John Kelly calls Robert E. Lee an "honorable man"

[The Derp]

Actually, it is all related to the more rural, society conscious, traditional agricultural ways of the South.

"Society conscious"? What do you mean by that?

And the "agricultural way" of the South was to use slavery to enrich plantation owners. You're arguing slavery was a tradition that had to be preserved? So then the war was about slavery, after all.

Didn't have the population to develop like the North. It was a true cultural/economic clash. Folks at the time might have BELIEVED that Southern life couldn't exist beyond slavery, but only a miniscule number of Southerners were responsible for MOST of slaves.

Yes, which makes it that much more puzzling that hundreds of thousands of people would take up arms against their country so a few rich people could continue being rich off the backs of free labor. Those are people we should respect and revere and honor? WHY!?

The fact is -- after the Civil War, agriculture in the South did JUST FINE without slavery. And STILL dominated the economy for at least 5 or 6 decades. Most all those men who died for the Confederacy would have had substantially the same life prospects, with or without slavery..

Yeah...so what does that say about them and their judgement...that they laid down their lives for a cause that had only hurt them economically because they couldn't compete with free labor.

 

[The Derp]

e was hiring them off to other plantations, because it was HIS JOB -- to dissolve THAT plantation. Family wasn't interested in farming anymore. What you're biased piece doesn't say -- is that he FREED many of them in the process as well.. BEFORE the Civil War.

Nothing you say seems to be corroborated by the accounts of those who were his slaves. So why are you taking (someone's) word for it and not the word of those who were enslaved?

 

[paperview]

Lee led and fought a bloody war that killed hundreds of thousands in the name of perpetuating and expanding human bondage.

Nothing will wipe the ugly off that.

 

[flacaltenn]

"Society conscious"? What do you mean by that?

It means the South remained "very British" in their concepts of society. Had a STRONG Aristocratic pecking order. Made a big deal about Belles and Cotillions. Stuff that North had been dismantling. Tho the North didn't have slavery, they were BIG on indentured servants. Which was also a vestige of British life.

And the "agricultural way" of the South was to use slavery to enrich plantation owners. You're arguing slavery was a tradition that had to be preserved? So then the war was about slavery, after all.

No.. Just after that -- I explained that the concept of slavery being NECESSARY to maintain life/economy was an illusion. Proven soon after the war. Only the aristocracy benefited largely from slavery. A remarkably SMALL part of the population, but a LARGE fraction of the economy. Much like leftists view America today.

Yeah...so what does that say about them and their judgement...that they laid down their lives for a cause that had only hurt them economically because they couldn't compete with free labor.

And like I just repeatedly told you --- didn't affect the outcomes of the VAST # of Confeds who died. Because slavery WAS NOT essential to them at all.

 

[paperview]

It means the South remained "very British" in their concepts of society. Had a STRONG Aristocratic pecking order. Made a big deal about Belles and Cotillions. Stuff that North had been dismantling. Tho the North didn't have slavery, they were BIG on indentured servants. Which was also a vestige of British life.

Not in the U.S.

Not long after the constitution was written, there was a strong, steady decline in Indentured Servitude.

There were some, yes, but their numbers were minuscule.

 

[flacaltenn]

It means the South remained "very British" in their concepts of society. Had a STRONG Aristocratic pecking order. Made a big deal about Belles and Cotillions. Stuff that North had been dismantling. Tho the North didn't have slavery, they were BIG on indentured servants. Which was also a vestige of British life.

Not in the U.S.

Not long after the constitution was written, there was a strong, steady decline in Indentured Servitude.

There were some, yes, but their numbers were minuscule.

Not miniscule at the beginning. And it continued until after the Civil War.

Indentured servitude - Wikipedia

North America[edit]
Until the late 18th century, indentured servitude was very common in British North America. It was often a way for poor Europeans to immigrate to the American colonies: they signed an indenture in return for a costly passage. After their indenture expired, the immigrants were free to work for themselves or another employer. The consensus view among economic historians and economists is that indentured servitude occurred largely as "an institutional response to a capital market imperfection."[1]

In some cases, the indenture was made with a ship's master, who on-sold the indenture to an employer in the colonies. Most indentured servants worked as farm laborers or domestic servants, although some were apprenticed to craftsmen.

