Posted on 10/11/2009 3:38:41 PM PDT by BigReb555
"Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by this nation." unquote--Dwight D. Eisenhower
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Unfortunately, Light Horse Harry was less of a man of character than Robert.
Timing is everything.
Jefferson, Luther Martin, et. al were right. Hamilton, Adams and the Federalists were wrong (Washington will alwyas get a pass from me.)
The relevant quote is here:
"The South, in my opinion, has been aggrieved by the acts of the North, as you say. I feel the aggression, and am willing to take every proper step for redress. It is the principle I contend for, not individual or private gain. As an American citizen, I take great pride in my country, her prosperity and institutions, and would defend any State if her rights were invaded. But I can anticipate p421no greater calamity for the country than a dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of, and I am willing to sacrifice everything but honor for its preservation. I hope therefore, that all constitutional means will be exhausted before there is a recourse to force. Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for 'perpetual union' so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It is idle to talk of secession. Anarchy would have been established, and not a government by Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, and the other patriots of the Revolution. . . . Still, a Union that can only be maintained by swords and bayonets, and in which strife and civil war are to take the place of brotherly love and kindness, has no charm for me. I shall mourn for my country and for the welfare and progress of mankind. If the Union is dissolved, and the Government disrupted, I shall return to my native State and share the miseries of my people, and save in defence will draw my sword on none."
It can be found in Freeman's biography of Lee Link
"I think Ulysses S. Grant is vastly underrated as a man and as a general. I know people think this and that about his drinking habits, which I think have been exaggerated way out of line. The fact is, he never demanded more men or material from the war department, he took over an army that had a long history of retreating and losing. That army had no confidence in their fighting ability and Grant came in as a real outsider. He had so many disadvantages going into the 1864 campaign, now 100 years ago. But he met every test and rose to the occasion unlike I’ve ever seen in American history. He was a very tough yet very fair man and a great soldier. He’s not been given his due...Grant devised a strategy to end the war. He alone had the determination, foresight, and wisdom to do it. It was lucky that President Lincoln didn’t interfere or attempt to control Grant’s strategic line of thinking. Lincoln wisely left the war to Grant, at least in the concluding moves after he came east. Grant is very undervalued today, which is a shame, because he was one of the greatest American generals, if not the greatest."
Earlier in 1956, when Richard Nixon told Eisenhower that it was common knowledge Stonewall Jackson was the greatest Civil War general, followed by Lee, Eisenhower interrupted him:
"I wouldn’t say that, Dick. In fact I think it’s not a very reasoned opinion. You forget that Grant captured three armies intact, moved and coordinated his forces in a way that baffles military logic yet succeeded and he concluded the war one year after being entrusted with that aim. I’d say that was one hell of a piece of soldiering extending over a period of four years, the same time we were in the last war.”
Obviously Eisenhower admired both men. And there was much to admire about each of them.
Incorrect.
The dissing of Grant is all part and parcel of Southen mythology to cover up the fact that they lost a war (which they had little chance of winning anyway). Southern historians practically invented historical revisionism as we know it today, per Alan Bloom and yours truly.
Grant made war on civilians Lee did not!
Incorrect.
You forgot Sherman!
Both sides waged war on civilians. Most wars are waged on civilians to one extent or another, and rebellions tend to be harder on civilians than most. And if it was Southern civilians that tended to get hit harder, well having started the war the confederacy found that they could not keep the war from coming home to them. They have nobody to blame but themselves. And if you cared to look at other rebellions througout history you would see that the South suffered less than virtually any other losing people.
I know, I know, "Ahh shucks, jla, I just do what I can".
Ignorance of the situation on the first day of Gettysburg is one thing but not listening to his commanders (Longstreet in particular) on subsequent days was just plain stubborn arrogance. He had come to believe his own press and for a leader that can be fatal. A gifted general, yes but that is in comparison with the union political yahoos who were put up against him. When he encountered “that drunk” Grant as his adversary he found he was up against someone who had his own failings, did not worry so much about what others thought of his decisions and who did not believe Lee to be infallible. Lee’s really notable actions were in his efforts to bring about reconciliation after the war. He was a model of leadership in that respect.
My daughter is shy and gentle, but she is also GOOD. (She takes after her daddy.)
I cited one example Sherman but did not mention Grants armed former Slaves in Blue uniforms.
OK, then play honestly. Lee freed the slaves from his father-in-laws estate in December 1862, a few months after the date stipulated in the will. Grant personally owned a single slave who he manumitted in 1859 before moving to Illinois. His wife had use of several slaves owned by his father-in-law, and according to Grant's own letters they were freed in early 1863. Grant could not have freed his slaves in 1866 since he didn't live anywhere where slavery was legal - slavery was outlawed by Missouri in January 1865 and in the country as a whole in December 1865.
When the War moved North Lee's Army was under strict Orders to respect Private property and NOT to make War on Civilians...
And order widely disregarded by then men and which didn't apply to the commanders. Lee's army was on a foraging mission in the North. His goal was to gather enough food and supplies from Union territories to help equip his army for the coming months and this was accomplished by taking everything of use to the army that wasn't nailed down. Kent Masterton Brown in his book "Retreat From Gettysburg: Lee, Logistics and the Pennsylvania Campaign" details the extent Lee and his subordinates went to in order to gather supplies, including levying requirements on various Northern towns with a threat to burn them if demands were not met. Letters from confederate soldiers also describe instances of looting and burning and abducting free blacks and taking them South.
If the North suffered less than the South from the armies passing through it's only because confederate armies seldom had the chance to campaign in the North.
I cited one example Sherman but did not mention Grants armed former Slaves in Blue uniforms.
And now that you have, how about citing it accurately?
How about the fact they were guards at Prisons where southern solders were held? Union Army was 2.5 Million and 10% were Blacks BTW the Cold blooded Murders,Rapes and other War crimes was a nice touch. How about the burning of Atlanta?
So what?
Union Army was 2.5 Million and 10% were Blacks BTW
Again, so what?
BTW the Cold blooded Murders,Rapes and other War crimes was a nice touch.
And for the most part imaginary.
How about the burning of Atlanta?
How about the burning of Chambersburg? And Lawrence?
Just finished reading (admittedly, scanning about 1/2) U.S. Grant’s
Personal Memoirs. It was a Christmas gift from my brother and
sister-in-law maybe five years ago.
Heck of a read.
Especially Grant’s recounting of the Appomatix (sp?) Court House
meeting with Lee. Grant admits he got caught up in reminiscing over
“the good old days” until Lee and his assistant reminded him of the
real purpose of their meeting.
Both generals seemed to have been very gracious, as Lee would reply
to Grant that this should have a good effect on the surrendering
Confederates when Grant allowed some leeway in terms (e.g., artillerists
could each take away a horse, with the tilling of fields in mind)
The Civil War was a sad event. But somehow conflict that the USA
engages in (even with itself) often produces some real giants
(even if they have “feet of clay” like any mortals).
He died?
I need to send a card then
Punctuation is your friend.
Punctuation is your friend.
So we are reduced to this? No thanks!
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.