Erasing Southern Pride: U.S. Army War College Removing Confederate Generals Portraits

[rightwinger]

If it was about slavery, how come the Confederate states rejected Fed. Gov's invitation to remain in the Union when they were guaranteed slavery(see original 13th Amendment).

The war was primarily about tariffs. The southern states paid the majority of the tariffs, the majority of this revenue was given to northern states(propping up northern industrialists).

The war was all about money.

They rejected it because they flat out didn't believe them. Thats also why the 2nd amendment is a state right instead of a federal right. The souths suspicion over the norths view on slavery. You neglected to explain why slavery was the first thing mentioned in most of the states articles of secession. Dont avoid the question this time.

I never said the Confederates were abolitionists. This is the second time I have had to repeat myself on this. Can you read?

I know your black ego might not be able to handle this, but believe it or not, not everything revolves around you, including the Civil War.

Actually, you are right
The south was not abolitionist. They were willing to fight to the death to defend the institution of slavery. They based their economy on it and were willing to send their boys to die for it

 

[Mr Natural]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

 

[WillowTree]

Another attack on White History as well as American history. Fox News is reporting the US Army War College is considering removing portraits of Confederate Generals. An unidentified administrator is wondering why we honor these Americans.

Please, call or write to the US Army War College to voice why these portraits are a part of American History and should be preserved (be kind and considerate and just voice your concern).

US Army War College considers removing prints depicting Robert E. Lee, Confederate generals | Fox News

Military makes a big thing about being first place and winning. Why would they honor the loosers?

Geez, you need spelling lessons.

 

[WillowTree]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

So why didn't you let them secede when you had the chance? Why engage in a war that cost 500,000 lives? So are we or are we not the USA? If we are then the Southern Generals Portraits should hang right where they've always hung.

 

[rightwinger]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

So why didn't you let them secede when you had the chance? Why engage in a war that cost 500,000 lives? So are we or are we not the USA? If we are then the Southern Generals Portraits should hang right where they've always hung.

You are right ...the Southern Generals should have been hung alongside their portraits

 

[rdean]

USMB Republicans think Lincoln was a confederate.

 

[Nosmo King]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

So why didn't you let them secede when you had the chance? Why engage in a war that cost 500,000 lives? So are we or are we not the USA? If we are then the Southern Generals Portraits should hang right where they've always hung.

Politically, economically and culturally, we could not have achieved our status of world superpower and economic dynamo ruling the globe, as it were, without being the whole country we are. The war made us a whole country, with liberty and justice for all.

But there is a facet of Southern culture that rubs the wrong way. And that is the glorification and mythologizing of the Civil War. The South fought for the vilest cause ever fought for in this hemisphere. Romanticizing the participants and icons of that most destructive of wars fought by this country only serves to perpetuate the cause of the war. Namely slavery. Hardly a noble system or cause.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

So why didn't you let them secede when you had the chance? Why engage in a war that cost 500,000 lives? So are we or are we not the USA? If we are then the Southern Generals Portraits should hang right where they've always hung.

The south started the War of Southern Aggression because it could not accept constitutional, electoral process.

The southern states rose up against the Union and were executed.

 

[Kondor3]

While there is no escaping the idea that the American Civil War was triggered, directly or indirectly, by Southern concerns over the preservation of Slavery...

We also need to keep in mind that only a very small percentage of ante bellum Southerners were slaveholders...

To a very large and very real extent, most folks in the South - including most slaveowners, most likely - perceived the War as a struggle against Centralized and Overbearing Government and for Local Self-Governance (States Rights)...

And, when you come right down to it, much of both the rank-and-file and leadership of the North, who suffered terrible loses and hardships themselves, were far more forgiving and willing to accord Southerners a Peace With Honor than some of the latter-day armchair rock-throwers amongst us today...

And that includes the rank-and-file of the Union Armies who respected their Adversaries during the course of the War, and who accorded them full military honors as worthy fighting men when they surrendered, and who came to call them Brothers as they aged and as their ranks began to thin...

This kind of pissing on the memories of such Worthies as Lee, Jackson, et al, is not the kind of America that Lincoln was asking and hoping for in the future, before he was martyred...

 

[Soupnazi630]

Another attack on White History as well as American history. Fox News is reporting the US Army War College is considering removing portraits of Confederate Generals. An unidentified administrator is wondering why we honor these Americans.