Indentured people were numerically important mostly in the region from Virginia north to New Jersey.

An American law passed in 1833 abolished imprisonment of debtors, which made prosecuting runaway servants more difficult, increasing the risk of indenture contract purchases. The 13th Amendment, passed in the wake of the American Civil War, made indentured servitude illegal in the United States.

 

[g5000]

On even numbered days, the psuedocons start topics to learn us 'bout how duh Confederates wuz racist Demcrats.

One odd numbered days, the pseudocons defend the Confederates with all the low wattage brainpower they possess!

Go figure.

 

[paperview]

It means the South remained "very British" in their concepts of society. Had a STRONG Aristocratic pecking order. Made a big deal about Belles and Cotillions. Stuff that North had been dismantling. Tho the North didn't have slavery, they were BIG on indentured servants. Which was also a vestige of British life.

Not in the U.S.

Not long after the constitution was written, there was a strong, steady decline in Indentured Servitude.

There were some, yes, but their numbers were minuscule.

Not miniscule at the beginning. And it continued until after the Civil War.

Indentured servitude - Wikipedia

North America[edit]
Until the late 18th century, indentured servitude was very common in British North America....

Yes, minuscule.

Do you need some help with your centuries?
I said "Not in the U.S.
Not long after the constitution was written, there was a strong, steady decline in Indentured Servitude."

You then quote in big boldies:..."Until the late 18th century, indentured servitude was very common in British North America."

Think on that.

British North America -- ta da! Was NOT the U.S.

And maybe you didn't know this either, but most indentured servants (primarily in the colonies) served voluntarily- and for relatively short terms.

It was not AT ALL like chattel slavery.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Hitler was a vegetarian, just like Bill Clinton and Ghandi.

 

[Asclepias]

After lying about an African American Congresswoman, John Kelly called the pro- slavery man in charge of trying to break up the USA an "honorable man".

Axios on Twitter

This sure will dispel the belief that Kelly is racist.

Lee was an honorable man born on the wrong side of history. He was a slave owner, but he was admittedly against abusing slaves. He in fact freed all the slaves he inherited from his father-in-law. While he wasn’t against slavery he was an ideology in favor of it.

When VA discussed succession, he was vehemently opposed it it calling it treason. He first turned down the offer to lead the Confederate Army. He then agreed to it when Lincoln gave his intentions he was going to put down the rebellion by force (obviously the right decision).

Lee was quoted as saying he would give up all the slaves in the South to preserve the Union.

After the war he supported the new government and the reconstruction efforts.

Many of his views were attributed to the time he lived in. But he was honorable even if he was born on the wrong side of history.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

"but he was admittedly against abusing slaves."

Too much bullshit in that statement considering what he was known for doing to the enslaved.

 

[Uncensored2008]

After lying about an African American Congresswoman, John Kelly called the pro- slavery man in charge of trying to break up the USA an "honorable man".

Axios on Twitter

This sure will dispel the belief that Kelly is racist.

Robert E. Lee was an extremely honorable man, and the best tactician / general in both sides. He only fought on the side of the south for his beloved state.

The Congresswoman is a well-known Trump-hater, far less honorable than Robert E. Lee.

Kelly was right in that the left has become despicable, trampling on everything sacred in this country, even going as fas as to be willing to use dead soldiers and their families for political attacks.

Lee wasn't even in the same league with Jackson, which is why the South started losing as soon as Jackson died.

Longstreet, one of Lee's luitenant generals, was actually a better general than Lee. He realized that attacking federal troops at Gettysburg was a suicide mission. The defense always had the advantage in the Civil war. There was just no way that mass charges of men on foot into fire from rifles with a range of 500 yards could prevail. Lee won most of his battles because he was always on defense. At Gettysburg Longstreet told him they should withdraw and then take up a defensive position between the Union army and Washington DC. The Confederacy would have won the war if that that advice had been followed.

