Posted on 01/17/2014 5:55:06 PM PST by DIRTYSECRET
OK my friends: In case you forgot: It was the Prez who returned the bust of Churchill to London. We ALL know it was petty. Am I right? Just remember that 2 can play this game. It all depends on which of us is in the W.H.
I don't think we should bring it back. Some GOP debater tried to make points on that issue-didn't work. Just put a bust of Americas greatest General in the same spot. Just watch the Great Ones friends react. Tit for tat. Thoughts?
Hey, what happened to the text?
They wouldn’t get it - it’s too subtle. Go with N.B. Forrest
In some ways it was the reverse.
Lee came from a long line of famous Lees -- nobility for this land. His family had fallen on hard times and he chose military service and worked long and hard to rise to the place he earned and a foremost soldier on the eve of war.
Churchill was the son of the second son, raised in privilege and somewhat a child without direction until he finished Sandhurst. Hardly a noble beginning but he went to India then to Africa and made a instant youthful success of himself gaining visibility as a correspondent partly with his famous name and the promotion of his mother who was a Kardashian of her day.
nobility for this land.
In their own mind. Looked down on anyone not of their “class”.
Which leads me to ask a question...Who would have made a better US President?
Grant or Lee, if he had lived long enough.
Lee was definitely a brilliant tactical commander, but his strategic sense was lacking. He had a tunnel vision in regards to Virginia. His total disconnect from the war in the West probably one of the biggest factors in the South losing the war.
Some vanities live forever, even if they don’t make much sense. So here’s my reply:
YES ! Excellent poin’t! One MUST be returne’d, the other forsaken! SCREW tCromwell etc.
What does this have to do with what I stated. This linked opinion piece is an apologia for the Confederate cause when I was just commenting on pure military strategy.
With apologies to General Eisenhower, he was never under fire during WWII, so even though he, as you say, lost, I would prefer General Wainwright. He took enemy fire, and suffered with his men. They loved him, as Marse Robert was loved by his men. I know this because my father was one of the men of Corregidor. I don't question Ike's courage or brilliance, but when MacArthur accepted the Japanese surrender on the deck of the Missouri, he handed the pens the Japanese signed with to Generals King (Bataan) and Wainwright (Bataan/Corregidor). Ike wasn't abandoned by his government, nor did he suffer the ordeal of being a prisoner of the Japanese.
Lee was the best general in that time by a long shot, even according to his enemies.
Ike was a traitor to America. Patton wasn’t.
Patton should of been running the show, but he somehow had a terrible accident.
Curtis Lemay?
George Patton?
Gen Sherman?
Huh? If you're speaking of the bonus army, they were infiltrated by communists by that time, good riddance.
I figured that if we were going for the stick in the eye, we might as well be as offensive as possible
WTF, put it in Reggie's room.
“Any president who puts a bust of Lee in the WH will lose political power. Just a fact.”
I’d say history indicates otherwise-
President Dwight Eisenhower wrote the following letter in response to one he received dated August 1, 1960, from Leon W. Scott, a dentist in New Rochelle, New York. Scott’s letter reads:
August 1, 1960
Dear Mr. President:
At the Republican Convention I heard you mention that you have the pictures of four (4) great Americans in your office, and that included in these is a picture of Robert E. Lee.
I do not understand how any American can include Robert E. Lee as a person to be emulated, and why the President of the United States of America should do so is certainly beyond me.
The most outstanding thing that Robert E. Lee did was to devote his best efforts to the destruction of the United States Government, and I am sure that you do not say that a person who tries to destroy our Government is worthy of being hailed as one of our heroes.
Will you please tell me just why you hold him in such high esteem?
Sincerely yours,
Leon W. Scott
Eisenhower’s response, written on White House letterhead, reads as follows:
August 9, 1960
Dear Dr. Scott:
Respecting your August 1 inquiry calling attention to my often expressed admiration for General Robert E. Lee, I would say, first, that we need to understand that at the time of the War Between the States the issue of Secession had remained unresolved for more than 70 years. Men of probity, character, public standing and unquestioned loyalty, both North and South, had disagreed over this issue as a matter of principle from the day our Constitution was adopted.
General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his belief in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.
From deep conviction I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s caliber would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.
Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall.
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
http://georgiaheritagecouncil.org/site2/commentary/Eisehower_letter_Lee080960.html
Churchill had a great interest in the American Civil War and was an admirer of R.E. Lee.
He wrote a provocative little essay titled “If Lee Had Not Won the Battle of Gettysburg” which you can read here:
http://www.unz.org/Pub/Scribners-1930dec-00587
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.