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

[Publius1787]

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?

Rommel wasn't American, which is why his picture doesn't hold a place of honor at the War College. However, you can bet your ass his endeavors are taught at the War College. Indeed, if it were up to me Nathan Bedford Forest would have his own picture if he doesn't already. Seeing as he is among the top three generals of the Civil War, I think he already does. In any case, one look at this website and you will understand why these American Generals are of particular note http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...soKQDw&usg=AFQjCNEJBoQGEpTybk7n9m_UfRp-KwfZ8w


As a side note: Bases named after Confederates.

Fort AP Hill, VA - Confederate General Amborse Powell (AP) Hill
Camp Beauregard LA - Confederate General P. G. T. Beauregard
Fort Benning, GA – Confederate Brigadier General Henry L. Benning
Fort Bragg, NC – Confederate General Braxton Bragg
Fort Gordon, GA - Confederate Lieutenant General John Brown Gordon
Fort Hood, TX - Confederate General John Bell Hood
Fort Lee, VA – Confederate General Robert E. Lee
Fort Picket VA - Confederate General George E. Pickett
Fort Polk, LA - Confederate General Reverend Leonidas Polk
Fort Rucker, AL – Confederate Colonel Edmund W. Rucker
Fort Stewart, GA – Confederate Brigadier General Daniel Stewart
Camp Van Dorn MS – Confederate General Earl Van Dorn

Lets not get into colleges and schools. There are too many to count. Washington Lee University is perhaps the more notable. Hell, General Jacksons' cannons (Matthew Mark Luke & John) are still stationed in the front of VMI. There's no telling how many soldiers met their demise at their behest.

These were honorable, heroic, and brilliant men. They are indeed among the warriors our soldiers should look up to as a part of our American heritage.

 

[Publius1787]

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?

Because they were supposed to lose much earlier in the war. In fact, the only reason they truly lost was because they couldn't keep pace on the battlefield of attrition. Indeed, every union (AOP) general (save Grant) who went up against Lee and Jackson was fired at one time or another because they simply were out generated by smaller and more ill-equipped force. Can anyone here think of a better Civil War general in the categories of leadership, competence, and tactical knowledge than Lee?

 

[Unkotare]

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

"White History"?

 

[NoNukes]

They were, but they were not unpatriotic. I do not expect a publicly-educated person to understand.

They fought a war attempting to remove themselves from the United States of America.

They may have been patriots. But patriotism towards a despicable cause is not an admirable trait.

Did the confederates ethnically cleanse anyone like the USA did?

Given the opportunity, they might have.

 

[Publius1787]

They were, but they were not unpatriotic. I do not expect a publicly-educated person to understand.

They fought a war attempting to remove themselves from the United States of America.

They may have been patriots. But patriotism towards a despicable cause is not an admirable trait.

Did the confederates ethnically cleanse anyone like the USA did?

I take issue with "ethnically cleanse" as that view is complete oversimplified Howard Zinn hogwash. However, the Confederate generals got their start as US soldiers and did have designs on Latin America. By that standard I don't see a difference.

 

[Unkotare]

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

Of course it was. The evil institution of slavery underlined all of the issues the led to the war, and by '82 the war was overtly and unambiguously about it.

 

[Publius1787]

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

Of course it was. The evil institution of slavery underlined all of the issues the led to the war, and by '82 the war was overtly and unambiguously about it.

Sure. For the southern elites it was cheap labor, for the Republicans it was competitively unfair labor, and for northern democrats it was labor they didn't want to compete against in the North. Nevertheless, the South did not fight to maintain slavery any more than the North fought to destroy the institution. If slavery itself was the issue of the War then the Southern states would have remained in the Union after the Republicans passed the Corwin Amendment (A constitutional amendment guaranteeing slavery). In any case, Lincoln cared less on how he kept the Union together, slave or free. The only issue with slavery was that of white self interest in the labor market. When you take that into account you realize that the two dramatically different economies and political cultures who never voted the same way since 1788 was the main cause of war. I don't agree much with the man but read Eric Foners' Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men. [ame]http://www.amazon.com/Free-Soil-Labor-Men-Republican/dp/0195094972[/ame]

 

[Indofred]

What an interesting thread.
This appears to be about brilliant military minds, ones who lost their battle to destroy what the right wing of this board claim to cherish.