If Stonewall Jackson had not been killed, the South absolutely would have won the war.

 

[Asclepias]

After lying about an African American Congresswoman, John Kelly called the pro- slavery man in charge of trying to break up the USA an "honorable man".

Axios on Twitter

This sure will dispel the belief that Kelly is racist.

Robert E. Lee was an extremely honorable man, and the best tactician / general in both sides. He only fought on the side of the south for his beloved state.

The Congresswoman is a well-known Trump-hater, far less honorable than Robert E. Lee.

Kelly was right in that the left has become despicable, trampling on everything sacred in this country, even going as fas as to be willing to use dead soldiers and their families for political attacks.

Lee wasn't even in the same league with Jackson, which is why the South started losing as soon as Jackson died.

Longstreet, one of Lee's luitenant generals, was actually a better general than Lee. He realized that attacking federal troops at Gettysburg was a suicide mission. The defense always had the advantage in the Civil war. There was just no way that mass charges of men on foot into fire from rifles with a range of 500 yards could prevail. Lee won most of his battles because he was always on defense. At Gettysburg Longstreet told him they should withdraw and then take up a defensive position between the Union army and Washington DC. The Confederacy would have won the war if that that advice had been followed.

If Stonewall Jackson had not been killed, the South absolutely would have won the war.

If if and buts were candy and nuts we would all have a merry christmas. They lost. They got their asses kicked. More humiliating is that the same people that they wished to keep enslaved are the ones that turned the tide.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Slavery was not Lee's motivation, that was clear.

Of fucking course it was! How do you think he became a rich man? By exploiting free labor (aka slavery).

You have something credible that supports your claim?

Or are you just ignorantly spouting Communist hatred?

 

[Correll]

Slavery was not Lee's motivation, that was clear.

Of fucking course it was! How do you think he became a rich man? By exploiting free labor (aka slavery).

You have something credible that supports your claim?

Or are you just ignorantly spouting Communist hatred?

With him it's all COmmunist hatred all the way down.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Lee was an honorable man born on the wrong side of history. He was a slave owner, but he was admittedly against abusing slaves. He in fact freed all the slaves he inherited from his father-in-law. While he wasn’t against slavery he was an ideology in favor of it.

Slavery is how he maintained and grew his wealth. You get rich real quick when you don't have to pay labor. Whether or not he was a racist doesn't matter; he exploited slaves in order to enrich himself personally.

No honor there.

You keep saying that Comrade, but offer literally nothing to support your claim.

Lee was born into a wealthy family, did he in fact increase that wealth?

I get that you're a demagogue spewing ignorant hatred, as is your way, but still...

 

[Uncensored2008]

There is no honor in fighting to protect slavery.

None.

Every death in the Civil War is on the traitorous Confederate generals and their leadership.

Thanks for your ignorance Guno.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

But they were rich, and not paying slaves a wage meant you got to keep more of that wealth. That's why Lee became a traitor...his personal wealth was more important to him than the unity of the country.

By the standards of the time, you are filthy rich, Comrade.

So why did you become a traitor?

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Conservatives have proven they have no principles or integrity by defending collusion between Trump and Russia. Becuase they've been losers their entire life, they can "win" vicariously through Trump. Fuckin' pathetic.

I know of no collusion between Trump and Russia.

You Communists paid a foreign spy to fabricate slander compiled from the Russians though - that is proven fact. The Mafia Don Hillary, Barack Obama, and the FBI funded a foreign intelligence operative to disrupt the election - fact.

Hey, you're traitors and it does make you bad people.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The DNC is melting down and the snowflakes are trying to distract with a thread about Kelly's opinion of Robert E. Lee.

Bwuhahahahaha.....

They got caught in open treason, they have to distract. It's why Mueller put out these pathetic indictments.

 

[deanrd]

Gee, I thought it was such a simple question. Did Robert E. Lee kill more Americans than Hitler?