When?

[dave8383]

I think we know that the major difference in the Civil War is that the North always has been superior to the South. So Lee never had a chance.

 

[Fledermaus]

Lee lost, end of story.

So did Hannibal, Rommel, and a myriad of great generals....

 

[Fledermaus]

We find generals throughout history distributed in the classic bell shaped curve because your average general wins some and he loses some. The average general is of course the rule and he populates each side. Grant who is an authority on the average general said after the war Lee was an "average general."

Central to Grant's evaluation of Lee was his significant lesson from his command in the West when Grant recognized quickly that when you've turned away the enemy, and when he chooses to run rather than surrender, you drive on after him and you plug his yellow backside full of hot lead. That is of course you defeat him or you reduce his force significantly enough to make the enemy general and his force insignificant for a significant period. It remains obscure to armchair military history buffs that disabling 40% of the opponent's offensive force typically renders it insignificant as a major offensive force or as a significant forward force. Lee and several major Union commanders knew this acutely hence Grant's disparaging barb against the CSA's Saint Robert that he never strayed far from from his defenses in a given offensive battle.

Meade at Gettysburg is a favorite of the Saint Robert crowd who criticize Meade for not taking after the tattered remains of Lee's retreating troops. Yet Lincoln himself accepted that, at that point, the Union forces were spent from the three days of fierce fighting while no fresh troops were available from reserves or otherwise to take pursuit, not until later at which point Lee had pulled up to establish formidable defenses along a river as recognized by Union Engineers, while no significant Union supporting Naval force was available either.

Indeed, professional military historians connect only two generals of the war to past commanders who stand at the pinnacle of warfare and each of 'em are Union commanders: Grant whose Napoleonic fire, maneuver and pursuit led to the kill, and Sherman whose largely self sustaining March to the Sea invoked Caesar in Gaul. Yet while Grant began the war as an average general he grew into an exceptional general with each battle, and while Sherman was, well, an average general on average, Sherman found his niche as a marching general of troops who believed in him without knowing he was drawing on Caesar, Hannibal, Alexander et al. Grant and Sherman conceived of the grand strategy of victory in spring 1864 at the grand Burnet House hotel in Cincinnati as the two Ohio boys used the old axiom two heads are better than one -- indeed one year later the South was fragmented into piles of ashes and Saint Robert had to surrender his sword of treason. This grates the Putin Trump Rowers to no end as they seek determinedly and relentlessly to realize what the post WW II Germans and Japanese know they cannot do morally, ie, glorify their military commanders.

Grant and Sherman alike knew well Washington drew on his lifelong study of Alexander and Hannibal, ie, Alexander as a marching general and Hannibal as the general of the unexpected and of the factor of the hard hitting surprise. Washington's exposed flank as it were was that neither Alexander nor Hannibal was a defensive general, so Washington -- who was pre Napoleon's great feats -- relied for advice on Lafayette, L'Enfant among other French nobles who were familiar with the doctrines of French fortification and defenses.

Yet Saint Robert was and remained unsuccessfully impelled to adapt Alexander the marching general and Caesar the conqueror only to end up as Hannibal did at the hands General Publius Cippio and his Roman armies that leveled Carthage and sent Hannibal on the run and to his fatal demise at the hands of the Romans. As we see today with the cultural and ideological descendants of Saint Robert and the CSA -- the Putin Trump Rowers -- the crushed Lee and his miserable defeated cohorts were treated erroneously by the victorious Union. The United States must never repeat this most costly error that bedevils us in the present as existential yet again.

More Tangmohistory...

Which will gt you a D- if you unleashed it on a history exam.

 

[dave8383]

So did Hannibal, Rommel, and a myriad of great generals....

How does that change Lee's loss?

 

[Fledermaus]

How does that change Lee's loss?

It doesn't. Did I say it did?

What it does show is that Generals can lose battles and even wars and still be considered great Generals based on their careers and deeds.

