Posted on 01/07/2014 6:48:32 AM PST by BigReb555
BE GONE FOOL: madison10
I live in Missouri and we outlawed slavery in January 1865 so I don't think you're correct in that.
Correct. He was a gambler, but did not take foolish risks. However, he also recognized the increasingly desperate situation the south was in and thus was willing to increase the level of risks taken.
Having roots there (via Phila, Cumberland Gap, then KY), a big chunk of southern Illinois was decidedly of grey sympathies,
with a few having meandered over to Missouri to lend a hand to Quantrill, et al., and others to points south.
Much of the attitude remains to this day . . there's Shitcago, and there's Illinois, then there's southern.bygod.Illinois
I'm no fan of the CSA or the cause for which it fought, but this ignores the circumstances of the time.
Two Army officers from VA were in 1860 faced with the choice of treason to their State or to their Nation.
Thomas chose to remain loyal to his nation and was convicted of treason against his State, his property was confiscated and disowned by his family. He went on to become one of the greatest of Union generals.
Lee chose to remain loyal to his State. His property was confiscated by the USA and converted into a military cemetery. He went on to become the greatest of Confederate generals.
Both were great men and great Americans. Each was faced with a choice between treasons, with the only alternative to betraying one or the other of their allegiances being a refusal to serve, probably by leaving the country. Both made honorable choices.
11/12/13
Danielle was absent from school yesterday 11/11 13 because of Veteran’s Day. She will go to school on Veteran’s Day when kids Go to school on Martin Luther King Day.
Thanks,
XXX
Big Red 1
Vietnam Vet
Sgt E-5
(real letter)
You can stop wondering. Lincoln had abandoned the idea of colonization long before his murder. He never envisioned it as anything but voluntary, and gave it up when it became clear there would be few volunteers.
It was never anything but a pipe-dream, anyway. The logistics and cost of such a project were well beyond the capacities of a 19th century economy.
Would be difficult today. It's equivalent would be conquering a large enough area on another continent, then transporting 45M Americans who don't want to go, and maintaining them till they could support themselves. Just not feasible.
My wife has that book. I must read it.
If you can mangle the meaning of the word honorably to cover Lee then the word has no meaning.
And there will be endless posts. One side will argue for “slavery was wrong” and “you can’t secede from the Union”. The other side will counter with “it was about states rights” and “secession is legal and Constitutional”.
Right, wrong or indifferent, slavery was legal and settled law. The Yankee government had NO right whatsoever in telling the states they could not have slaves.
It would be like forcing citizens to buy health insurance.
Me too. I think that is why more has been written about the US "Civil War" than any other war in history.
R.E.L. was an honest and respected man. My favorite quote that helped me with my kids. "Never do a wrong thing to make or keep a friend."
This is inaccurate on several levels.
Julia Grant lived in MO. All slaves in MO were freed on Jan. 11, 1865.
Julia Grant often spoke of "her" slaves, a gift from her father, but the records are unclear whether legal title was ever transferred.
There were NO slaves left in America in 1866. 13A freed the last ones, about 50k in KY and a few hundred in DE, in December of 1865.
Grant owned one slave in his lifetime. He freed him before the war, at a time when his family was in desperate financial trouble, and the slave could have been sold for the equivalent today of tens of thousands of dollars.
Criticisms of Grant for hypocrisy on the slavery issue fall apart in every direction.
The Mexican War began in 1848.
Unfortunately it wasn't so much the fed telling southerners what they could and couldn't own - or do with their property - as it was the southern slavers who demanded that the rest of the country toe the line in tacit acceptance of the Particular Institution.
It would be like forcing citizens to buy health insurance.
No, it would be like fags coming into your state and forcing you to accept their "marriages".
Never have understood supposed conservatives and constitutionalists presenting this as an argument to supposedly invalidate Lincoln's election.
He won a considerable majority of the Electoral College, the mechanism set up by the Constitution to elect the President. His popular vote percentage is comprehensively irrelevant.
He would have won the election even if his opponents had fused behind a single slate of anti-Lincoln electors.
Apparently, if the Constitution and its mechanisms don't produce the results you want, it's okay to take your ball and go home.
And please educate those here that think otherwise... who was it exactly in Africa that sold these slaves to the slave traders? Who was the first American to ever sue in court to be able to own another human being? What race was that man?
I hate slavery... it should never have been allowed in the US. I am Southern and a direct descendent of Jefferson Davis... and I wish slavery had never been allowed in the colonies... especially after we threw off the chains of king george. White boys should have picked their own damned cotton.
I think the USA was a different entity back then. As I recall when Lee was asked if he would accept the Union Army commander position, his reply was, “I cannot go against Virgina”. Loyalty back then was much more state than union oriented,
I think it is difficult for us to understand the political/social situation on the ground back then. Was the civil war ultimately about Slavery? Ultimately yes, though it is somewhat convoluted.
Would the men who died for the Confederacy have sacrificed their lives solely for the institution of Slavery? I doubt it. I think there was enough convoluted issues back then for a soldier to be for the South but neutral or against slavery.
Obviously we’re going to disagree on this point.
But it seems to me a man given no choice except to violate one of his two allegiances can act honorably whichever he chooses.
There were, of course, men on both sides who chose sides for opportunistic or other dishonorable reasons, but there is zero evidence that Lee was among them.
In fact, I believe there is good evidence he fully understood the South was likely to lose. This is evidenced by, among other evidence, his understanding that the only way for the South to win, once foreign intervention became impossible, was to go forth and conquer a peace. Defensive strategy could lead, in the end, to nothing but a delayed defeat.
Robert E. Lee was a true American hero.
If only we had one to lead us today with the courage and dignity this gentleman displayed.
These statist fools believe that the Civil War was about slavery. Even Lincoln wasn’t in favor of freeing them.
It’s just too damned bad the planters of the south didn’t utter these five words:
LET’S PICK OUR OWN COTTON!
Seward wanted to return ALL negroes back to Africa and he almost got the support to do it.
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.