Trump: 'Robert E. Lee was a great general'

[MAGAnificent]

Thanks for admitting that Lee was a traitor. Good to see you coming around.

Claiming to speak for your opponent is a cowardly form of debate.

 

[jdog21]

Lesson 1. War is hell and people die in wars. Lesson 2, Lee was a great general who just happened to be fighting on the losing side. It was a civil war. The soldiers on both sides fought for what they believed in. It is civilian leaders who get us into wars. If you want to condemn the confederacy, you can start with Jefferson Davis. The nation was less then 100 years old when the war started. Knowing the history, I would have fought to preserve the Union.

Not so much of a civil war, but more of a failed attempt at an independence war for those southern states. As americans we tend to confuse our terms to try and redefine history. The civil war wasn't a civil war due to the fact those southern states wernt trying to overthrow the government of the northern states. Just the revolutionary war wasn't a revolution, they wernt trying to overthrow the government of Great Britain. It was an independence war to succeed from the English union. The only difference between the colonies succession war and the southern states succession war was the colonies won and the southern states lost.

 

[stevecanuck]

The liberal melt-down continues, not just unabated, but steadily ramping up. Their hysteria is, well, hysterical.

 

[Kreton]

Your last paragraph is baiting asshattery, that's also very important to note. The flippant remark was Calamity's usual run into a thread and seeing what he can burn down. Don't fall for the stupid he posts.

Lets try something else since you insist it be Generals. Was Erwin Rommel a great general? Was Napoleon a great general?

I don't care what Calamity posted. It doesn't change what you posted.

Let's consider what you think makes a general great? I'd put winning wars up there - but more importantly I'd say loyalty to their country. Neither of which he could claim.

 

[MAGAnificent]

But since he did, that makes him a traitor to the USA. Still a great general but also a traitor.

Using your logic, all of those ANTIFA morons are traitors to the USA. Same with all of those in the so-called resistance movement against Trump.

 

[Eriech]

Nothing wrong with his opinion of Lee. The baiting, by the POTUS is the problem, and African Americans aren't stupid. They can read between the lines.

The baiting was done by the editors of the Hill not by Trump.......

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[OpportunityCost]

I don't care what Calamity posted. It doesn't change what you posted.

Let's consider what you think makes a general great? I'd put winning wars up there - but more importantly I'd say loyalty to their country. Neither of which he could claim.

Military capability, and you didn't answer either question, but that does answer them. Fail.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Not so much of a civil war, but more of a failed attempt at an independence war for those southern states. As americans we tend to confuse our terms to try and redefine history. The civil war wasn't a civil war due to the fact those southern states wernt trying to overthrow the government of the northern states. Just the revolutionary war wasn't a revolution, they wernt trying to overthrow the government of Great Britain. It was an independence war to succeed from the English union. The only difference between the colonies succession war and the southern states succession war was the colonies won and the southern states lost.

I agree that the southern states were not attempting to overthrow the Union and I also agree that the revolutionaries were not attempting to overthrow the government of Great Britain, However it was still a civil war and a revolutionary war.

 

[danarhea]

I concur with our magnificent leader of this country who's making it great again. He was right tonight about the patriotic General Lee.. any military historian will agree with his statement. Robert E. Lee being a talented general and the reality that it was frustrating to President Lincoln and General Grant is simply a statement of historical fact.


https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/411237-trump-robert-e-lee-was-a-great-general


President Trump praised Confederate Geader Robert E. Lee as "a great general" on Friday during a campaign rally in Lebanon, Ohio.

"So Robert E. Lee was a great general. And Abraham Lincoln developed a phobia. He couldn’t beat Robert E. Lee," Trump said before launching into a monologue about Lee, Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant.

"He was going crazy. I don’t know if you know this story. But Robert E. Lee was winning battle after battle after battle. And Abraham Lincoln came home, he said, 'I can’t beat Robert E. Lee,'" Trump said.

Robert E. Lee was a traitor, and the only Confederate flag that matters is the white one, which means that Lee had his ass handed to him.

 

[Zachariah]

It is true that General Lee was an amazing man and a great general. But he could not overcome the industrial strength and therefore much greater funding of the Union Army. He was second in his class at West Point while Grant was pretty mediocre. Lee was probably the superior military strategist and the Confederate Army did enjoy a lot of early success in the war, but were simply outnumbered and outspent to the point it was inevitable that they would succumb.

It took the north 4-5 years to defeat a poorly supplied and heavily outnumbered South. That's because the Northern Generals were a collection of alcoholic sociopaths. I just ignore all the stupid childish posturing about how somebody or other here is' against slavery n stuff', when they had nothing to do with freeing anybody, and trying to pretend they have some sort of moral high ground because they said something that cost them nothing. Looked up a few of their posting histories and nothing at all about them being members of any anti-slavery organizations around today, so we know they're full of BS and just bigots themselves, parroting rubbish..