 

[dave8383]

It doesn't. Did I say it did?

What it does show is that Generals can lose battles and even wars and still be considered great Generals based on their careers and deeds.

Fortunately, Lee wasn't great enough.

 

[Fledermaus]

Fortunately, Lee wasn't great enough.

We agree on that.

Had the Confederacy prevailed slavery would have continued for decades.

 

[Tangmo]

As the statues and engraved worship of the CSA generals continue to come down and be taken away so too does the bloated and false mythology of Saint Robert E. Lee and other CSA generals who fought to preserve and extend the oppression and treason perpetrated by the culturally vile South in its blatant racism. We recall CSA was a one party state for Christian white agriculturalists to which the Putin Trump Rowers connect in a direct line to their unrelenting pursuit for a new single party state dominated and ruled by rural America in the 21st century.

The Civil War monuments are a constant reminder of the oppression and treason perpetrated by the rebellious South. We know the Confederates were traitors — plain and simple. Their place in history is clear. They no more deserve monuments than Hitler does in Germany or Tojo does in Japan in their pursuit of barbarism.

The South turned Democrat when Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation and it flipped to Republican when Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act and Nixon immediately after him implemented the "Southern Strategy." There is a common thread here that can’t be denied to include the Putin Trump Rowers who have taken control of the Republican party to make it the largest pro Russia political party outside of Russia.

The Rowers are leaders among those who defend the statues and memorials to the CSA generals. Saint Robert E. Lee has of course always been their first and foremost hero who tried to dissolve the Constitutional United States of America and to remake a world safe for slavery and for rebellion in pursuit of feudal values, attitudes, systems, political structures. Salient about Lee is that his native homeland was the Virginia of 1860 and not the enduring and dynamic United States of America.

The CSA generals statues coming down and being removed -- Saint R.E. Lee first and foremost -- continues the inexorable decline in the falsified legends of courage and bravery, of the genius and brilliance myths that have been perpetrated to preserve the Lost Cause and its generals led by Saint Robert E. Lee toward the day instead the Lost Cause finally prevails in one way or another as as the Victorious Cause realized finally and at long last by their vile direct descendants whom we recognize as the Putin Trump Rowers.

As the statues of Lee come down so do the concocted OTT myths that make Saint Robert more, mightier and greater than he was. After all, after the war Grant said Lee was an "average general." I think Grant was rather being kind and generous toward his vanquished counterpart Lee. Indeed once Grant and Sherman took after Lee and Johnston the war was over for Lee and cohorts suddenly and in but one devastating year.

 

[danielpalos]

I think we know that the major difference in the Civil War is that the North always has been superior to the South. So Lee never had a chance.

The South needed to win enough battles to convince Europe to get involved and recognize the confederacy.

 

[Oozlefinch]

Native Americans were called warriors back in the 1800s.

Well, that certainly shows your ignorance.

Most Indian clans are both tribal and clan oriented. The tribe is generally a family grouping, while clan may be specific to a family, or it may only be used by an individual. These are not clans as the Scottish view them, and in many ways an individual adopts a clan when they choose a profession, one in keeping with their new role (depending on tribe of course).

And no, the number of "Warriors" was generally very small. Only a handful in a tribe, generally they would teach the other males in times of need (war), and mostly were little more then guards. In most Indian groupings, this is the role of the Wolf Clan. In tribes that had a duel-chief system, the Peace Chief would always come from one clan, and the War Chief would always come from the Wolf Clan (or whatever that tribe had as the equivalent).

Most white men tend to confuse and combine 2 different groupings. Brave was available to any member of the tribe, it was in most tribes part of the Rite of Passage into adulthood, and would be considered to be the same as being a member of the Militia or National Guard. They could fight, but their job was actually something else. Warriors were members of the Wolf Clan, and that was their job, full time fighters who usually did things like herding, patrolling, and escorting traders when during time of peace.

