Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Western expansion and spreading abolitionism would have put that incredibly stupid, immoral, and counter-productive 'institution' out of business sooner or later.
Likely. Allowing the new states a plebiscite on wether or not they would allow slavery lead to quite a few deaths. I consider the years of 'Bleeding Kansas' to be the opening shots of The Civil War.
The opening shots of the American Civil War were fired at Lexington and Concord. (let it sink in - it's deeeep, baby)
?????? Since when????
I thought Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor was the site of the opening shot of the Civil War.
Your view is too narrow.
Hmmm. Well....it sure is well documented in history books that the first shots of the Civil War were fired at a federal supply ship in Charleston harbor that was trying to restock Fort Sumter when cadets from The Citadel fired on it with rifles followed by volleys of cannon fire from the confederate forts on James Island and Sullivan's Island.
But.....maybe you should rewrite history.
He probably does understand that the founding fathers created a slave republic less than 90 years before the Civil War.Likely. Allowing the new states a plebiscite on wether or not they would allow slavery lead to quite a few deaths. I consider the years of 'Bleeding Kansas' to be the opening shots of The Civil War.
The opening shots of the American Civil War were fired at Lexington and Concord. (let it sink in - it's deeeep, baby)
?????? Since when????
I thought Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor was the site of the opening shot of the Civil War.
Your view is too narrow.
Hmmm. Well....it sure is well documented in history books that the first shots of the Civil War were fired at a federal supply ship in Charleston harbor that was trying to restock Fort Sumter when cadets from The Citadel fired on it with rifles followed by volleys of cannon fire from the confederate forts on James Island and Sullivan's Island.
But.....maybe you should rewrite history.
Do you practice missing the point, or is it something that comes naturally to you?
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?
1. you are a loyal Union manIt will pass un noticed as it should. The man was a traitor and deserves his place of infamy in History.
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?
Lee's brilliant tactical maneuvering has been trumpeted by historians forever. However I believe that strategically he was a disaster for the South. When he turned down command of the Union army it was because he couldn't bring himself to raise his sword against his native state Virginia. From that April until the final April at Appomattox his energies were centered on defending Virginia without much thought for the overall support of other Southern battle zones, especially the critical West. Also he had little regard for the well being of his troops. They went cold and barefoot into battle while some Southern warehouses were bulging with new boots and enough clothing to outfit the entire Army of Northern Virginia.
His failed foray into the North that culminated at Gettysburg should be studied as other great strategic blunders such as Napoleon's and Hitler's invasions of Russia are studied. That act of hubris alone should disqualify him from consideration as a "great" General. On top of that his laissez-faire leadership at the Battle of Gettysburg is nothing if not criminally negligent. He was intellectually detached from the battle, during that whole final day he issued only one written dispatch and seemed resigned to letting fate take its course. He allowed his Generals to drag their feet as General Ewell had done on July 1st, failing to take Culp's Hill or Cemetery Hill mostly because of Lee's ambiguous orders. The ceding of the high ground to such a logistically superior force doomed the Confederate forces to a situation where their only hope was that the Northern commanding General make more than one tactical blunder. Unfortunately for Lee, Meade during the three days of battle performed more than adequately. Although neither army would again reach the peak of battle readiness they both displayed at Gettysburg the numbers favored the North. From that July 4th the road to Appomattox was inevitable. I could go on but I think you get my point. In the final analysis Lee's "greatness" as a General is no more that a plot point in the failed "lost cause" narrative that romanticizes Southern depravity and defeat. You can cling to his deification as a "national treasure of Southern Pride and White Heritage" but history will remember him for what he was...a hubristic traitor to the United States of America.
Great General but he was overwhelmed by superior numbers and equipment.
Yep.
If the Civil War happened today.....the South would have the superior numbers and equipment.
No.He probably does understand that the founding fathers created a slave republic less than 90 years before the Civil War.The opening shots of the American Civil War were fired at Lexington and Concord. (let it sink in - it's deeeep, baby)
?????? Since when????
I thought Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor was the site of the opening shot of the Civil War.
Your view is too narrow.
Hmmm. Well....it sure is well documented in history books that the first shots of the Civil War were fired at a federal supply ship in Charleston harbor that was trying to restock Fort Sumter when cadets from The Citadel fired on it with rifles followed by volleys of cannon fire from the confederate forts on James Island and Sullivan's Island.
