburg had went to the south both France and England would have done so

England's disdain for slavery and the cultivation of Egyptain cotton made intervention in the war unlikely.

The Confederacy had some allies in France as well but military aid seemed unlikely as they were too busy trying to rebuild on an Empire at the expense of Mexcio. It didn't turn out as they planned. lol

England and France both gave serious thought to siding with the Confederates, if they had it was an entire new war. Gettysburg and one infamous charge prevented it

It's one America great historical 'what if's' but I am still not convinced they would have sided with the Confederacy. The Union made it quite plain that recognizing them diplomatically meant war. England and France were more concerned about expanding their empires and markets in Latin America. The public opinion in both nations were spilt but more so in France b/c the 'cotton famine' greatly harmed them economically.

England had more need of cotton, but the unbelievably stupid idea the confederate traitors had to burn their cotton crop failed miserably. England turned to Brazil, Egypt, and India to make up the supply. The cotton market was never the same again after the war.

 

[mdk]

People who haven't studied the Civil War have no idea how close the Confederate States came to achieving independence recognized by England and France. If Gettysburg had went to the south both France and England would have done so

England's disdain for slavery and the cultivation of Egyptain cotton made intervention in the war unlikely.

The Confederacy had some allies in France as well but military aid seemed unlikely as they were too busy trying to rebuild on an Empire at the expense of Mexcio. It didn't turn out as they planned. lol

England and France both gave serious thought to siding with the Confederates, if they had it was an entire new war. Gettysburg and one infamous charge prevented it

It's one America great historical 'what if's' but I am still not convinced they would have sided with the Confederacy. The Union made it quite plain that recognizing them diplomatically meant war. England and France were more concerned about expanding their empires and markets in Latin America. The public opinion in both nations were spilt but more so in France b/c the 'cotton famine' greatly harmed them economically.

England had more need of cotton, but the unbelievably stupid idea the confederate traitors had to burn their cotton crop failed miserably. England turned to Brazil, Egypt, and India to make up the supply. The cotton market was never the same again after the war.

Yeah, it was a pretty big mistake. Though cotton exports to Europe dropped sharply, England had a surplus of Southern cotton stockpiled from bumper years just before the war. Cotton Diplomacy didn't have the desired effect, in fact, the exact opposite occurred.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

People who haven't studied the Civil War have no idea how close the Confederate States came to achieving independence recognized by England and France. If Gettysburg had went to the south both France and England would have done so

England's disdain for slavery and the cultivation of Egyptain cotton made intervention in the war unlikely.

The Confederacy had some allies in France as well but military aid seemed unlikely as they were too busy trying to rebuild on an Empire at the expense of Mexcio. It didn't turn out as they planned. lol

England and France both gave serious thought to siding with the Confederates, if they had it was an entire new war. Gettysburg and one infamous charge prevented it

It's one America great historical 'what if's' but I am still not convinced they would have sided with the Confederacy. The Union made it quite plain that recognizing them diplomatically meant war. England and France were more concerned about expanding their empires and markets in Latin America. The public opinion in both nations were spilt but more so in France b/c the 'cotton famine' greatly harmed them economically.

England had more need of cotton, but the unbelievably stupid idea the confederate traitors had to burn their cotton crop failed miserably. England turned to Brazil, Egypt, and India to make up the supply. The cotton market was never the same again after the war.

Yeah, it was a pretty big mistake. Though cotton exports to Europe dropped sharply, England had a surplus of Southern cotton stockpiled from bumper years just before the war. Cotton Diplomacy didn't have the desired effect, in fact, the exact opposite occurred.

The south couldn't ship the cotton, the Union naval blockade was strangling them

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

On January 19th, Americans will celebrate a true hero, a national treasure of Southern Pride and White Heritage. Robert E. Lee is a true icon and he should be remembered as such. How will you celebrate this remarkable gentleman?

There is a bona fide reason to recognize the valor and loyalty of Confederate soldiers.
But blatant racists like you shoot it in the foot and set everything back because you give ammo to the left wing racists and democrat fascists who deny and destroy that legitimate American history.