Myself, I am Potawatomie, and my grandmother's maiden name was Wolf. A practice which was common in the 1800s, when they settled into reservations many used their clan name as their last name. There is a reason why so many today still use last names with Deer, Wolf, Elk, Beaver, and Bear in them. If you look back, I can guarantee the first of their families to select those names were all members of those clans.

 

[Fledermaus]

As the statues and engraved worship of the CSA generals continue to come down and be taken away so too does the bloated and false mythology of Saint Robert E. Lee and other CSA generals who fought to preserve and extend the oppression and treason perpetrated by the culturally vile South in its blatant racism. We recall CSA was a one party state for Christian white agriculturalists to which the Putin Trump Rowers connect in a direct line to their unrelenting pursuit for a new single party state dominated and ruled by rural America in the 21st century.

The Civil War monuments are a constant reminder of the oppression and treason perpetrated by the rebellious South. We know the Confederates were traitors — plain and simple. Their place in history is clear. They no more deserve monuments than Hitler does in Germany or Tojo does in Japan in their pursuit of barbarism.

The South turned Democrat when Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation and it flipped to Republican when Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act and Nixon immediately after him implemented the "Southern Strategy." There is a common thread here that can’t be denied to include the Putin Trump Rowers who have taken control of the Republican party to make it the largest pro Russia political party outside of Russia.

The Rowers are leaders among those who defend the statues and memorials to the CSA generals. Saint Robert E. Lee has of course always been their first and foremost hero who tried to dissolve the Constitutional United States of America and to remake a world safe for slavery and for rebellion in pursuit of feudal values, attitudes, systems, political structures. Salient about Lee is that his native homeland was the Virginia of 1860 and not the enduring and dynamic United States of America.

The CSA generals statues coming down and being removed -- Saint R.E. Lee first and foremost -- continues the inexorable decline in the falsified legends of courage and bravery, of the genius and brilliance myths that have been perpetrated to preserve the Lost Cause and its generals led by Saint Robert E. Lee toward the day instead the Lost Cause finally prevails in one way or another as as the Victorious Cause realized finally and at long last by their vile direct descendants whom we recognize as the Putin Trump Rowers.

As the statues of Lee come down so do the concocted OTT myths that make Saint Robert more, mightier and greater than he was. After all, after the war Grant said Lee was an "average general." I think Grant was rather being kind and generous toward his vanquished counterpart Lee. Indeed once Grant and Sherman took after Lee and Johnston the war was over for Lee and cohorts suddenly and in but one devastating year.

Funny how the only person bestowing Sainthood on Lee is Tangmo.

Oh, and EVERYONE DRINK...

Tangmo regurgitated "Putin Trump Rowers"

 

[Oozlefinch]

And to take that even further, members of completely different tribes would recognize members of an affiliated clan as "Brothers". Not unlike how a Teamster and a member of the UAS consider themselves "Brothers" for being union members.

So a member of the Wolf Clan of the Lakota would see a member of the Wolf Clan of the Apache or Crow as "Brother", because they share a clan affiliation, even if there is absolutely no connection between those actual clans.

And each clan had their duties. Eagle Clan were normally hunters of birds. Deer, Elk or Bison Clans were normally animal hunters, and in most tribes the Peace Chief came from this clan. Heron, Holly, or other clans depending on tribe were the spiritual members. Potato, Corn, or another plant clan was of course that of farmers and plant gatherers.

And most clans also had prohibitions in marrying inside the clan, they had to go outside to find a spouse. Which means the children always had traditions and teachings from 2 different clans as they matures. Hence a boy who was raised to be a Wolf, may also be a good hunter because he learned from his uncles in the Bison clan. Or a farmer might have received training in warfare from his Wolf uncle.

I always kind of laugh when people really over-simplify tribal organization, structure, and relationships. Especially when they then attack me as being "not politically correct." But my grandmother was proud to be an Indian, as were her parents. I see absolutely no shame in the word, and am proud of my heritage. And I hate when others try to tell me what word I should use to refer to myself.