There seems to be some conflict of interests here but, as is common for the right, minor details don't matter if you can support someone who didn't like black people.

 

[Publius1787]

What an interesting thread.
This appears to be about brilliant military minds, ones who lost their battle to destroy what the right wing of this board claim to cherish.

There seems to be some conflict of interests here but, as is common for the right, minor details don't matter if you can support someone who didn't like black people.

In comes the red herring of slavery as to distract from military merit. Nevertheless, we shouldn't be mistaken. No one during those days liked black people. Republicans didn't like competing against slave plantations, northern democrats were afraid that the abolition of slavery would place whites at a disadvantage in wage labor, and southern democrats favored the planter class.

 

[Unkotare]

Economics was one factor leading to the war, but not the primary one.

 

[JimBowie1958]

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

Of course it was. The evil institution of slavery underlined all of the issues the led to the war, and by '82 the war was overtly and unambiguously about it.

'Underlining' whatever the hell that exactly means, is NOT the same thing as being the principle activating CAUSE of the Civil War.

And that CAUSE was the break up of the Union, that is if you take your history from those who participated in it instead of what some neoMarxist professor thinks about it over a century and a half later, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Economics was one factor leading to the war, but not the primary one.

Agreed.

The break up of the Union was the primary cause, since we know the war would not have occurred had Lincoln not invaded the South.


And why did he do that? TO PRESERVE THE UNION!

 

[paperview]

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.

The South fought to maintain it, steadfastly, it was far and away the primary motive;
the motive for the North, prior to the EP, was to keep the Union together.

 

[JimBowie1958]

what an interesting thread.
This appears to be about brilliant military minds, ones who lost their battle to destroy what the right wing of this board claim to cherish.

There seems to be some conflict of interests here but, as is common for the right, minor details don't matter if you can support someone who didn't like black people.

waaahhhh!!!!! Rasssiisssiiiisssmmmm!!!!! Waaaahhhhh!!!!! Wwwaaaahhhh!!!!!

 

[eagle1462010]

Army War College Community Banner

Here is what happened: a few weeks ago, while relocating his office to a new floor in our main school building over the weekend, one of my leaders looked outside his new office location and simply decided to change the look of the hallway. He took down, off the wall, a number of framed Civil War prints that depicted Confederate States of America forces in action against Union forces or depicted famous Confederate leaders. He did this on his own. There was no directive to “remove all traces of the CSA.” Since this is a public hallway with seminar rooms and offices, the sudden new look drew attention the following week. And since there was no public explanation of my leader’s action, some of my folks jumped to conclusions, even to the point of sending anonymous notes to local media. We have since attempted to clarify the action within our own ranks.

If it matters to any of you, you could walk into this building today, and see ornately framed paintings and even a few prints similar to the ones that came down off that hallway wall of Confederate forces and leaders mixed in an among countless other paintings and prints of the Army (and the other services) in action from the Revolutionary War through the current fight in Afghanistan. I must admit, there are in fact a large number of Civil War paintings, depicting both North and South. I can only assume one of the reasons there are so many is that we are barely 30 minutes from Gettysburg, home to many renowned artists, a few of whom have been commissioned by US Army War College classes of the past to capture some iconic scene of that conflict.

Finally, and with ironic timing, I also must tell you that I am in the midst of planning a more meaningful approach to the imagery and artwork that currently adorn the public areas on the three primary floors of The War College. There will be change: over the years very fine artwork has been hung with care – but little rationale or overall purpose. Just today, I left the “George S. Patton Jr. Room”, walked by the “Peyton March Room” and nearby hung a picture of a sharp fight in Iraq, 2003, right next to a Civil War print, which was near a series of prints honoring Army Engineers, and a few feet further hung a painting of the Battle of Cowpens. We can do better; we’d like our students, staff, and faculty to walk through a historical narrative that sends a message of service, valor, sacrifice, and courageous leadership at the strategic level.