 

[Tom Horn]

My bad. It was Cheat Mountain where he committed his first flop.

 

[danarhea]

I refuse to accept your silly claim that "states rights"=pro slavery

Then you never read the Stone Mountain Speech, or the Declarations of Secession of 4 of the Confederate states. They ALL state that secession was due to maintaining slavery.

 

[Redress]

It's fun to watch how easily Trump gets liberal panties in a twist.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

It is funny how people think historical accuracy is important. Can't imagine why...

 

[Tom Horn]

And in my esteem, most great generals only commit one major flop, then die in the middle of executing his blunder.

 

[calamity]

The Myth of the Kindly General Lee

The legend of the Confederate leader’s heroism and decency is based in the fiction of a person who never existed.


...even if one conceded Lee’s military prowess, he would still be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans in defense of the South’s authority to own millions of human beings as property because they are black. Lee’s elevation is a key part of a 150-year-old propaganda campaign designed to erase slavery as the cause of the war and whitewash the Confederate cause as a noble one. That ideology is known as the Lost Cause, and as historian David Blight writes, it provided a “foundation on which Southerners built the Jim Crow system.”

There are unwitting victims of this campaign—those who lack the knowledge to separate history from sentiment. Then there are those whose reverence for Lee relies on replacing the actual Lee with a mythical figure who never truly existed.

 

[Zachariah]

Lincoln started the war, and did so to force the South to fund his corporate welfare projects and public projects that would only benefit the Northern interests; it was the old Whig's 'American system' revived. He didn't give a rat's ass about slavery, or black people, and either did the vast majority of northern people; they're just trying to put lipstick on a pig, is all, faking it.

Lincoln's war was illegal, period.

The Writings of James Madison, vol. 3 (1787, The Journal of the Constitutional Convention, Part I) - Online Library of Liberty

Thursday May 311

The other clauses giving powers necessary to preserve harmony among the States to negative all State laws contravening in the opinion of the Nat. Leg. the articles of union, down to the last clause, (the words “or any treaties subsisting under the authority of the Union,” being added after the words “contravening &c. the articles of the Union,” on motion of Dr. Franklin) were agreed to witht. debate or dissent.
The last clause of Resolution 6, authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole agst. a delinquent State came next into consideration.
Mr. Madison, observed that the more he reflected [56] on the use of force, the more he doubted, the practicability, the justice and the efficacy of it when applied to people collectively and not individually.—A union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force agst. a State, would look more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound. He hoped that such a system would be framed as might render this resource unnecessary, and moved that the clause be postponed. This motion was agreed to, nem. con.
The Committee then rose & the House Adjourned.1

The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, 3 vols. - Online Library of Liberty

The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, vol. 1 - Online Library of Liberty

And to call forth the force of the union against any member of the union failing to fulfil its duty under the articles thereof.
postponed.
Mr. E. Gery thought this clause “ought to be expressed so as the people might not understand it to prevent their being alarmed”.✪
This idea rejected on account of its artifice, and because the system without such a declaration gave the government the means to secure itself.

FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 1787.

Madison and others did not grant the Federal govt. the right to use military power against a state, and in fact specifically rejected it. Gary wanted to disguise it, deliberately misleading people into accepting granting the Feds that power. Lincoln was merely a crook and a murderer. The same clueless hippies that glorify him no end for no reason also like to forget it was his Generals that went West and massacred their favorite savages so brutally.

Another irony is that in spite of all that, the South would have been far better off if Lincoln had not been assassinated, since Lincoln wanted to start raking money as soon as possible, and we already know what fae was going to befall 'freed' slaves: they were going to end up far worse off.

 

[Eriech]

Well isn't that a brilliant contribution and absolutely relevant to the post you're replying to.

Just an observation

I watched the rally last night and read through 200 or so comments about Lee. That someone at The Hill thought that Lee referenced in a story about Grant, deserved a headline was telling. The responses here to that headline even more telling.


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[MTAtech]

I concur with our magnificent leader of this country who's making it great again. He was right tonight about the patriotic General Lee.. any military historian will agree with his statement. Robert E. Lee being a talented general and the reality that it was frustrating to President Lincoln and General Grant is simply a statement of historical fact.


https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/411237-trump-robert-e-lee-was-a-great-general


President Trump praised Confederate Geader Robert E. Lee as "a great general" on Friday during a campaign rally in Lebanon, Ohio.

"So Robert E. Lee was a great general. And Abraham Lincoln developed a phobia. He couldn’t beat Robert E. Lee," Trump said before launching into a monologue about Lee, Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant.

"He was going crazy. I don’t know if you know this story. But Robert E. Lee was winning battle after battle after battle. And Abraham Lincoln came home, he said, 'I can’t beat Robert E. Lee,'" Trump said.