I knew an old guy that lived next to me growing up, and we would often talk (I was maybe 7, he was in his 70s). And he always referred to himself as "colored", an outdated term even by the early 1970s. But I would never dare to try and correct him, no more than I would stupidly demand the NAACP change its name to the NAABP (or the NAAAAP) to reflect the current "politically correct" term(s).

 

[Oozlefinch]

Funny how the only person bestowing Sainthood on Lee is Tangmo.

Oh, and EVERYONE DRINK...

Tangmo regurgitated "Putin Trump Rowers"

Want to see one of them melt down?

Ask what they would do of a statue of Joseph "Fighting Joe" Wheeler. Grandson of a Revolutionary War General, he was from Georgia and of course joined his home state when they left and joined the Confederate Army. Where he rose to Lieutenant General. Then after the war ended he returned home and was elected to Congress 9 times, and was a tireless supporter of reconciliation and peaceful return to the Union (and was a vocal critic of the Klan).

Then in 1898 he returned to the US Army, serving in both the Spanish-American War and the Philippine Insurrection with distinction, rising to Major General.

In 1902 after his final retirement, he went to a reunion of West Point classmates. Proudly wearing his blue 2 star Major General uniform (and not his grey 3 star Lieutenant General one). Former Confederate Generals Longstreet and Alexander even commented on his choice of uniform to wear to the event.

And in recognition of his long service to his country, he is the only Confederate General buried at Arlington. And I defy anybody to say he does not have a place there.

It always amazes me how those on the "Far Left" are so intolerant of anybody that does not agree with them, and will blast everything about an individual because of that. They react in a purely knee-jerk fashion, yet call me a "reactionary".

 

[dave8383]

The South needed to win enough battles to convince Europe to get involved and recognize the confederacy.

I freely admit to not being well informed on the Civil War so I'm just kind of playing around. I did lose a great, great, however many greats, uncle a couple of weeks after Gettysburg in a hospital nearby. Whether he was wounded during that battle I don't know. He was in one of the units from Maine but not the 20th Maine.

 

[Oozlefinch]

The South needed to win enough battles to convince Europe to get involved and recognize the confederacy.

Never would have happened. The nations of Europe did not like the Confederacy, and had no interest in actually assisting them in any meaningful way. France, Spain, UK, nobody would have recognized or supported them, ever.

Some did give assistance, but purely for the purpose of laughing as the US tore itself apart. We were an emerging world power at the time, and the thought we would kill ourselves and allow them to return to some areas was impossible to resist. But they always did it with their fingers holding their noses as they did so. For as much as many did not like or trust the US< they hated the slavery of the Confederacy even more.

So long as the Confederacy was a slave nation, Europe would never have recognized it. But for some reason the "Lost Cause" fanatics still believe they were on the verge of being recognized.

Sure, maybe by around 1900. Not unlike how it took the US 30 years to recognize the PRC as "China".

Of course, we also know now that President Davis was in talks with France and the UK for recognition, even sending an envoy with the promise of ending slavery in exchange for recognition. Something where even if they had won, would have torn the Confederacy apart. After all, he was literally promising to tear up their own Constitution for it.

 

[Tangmo]

Native Americans were called warriors back in the 1800s.

Times change don't they.

Contemporary Gucci Brave 2020.



Good on 'em and us for it eh. eace

 

[Tangmo]

The Confederate war dead monument and graves at Arlington National Cemetery, since 1901 promoted successfully by President McKinley. The Section was created by reentombing known CSA soliders buried at various sites in the Washington DC area. U.S. Army administers the National Cemetery.

Technically, the few hundred Confederate soldiers from the Civil War should not be buried in Arlington National Cemetery, per army burial regulations. It is a United States military cemetery and these soldiers, for the most part, did not serve in the United States military.