Please, call or write to the US Army War College to voice why these portraits are a part of American History and should be preserved (be kind and considerate and just voice your concern).

US Army War College considers removing prints depicting Robert E. Lee, Confederate generals | Fox News

Military brilliance is as objective as it gets. If anything, General Lee and Jackson is an inspiration to all who study military history and tactics. Together, they broke every rule in the book of military conventional wisdom. Especially with the laws of attrition in mind, they are among the top Generals ever to have walked the face of the earth. To take their portraits down would be a disgrace to the military profession.

That is quite true. Both were brilliant tacticians and leaders.

So was Rommel. Should we hang his portrait there as well?

He was not an American they were.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If it was about slavery, how come the Confederate states rejected Fed. Gov's invitation to remain in the Union when they were guaranteed slavery(see original 13th Amendment).

The war was primarily about tariffs. The southern states paid the majority of the tariffs, the majority of this revenue was given to northern states(propping up northern industrialists).

The war was all about money.

They rejected it because they flat out didn't believe them. Thats also why the 2nd amendment is a state right instead of a federal right. The souths suspicion over the norths view on slavery. You neglected to explain why slavery was the first thing mentioned in most of the states articles of secession. Dont avoid the question this time.

I never said the Confederates were abolitionists. This is the second time I have had to repeat myself on this. Can you read?.

Ignoring what you write is standard libtard tactic to frustrate you and try to discredit you as a hot head.

Which is why they are indeed stupid little whores and would be murderers, as they have no respect for Truth, human life or the rule of natural law.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

Why don't you g fuck yourself, you self-righteous ignoramus?

 

[National Socialist]

Another attack on White History as well as American history. Fox News is reporting the US Army War College is considering removing portraits of Confederate Generals. An unidentified administrator is wondering why we honor these Americans.

Please, call or write to the US Army War College to voice why these portraits are a part of American History and should be preserved (be kind and considerate and just voice your concern).

US Army War College considers removing prints depicting Robert E. Lee, Confederate generals | Fox News

Military brilliance is as objective as it gets. If anything, General Lee and Jackson is an inspiration to all who study military history and tactics. Together, they broke every rule in the book of military conventional wisdom. Especially with the laws of attrition in mind, they are among the top Generals ever to have walked the face of the earth. To take their portraits down would be a disgrace to the military profession.

That is quite true. Both were brilliant tacticians and leaders.

So was Rommel. Should we hang his portrait there as well?

He wasn't an American idiot.

Another attack on White History as well as American history. Fox News is reporting the US Army War College is considering removing portraits of Confederate Generals. An unidentified administrator is wondering why we honor these Americans.

Please, call or write to the US Army War College to voice why these portraits are a part of American History and should be preserved (be kind and considerate and just voice your concern).

US Army War College considers removing prints depicting Robert E. Lee, Confederate generals | Fox News

Military makes a big thing about being first place and winning. Why would they honor the loosers?

Why would anyone want to honor traitors?

So we shouldn't honor Washington or Jefferson or any of the presidents or generals that fought in the war to secede from England.

We should not honor traitors

I would rather see Gen Benedict Arnold up there

traitors like Washington....mmhmm...

 

[JimBowie1958]

USMB Republicans think Lincoln was a confederate.

Lol, well we do know that you are a fl and a jack ass.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Let it go. The South has nothing to be proud of.

So why didn't you let them secede when you had the chance? Why engage in a war that cost 500,000 lives? So are we or are we not the USA? If we are then the Southern Generals Portraits should hang right where they've always hung.

Politically, economically and culturally, we could not have achieved our status of world superpower and economic dynamo ruling the globe, as it were, without being the whole country we are. The war made us a whole country, with liberty and justice for all.

But there is a facet of Southern culture that rubs the wrong way. And that is the glorification and mythologizing of the Civil War. The South fought for the vilest cause ever fought for in this hemisphere. Romanticizing the participants and icons of that most destructive of wars fought by this country only serves to perpetuate the cause of the war. Namely slavery. Hardly a noble system or cause.

The South did not fight for slavery, that is a modern neoMarxist myth.