 

[Unkotare]

People who haven't studied the Civil War have no idea how close the Confederate States came to achieving independence recognized by England and France. If Gettysburg had went to the south both France and England would have done so

England's disdain for slavery and the cultivation of Egyptain cotton made intervention in the war unlikely.

The Confederacy had some allies in France as well but military aid seemed unlikely as they were too busy trying to rebuild on an Empire at the expense of Mexcio. It didn't turn out as they planned. lol

England and France both gave serious thought to siding with the Confederates, if they had it was an entire new war. Gettysburg and one infamous charge prevented it

It's one America great historical 'what if's' but I am still not convinced they would have sided with the Confederacy. The Union made it quite plain that recognizing them diplomatically meant war. England and France were more concerned about expanding their empires and markets in Latin America. The public opinion in both nations were spilt but more so in France b/c the 'cotton famine' greatly harmed them economically.

England had more need of cotton, but the unbelievably stupid idea the confederate traitors had to burn their cotton crop failed miserably. England turned to Brazil, Egypt, and India to make up the supply. The cotton market was never the same again after the war.

Yeah, it was a pretty big mistake. Though cotton exports to Europe dropped sharply, England had a surplus of Southern cotton stockpiled from bumper years just before the war. Cotton Diplomacy didn't have the desired effect, in fact, the exact opposite occurred.

Yes, the genius traitors thought burning a crop would bring those prices back up. About as good an idea as fighting a war one cannot win for an utterly immoral and hopeless cause.

 

[mdk]

England's disdain for slavery and the cultivation of Egyptain cotton made intervention in the war unlikely.

The Confederacy had some allies in France as well but military aid seemed unlikely as they were too busy trying to rebuild on an Empire at the expense of Mexcio. It didn't turn out as they planned. lol

England and France both gave serious thought to siding with the Confederates, if they had it was an entire new war. Gettysburg and one infamous charge prevented it

It's one America great historical 'what if's' but I am still not convinced they would have sided with the Confederacy. The Union made it quite plain that recognizing them diplomatically meant war. England and France were more concerned about expanding their empires and markets in Latin America. The public opinion in both nations were spilt but more so in France b/c the 'cotton famine' greatly harmed them economically.

England had more need of cotton, but the unbelievably stupid idea the confederate traitors had to burn their cotton crop failed miserably. England turned to Brazil, Egypt, and India to make up the supply. The cotton market was never the same again after the war.

Yeah, it was a pretty big mistake. Though cotton exports to Europe dropped sharply, England had a surplus of Southern cotton stockpiled from bumper years just before the war. Cotton Diplomacy didn't have the desired effect, in fact, the exact opposite occurred.

The south couldn't ship the cotton, the Union naval blockade was strangling them

A tactic many historians believe to be a violation of international law. They had plans to sell it to Europe via Mexico but that plan went to hell when France invaded.

 

[Liminal]

England's disdain for slavery and the cultivation of Egyptain cotton made intervention in the war unlikely.

The Confederacy had some allies in France as well but military aid seemed unlikely as they were too busy trying to rebuild on an Empire at the expense of Mexcio. It didn't turn out as they planned. lol

England and France both gave serious thought to siding with the Confederates, if they had it was an entire new war. Gettysburg and one infamous charge prevented it

It's one America great historical 'what if's' but I am still not convinced they would have sided with the Confederacy. The Union made it quite plain that recognizing them diplomatically meant war. England and France were more concerned about expanding their empires and markets in Latin America. The public opinion in both nations were spilt but more so in France b/c the 'cotton famine' greatly harmed them economically.

England had more need of cotton, but the unbelievably stupid idea the confederate traitors had to burn their cotton crop failed miserably. England turned to Brazil, Egypt, and India to make up the supply. The cotton market was never the same again after the war.

Yeah, it was a pretty big mistake. Though cotton exports to Europe dropped sharply, England had a surplus of Southern cotton stockpiled from bumper years just before the war. Cotton Diplomacy didn't have the desired effect, in fact, the exact opposite occurred.

The south couldn't ship the cotton, the Union naval blockade was strangling them

The Confederacy imported and exported quite a bit through Mexico with French complicity.