But I will also approach our historical narrative with keen awareness and adherence to the seriousness of several things: accurate capture of US military history, good, bad and ugly; a Soldier’s life of selfless service to our Nation; and our collective solemn oath to defend the Constitution of the United States (not a person or a symbol, but a body of ideals). Those are the things I will be looking to reinforce with any changes to the artwork.

 

[JimBowie1958]

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.

The South fought to maintain it, steadfastly, it was far and away the primary motive;
the motive for the North, prior to the EP, was to keep the Union together.

Lincoln invaded the South to preserve the Union according to him (but what did he know about why he did things, the libtards know better), first of all, and secondly the South fought to get the invaders out of the South.

Slavery was a side issue that Lincoln didn't even act on for several years of the war.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Army War College Community Banner

Here is what happened: a few weeks ago, while relocating his office to a new floor in our main school building over the weekend, one of my leaders looked outside his new office location and simply decided to change the look of the hallway. He took down, off the wall, a number of framed Civil War prints that depicted Confederate States of America forces in action against Union forces or depicted famous Confederate leaders. He did this on his own. There was no directive to “remove all traces of the CSA.” Since this is a public hallway with seminar rooms and offices, the sudden new look drew attention the following week. And since there was no public explanation of my leader’s action, some of my folks jumped to conclusions, even to the point of sending anonymous notes to local media. We have since attempted to clarify the action within our own ranks.

If it matters to any of you, you could walk into this building today, and see ornately framed paintings and even a few prints similar to the ones that came down off that hallway wall of Confederate forces and leaders mixed in an among countless other paintings and prints of the Army (and the other services) in action from the Revolutionary War through the current fight in Afghanistan. I must admit, there are in fact a large number of Civil War paintings, depicting both North and South. I can only assume one of the reasons there are so many is that we are barely 30 minutes from Gettysburg, home to many renowned artists, a few of whom have been commissioned by US Army War College classes of the past to capture some iconic scene of that conflict.

Finally, and with ironic timing, I also must tell you that I am in the midst of planning a more meaningful approach to the imagery and artwork that currently adorn the public areas on the three primary floors of The War College. There will be change: over the years very fine artwork has been hung with care – but little rationale or overall purpose. Just today, I left the “George S. Patton Jr. Room”, walked by the “Peyton March Room” and nearby hung a picture of a sharp fight in Iraq, 2003, right next to a Civil War print, which was near a series of prints honoring Army Engineers, and a few feet further hung a painting of the Battle of Cowpens. We can do better; we’d like our students, staff, and faculty to walk through a historical narrative that sends a message of service, valor, sacrifice, and courageous leadership at the strategic level.

But I will also approach our historical narrative with keen awareness and adherence to the seriousness of several things: accurate capture of US military history, good, bad and ugly; a Soldier’s life of selfless service to our Nation; and our collective solemn oath to defend the Constitution of the United States (not a person or a symbol, but a body of ideals). Those are the things I will be looking to reinforce with any changes to the artwork.

If the cooler heads like your prevail, then there is no cause for concern.

But since when has our DoD let that happen? lol

 

[JimBowie1958]

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.

True, but since when has that ever stopped them from repeating the lies without cease?

 

[eagle1462010]

The Army War College portraits are there to interpret the true history of our Nation and the men and women who fought to preserve our country, our Constitution, and our way of life.

They show the history of all the Wars we fought including the Civil War. And depicting History as it should be. This would include the Civil War Generals on both sides of the equation.

This entire thread and article is based on one Officer just moving some picks outside his office as he rearranged the look of the area. It was NEVER ORDERED. It just happened. There is No Conspiracy here and thus the original OP is just HYPE..................

 

[JimBowie1958]

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

"White History"?

lol, do you do that when people mention 'black history'?

Why cant white people have a history without some libtard passing a boulder?