 

[National Socialist]

Also.They can't erase what's in our hearts,minds and in the stories and memories we have and will pass along to our children. I pity non southerners because the south is the greatest place on earth.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Military brilliance is as objective as it gets. If anything, General Lee and Jackson is an inspiration to all who study military history and tactics. Together, they broke every rule in the book of military conventional wisdom. Especially with the laws of attrition in mind, they are among the top Generals ever to have walked the face of the earth. To take their portraits down would be a disgrace to the military profession.

That is quite true. Both were brilliant tacticians and leaders.

So was Rommel. Should we hang his portrait there as well?

He wasn't an American idiot.

Why would anyone want to honor traitors?

So we shouldn't honor Washington or Jefferson or any of the presidents or generals that fought in the war to secede from England.

We should not honor traitors

I would rather see Gen Benedict Arnold up there

traitors like Washington....mmhmm...

Go away we don't need any libtard sock puppets posing as Nazis.

Go to hell, you slimey fraud.

 

[National Socialist]

That is quite true. Both were brilliant tacticians and leaders.

So was Rommel. Should we hang his portrait there as well?

He wasn't an American idiot.

So we shouldn't honor Washington or Jefferson or any of the presidents or generals that fought in the war to secede from England.

We should not honor traitors

I would rather see Gen Benedict Arnold up there

traitors like Washington....mmhmm...

Go away we don't need any libtard sock puppets posing as Nazis.

Go to hell, you slimey fraud.

Kindly go fuck yourself.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The neoMarxists and those who have swallowed their arguments like baby birds in a nest gulping down the vomit from their mothers mouth, have only one goal in their rewriting of US history; to divide the people of this nation against one another. This dovetails with their agenda to promote what is called 'Identity Politics' which emphasizes the membership of the individual in a sub-grouping of race, or religion, or gender, or whatever may be found to splinter the solidity of the general population.

Driving a wedge between Southerners and the rest of the country also serves to suppress a glorious defense of independence for the individual states, a defense that prior to the Second World War was never so besmirched as it is by these liars that have take over the history profession as they have today.

The fact is that Lincoln repeatedly claimed that he would do anything to save the Union and he would not risk re-uniting the country for the sake of ending slavery. For Lincoln the war was about union, not slavery, and restoring the union was a far greater concern to him.

For the South, the critical moment came when it was proven beyond all doubt that the North had the population to reduce the South to being its federal piggy bank. Most of the finances for the federal government came from tariffs paid for by Southerners as the North manufactured far more of what it needed than did the South. The tariffs increased the cost of manufactured goods the South bought by as much as 50% or more. This impacted every man woman and child in the South whether they owned a slave or swore to never do so, and it united the South against the North for placing such a heavy financial burden on it.

For the plantation economy, which was not the majority of Southerner's economic activity as most were subsistence farmers, slavery was the paramount issue as they believed freeing the slaves would destroy their economy and it would, and in the leadership of the states political systems the voice of the plantations was much louder than its proportion of the population, and so they did not reflect the common desires of the Southern farmer who owned no slaves.

The North had a great many people who were determined to not fight the war for slavery, and Lincoln knew this, so that even when he realized that emancipating the slaves would be a serious blow to the Southern economy and weaken the South and hopefully bring the war to a quicker end, he was reluctant to do so since the Democrats were poised to attack him at any hint he would shift the war to an abolitionists war.

Slavery still continued in the North as well. Grant himself owned slaves via his wife and he kept two slaves for t his personal servants even as he fought the Southern armies.

The Civil War was not about slavery in its beginnings otherwise there would be no need of the Emancipation Proclamation, and it would not have exempted the states still in the union. To excuse this as simple tactical decision is to admit that winning the war for union trumped the issue of freeing slaves.

The Civil War was not started over slavery but over the subordination of the South to the North, and the North got its way and the South, white and black, slave and free, all suffered for decades from its consequences.

It was never a war for the slaves, but for the Northern corporations to keep the South paying its federal bills.

 

[Publius1787]

Therein lies the difference.

Do you think the slaves in 1775-1780s would agree with that assessment?

You have to put things in historical perspective

Slavery was prevalent in 1775
by 1860, the US was one of the last nations to hold onto the institution

The South was willing to fight and die to maintain it

No one with any inkling of historical knowledge would agree that the South fought to maintain slavery and the North fought to abolish it.