Not too far from the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is section 16. It holds the remains of 482 confederate soldiers and the Confederate Memorial. The cemetery began as a Civil War burial ground in 1864, but it wasn’t until 1901 that Confederate Soldiers were recognized at Arlington.

In the years following the Civil War, feelings between the North and the South remained bitter and tense. Hundreds of confederates were buried at the cemetery, but their family and friends were not allowed to decorate the graves. In some extreme cases, they were even denied access to the cemetery.

Confederate Memorial At Arlington National Cemetery

Confederate Memorial

Whereas the regulation tombstones at ANC are arched evenly at the top the CSA soldiers stones are angled along the top to form a center line crease which Confederates say exists "to keep the Yankees from sittin' on 'em." We do it anyway.

 

[Fledermaus]

The Confederate war dead monument and graves at Arlington National Cemetery, since 1901 promoted successfully by President McKinley. The Section was created by reentombing known CSA soliders buried at various sites in the Washington DC area. U.S. Army administers the National Cemetery.

Whereas the regulation tombstones at ANC are arched evenly at the top the CSA soldiers stones are angled along the top to form a center line crease which Confederates say exists "to keep the Yankees from sittin' on 'em." We do it anyway.

Such respect for the dead demonstrated by one who supposedly was part of a ceremonial unit that respected the dead.....

Another nail in the coffin of that myth.

 

[danielpalos]

Never would have happened. The nations of Europe did not like the Confederacy, and had no interest in actually assisting them in any meaningful way. France, Spain, UK, nobody would have recognized or supported them, ever.

Some did give assistance, but purely for the purpose of laughing as the US tore itself apart. We were an emerging world power at the time, and the thought we would kill ourselves and allow them to return to some areas was impossible to resist. But they always did it with their fingers holding their noses as they did so. For as much as many did not like or trust the US< they hated the slavery of the Confederacy even more.

So long as the Confederacy was a slave nation, Europe would never have recognized it. But for some reason the "Lost Cause" fanatics still believe they were on the verge of being recognized.

Sure, maybe by around 1900. Not unlike how it took the US 30 years to recognize the PRC as "China".

Of course, we also know now that President Davis was in talks with France and the UK for recognition, even sending an envoy with the promise of ending slavery in exchange for recognition. Something where even if they had won, would have torn the Confederacy apart. After all, he was literally promising to tear up their own Constitution for it.

I agree to disagree. Insisting on eminent domain was more cost effective than rebelling.

 

[Fledermaus]

I agree to disagree. Insisting on eminent domain was more cost effective than rebelling.

You were doing so well....

 

[danielpalos]

You were doing so well....

Nothing has changed with you, you are still the same.

The South had a Constitutional right to eminent domain not rebellion.

 

[Fledermaus]

Nothing has changed with you, you are still the same.

The South had a Constitutional right to eminent domain not rebellion.

Incorrect.... You had one good post and then blew it with your knee-jerk pronouncements that make no sense.

 

[danielpalos]

Incorrect.... You had one good post and then blew it with your knee-jerk pronouncements that make no sense.

Why do you believe You are right and not me? Do you have a valid argument that rebuts my assertion? Ad hominems are usually considered, nothing but fallacy.

 

[Fledermaus]

Why do you believe You are right and not me? Do you have a valid argument that rebuts my assertion? Ad hominems are usually considered, nothing but fallacy.

History, facts, logic, reality, law books, etc. are normally on my side in arguments we have had. I use those to rebut your regurgitated and repetitious pronouncements.

Proving you to be incorrect isn't an ad hominem. It is a simple fact.

 

[danielpalos]

History, facts, logic, reality, law books, etc. are normally on my side in arguments we have had. I use those to rebut your regurgitated and repetitious pronouncements.

Proving you to be incorrect isn't an ad hominem. It is a simple fact.

lol. In other words, in right wing fantasy you can make up any story you want and proclaim You are Right? You haven't proved anything; You be being Right is an externality to Reality. In right wing fantasy, You are Always Right.