Yes, Lee was a great military tactician. His only problem was that he was on the wrong side -- the side that wanted to preserve the immoral institution of slavery.

Trump might has well bestow praise on Nazi Field Marshal Hermann Göring.

 

[Deuce]

I refuse to accept your silly claim that "states rights"=pro slavery

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery."

How the **** more clear can it be made

 

[AlbqOwl]

It took the north 4-5 years to defeat a poorly supplied and heavily outnumbered South. That's because the Northern Generals were a collection of alcoholic sociopaths. I just ignore all the stupid childish posturing about how somebody or other here is' against slavery n stuff', when they had nothing to do with freeing anybody, and trying to pretend they have some sort of moral high ground because they said something that cost them nothing. Looked up a few of their posting histories and nothing at all about them being members of any anti-slavery organizations around today, so we know they're full of BS and just bigots themselves, parroting rubbish..

Slavery was certainly a factor in the Civil War, but had the issue been slavery alone, there would have been no Civil War. Lincoln's emancipation proclamation did not free all the slaves, but only those in the states that seceded. The northern slave states that did not secede were not affected. Lincoln, though opposed to slavery, had no intention of freeing the slaves which he considered to be outside presidential authority, but when the South forced his hand, he took that issue head on to punish the seceding states.

 

[JasperL]

interesting perspective but 10 years ago I don't recall lefties on this board constantly going on about Lee etc.

10 years ago the state didn't have a law protecting statues of former KKK Grand Dragons and dead confederate white supremacist statues in black neighborhoods, either.

BTW, do you know what it took to get the statue down? The city did an end run around the law - deeded the property to a non-profit (so made it private property) who removed it and one of Jefferson Davis on the day the deed transferred. I don't have to guess why the city wanted it down - it's like asking why Jews object to Nazi statues. What's more interesting to me is why the white state legislature in Tennessee pulled out the big legislative guns to butt into local affairs and keep the statues of these famous white supremacists standing in a black neighborhood.

 

[Deuce]

Slavery was certainly a factor in the Civil War, but had the issue been slavery alone, there would have been no Civil War. Abraham's emancipation proclamation did not free all the slaves, but only those in the states that seceded. The northern slave states that did not secede were not affected. Lincoln, though opposed to slavery, had no intention of freeing the slaves which he considered to be outside presidential authority, but when the South forced his hand, he took that issue head on to punish the seceding states.

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery."

 

[Tom Horn]

Had Stones River gone like it should have, Morton would’ve called the succession vote to order on Jan 3 like it was scheduled for.

 

[Redress]

Yes, Trump loves revisionist history. In real history, Lee was a terrible general who needlessly got hundreds of thousands killed.

Lee is overrated by quite a few, but he was not nearly terrible. Chancellorsville is a great example or his both being overrated as a general, and of his actual, very real ability as a general. He should have lost, the force he faced was much larger. However, he did not panic, and did the one thing that had a chance to work, which was send Jackson to attack the US right flank. Now, the claim this as brilliant is massively overstating things. Flank attacks are kinda the first thing a general should look at in any battle. However, it is also something that many generals(including at times Lee) overlook(see for example the Soviets during Operation Barbarossa, where STAVCA had to actually send out instructions to the Soviet generals banning frontal attacks, and requiring generals to attack flanks or exposed weak spots). Now, it was blind luck that it worked, but it was still the one thing that had a chance to work.

Lee was a really odd duck in that he could at times makes the right moves, at the right time, to great success, such as at Chancellorsville, and at other times make completely boneheaded moves that failed terribly, such as at Gettysburg, where he chose to go with hey diddle diddle, straight up the middle, into a strong defensive position. Lee was in one way kinda reminiscent of McClellan, really good in defensive battles, not so much in offensive ones. In reputation, Lee reminds me very much of Patton, seen by some of much better than he was, but seen by others as much worse than he really was. In both cases, the truth falls somewhere in the middle, both where very good, though flawed, generals.

 

[Zachariah]

Slavery was certainly a factor in the Civil War, but had the issue been slavery alone, there would have been no Civil War. Abraham's emancipation proclamation did not free all the slaves, but only those in the states that seceded. The northern slave states that did not secede were not affected.

Lincoln occupied the border states with troops personally loyal only to him, and controlled their ballot boxes, so yes, they were affected; he simply had voters not loyal to him arrested or barred from voting, and deported others who opposed his illegal war. He was just a cheap dictator. Secession was never considered illegal, and most certainly he had no right to use Federal military powers against any state.

Lincoln, though opposed to slavery, had no intention of freeing the slaves which he considered to be outside presidential authority, but when the South forced his hand, he took that issue head on to punish the seceding states.

Lincoln forced the issue, and he knew exactly what he was doing; nobody 'forced his hand'. All Lincoln did was provoke several more states to secede, which of course was exactly what he wanted to happen.