But.....maybe you should rewrite history.
Do you practice missing the point, or is it something that comes naturally to you?
Don't laugh.Great General but he was overwhelmed by superior numbers and equipment.
Yep.
If the Civil War happened today.....the South would have the superior numbers and equipment.
The thread was OPed by a shallow simpleton, and you appear to be a close second.You probably didn't need to reemphasize your being a shallow simpleton.^deflectionBecause we all know what exemplars of decorum people in other parts of this country are.Scratch my ass and burp in public like any proud southerner.
^broken clock syndromeWestern expansion and spreading abolitionism would have put that incredibly stupid, immoral, and counter-productive 'institution' out of business sooner or later.
Likely. Allowing the new states a plebiscite on wether or not they would allow slavery lead to quite a few deaths. I consider the years of 'Bleeding Kansas' to be the opening shots of The Civil War.
The opening shots of the American Civil War were fired at Lexington and Concord. (let it sink in - it's deeeep, baby)
No. It would have moved slaves to factories.And like every other commodity its value is relative to its necessity. Industrialization would have made slavery moot.Social momentum is worth jack shit when so much money is involved. The total value of the slaves was more than all the banks, factories and railroads in the entire country.That's all very interesting I'm sure, but how exactly would slavery have ended? ...See if you can imagine the political deadlock if secession had never happened. Slavery would very likely have continued well into the 20th century.
Western expansion and spreading abolitionism would have put that incredibly stupid, immoral, and counter-productive 'institution' out of business sooner or later.
The way the small number of Southerners who owned significant numbers of slaves feared: Congressional representation and social momentum.
The thread was OPed by a shallow simpleton, and you appear to be a close second.You probably didn't need to reemphasize your being a shallow simpleton.^deflectionBecause we all know what exemplars of decorum people in other parts of this country are.Scratch my ass and burp in public like any proud southerner.
There is no reason to celebrate Lee.
Not if it costed non-slaves jobs.No. It would have moved slaves to factories.And like every other commodity its value is relative to its necessity. Industrialization would have made slavery moot.Social momentum is worth jack shit when so much money is involved. The total value of the slaves was more than all the banks, factories and railroads in the entire country.That's all very interesting I'm sure, but how exactly would slavery have ended? ...Western expansion and spreading abolitionism would have put that incredibly stupid, immoral, and counter-productive 'institution' out of business sooner or later.
The way the small number of Southerners who owned significant numbers of slaves feared: Congressional representation and social momentum.
On the contrary. He pushed for individual freedom and that is what our country was founded on.The thread was OPed by a shallow simpleton, and you appear to be a close second.You probably didn't need to reemphasize your being a shallow simpleton.^deflectionBecause we all know what exemplars of decorum people in other parts of this country are.Scratch my ass and burp in public like any proud southerner.
There is no reason to celebrate Lee.
There is no reason to celebrate King.
Are you kidding me? Plantation slaves cost non-slaves jobs.Not if it costed non-slaves jobs.No. It would have moved slaves to factories.And like every other commodity its value is relative to its necessity. Industrialization would have made slavery moot.Social momentum is worth jack shit when so much money is involved. The total value of the slaves was more than all the banks, factories and railroads in the entire country.That's all very interesting I'm sure, but how exactly would slavery have ended? ...
The way the small number of Southerners who owned significant numbers of slaves feared: Congressional representation and social momentum.
Not the type that would have been part of an industrialized society. Slaves did essentially the same work that illegals do now.Are you kidding me? Plantation slaves cost non-slaves jobs.Not if it costed non-slaves jobs.No. It would have moved slaves to factories.And like every other commodity its value is relative to its necessity. Industrialization would have made slavery moot.Social momentum is worth jack shit when so much money is involved. The total value of the slaves was more than all the banks, factories and railroads in the entire country.The way the small number of Southerners who owned significant numbers of slaves feared: Congressional representation and social momentum.
there is no reason to celebrate King.The thread was OPed by a shallow simpleton, and you appear to be a close second.You probably didn't need to reemphasize your being a shallow simpleton.^deflectionBecause we all know what exemplars of decorum people in other parts of this country are.Scratch my ass and burp in public like any proud southerner.
There is no reason to celebrate Lee.
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?