Well, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. Monument Avenue to be destroyed
Page 1 of 11 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 45 of 479

Thread: Well, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. Monument Avenue to be destroyed

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default Well, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. Monument Avenue to be destroyed

    https://www.nbc29.com/2020/06/04/liv...-restrictions/

    It is a beautiful place and it will be stolen from future generations.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    Hard to understand the mentality that wants this....its as if they are trying to deny,and re-write,history.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Beach Va, not Va Beach
    Posts
    46,449

    Default

    Absolutely stupid,

    I was born in the now closed hospital at the east end of monument,

    The stupidity if the folks in charge know no limits,
    Destroying something that they should be capitalizing for tourist $$$$




    Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
    what's so funny about peace love and understanding?

  4. Remove Advertisements
    GunBoards.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    3,533

    Default

    What a pathetic mind set to have, but increasingly common amongst our spoiled generations.

  6. #5

    Default

    What is the real goal to accomplish of all this stupidity in the first place that will do any good ??

  7. #6

    Default

    I see both sides in the matter. Without diving again into the dirty swamp of what started the Civil War, we shouldn't be venerating someone on the wrong side of slavery. On the other hand, he was an honorable man in his own way. I'd think something a little more graceful would be a better response, like putting a statue of Martin Luther King standing right in front of him, looking right at him in defiance. Or maybe Frederick Douglas.
    Turning relics into near-relics since 2005.

  8. #7
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is online now Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    93,036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Murvihill View Post
    I see both sides in the matter. Without diving again into the dirty swamp of what started the Civil War, we shouldn't be venerating someone on the wrong side of slavery. On the other hand, he was an honorable man in his own way. I'd think something a little more graceful would be a better response, like putting a statue of Martin Luther King standing right in front of him, looking right at him in defiance. Or maybe Frederick Douglas.
    Before you say that, should probably read Lee's comments on the system. His main failing, if that is the right word, is he couldn't see a way to end it. When I look at our (USA) history and economics - neither do I. Not one that a significant part of the populace would find acceptable.
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Murvihill View Post
    I see both sides in the matter. Without diving again into the dirty swamp of what started the Civil War, we shouldn't be venerating someone on the wrong side of slavery. On the other hand, he was an honorable man in his own way. I'd think something a little more graceful would be a better response, like putting a statue of Martin Luther King standing right in front of him, looking right at him in defiance. Or maybe Frederick Douglas.
    The statue is over 120 years old and in this country, for good or bad, we venerate many men who were on the wrong side of slavery; Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Henry etc. One would hope that the educated man could place our forefathers in context and acknowledge that what may have been acceptable in their time is no longer but that does not justify destruction of their monuments.
    The U.K. still has Nelson’s Column, as they should and he too was on the wrong side of slavery.
    Tearing down our history is only evidence that the ill-educated and gutless are taking control. If we tear down everything that someone might be offended by we would have zero statues, zero public art....nothing.
    We become little different from those who destroy the Buddhas of Batman or the city of Palmyra.
    The statues and the Avenue should be left alone.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    39,398

    Default

    "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."
    —Abraham Lincoln Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural address closing statement.

    The full should be read in its entirey. (IMO.) https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln2.asp
    "Don't you have anything better to do than to troll gunboards"? Mauserboy48

    "But broadly accurate, probably." Clyde

    -produced by- Shameless Self-Promotions Inc. All rights reserved

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caerlonie View Post
    Hard to understand the mentality that wants this....its as if they are trying to deny,and re-write,history.
    My understanding is that many of these statues were build decades after the war with an intent to show that the confederacy was still "alive" in a way. If it was built around the time of the war, I think it should either stay, or be moved. I probably wouldn't keep it in front of government buildings though.

    If it was built later on with racist intent, I think they aught to go into museums or something. I think those are good compromises to keep history but not destroy it. I'm completely 1000% against destroying them. In fact, if we applied those same standards to ancient Greece, the Roman Empire and so on, we'd have to tear down the entirety of the world, really.

  12. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    3,533

    Default

    A similar proposition was made some years ago in respect of Cecil Rhodes at a College in Oxford, fortunately sense prevailed.
    History is full of lumps and bumps. Do these people think of Greece as being the cradle of Democracy and ignore that it was based on a slave owning society, as was Rome, etc?

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooinek View Post
    The statue is over 120 years old and in this country, for good or bad, we venerate many men who were on the wrong side of slavery; Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Henry etc. One would hope that the educated man could place our forefathers in context and acknowledge that what may have been acceptable in their time is no longer but that does not justify destruction of their monuments.
    The U.K. still has Nelson’s Column, as they should and he too was on the wrong side of slavery.
    Tearing down our history is only evidence that the ill-educated and gutless are taking control. If we tear down everything that someone might be offended by we would have zero statues, zero public art....nothing.
    We become little different from those who destroy the Buddhas of Batman or the city of Palmyra.
    The statues and the Avenue should be left alone.
    I agree with you. I can also see how an African-American who walks by that statue everyday could see it as a monument to slavery. Maybe Richmond should be looking for a compromise solution rather than "Keep it up/tear it down", like moving the statue to a neighborhood that wants it, a Confederate graveyard or my first proposal. With today's vitriol in political discourse I don't see how a middle ground could be achieved. It's sad all the way around.
    Turning relics into near-relics since 2005.

  14. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by staffy View Post
    A similar proposition was made some years ago in respect of Cecil Rhodes at a College in Oxford, fortunately sense prevailed.
    The Zulu tradition is that a commoner mustn't kill anyone of royal blood. Rhodes's grave, and I believe Jameson's nearby, is in a remote and unguarded spot, the View of the World, in the Matopo Hills. It was never desecrated, or at least nothing that wouldn't wash off, in the course of the Rhodesian war. Similarly although there was a good deal of terrorism (or whatever you call it) in South Africa before it changed, and since, there appears to have been a genuine aversion to the assassination of leading politicians. Just compare it with Pakistan and Bangladesh.

    Rhodes was in some ways an unlikeable character, and an implacable foe. But one of his saving graces was that he always tried to spare the feelings of a defeated enemy. He got Barney Barnato into he Kimberley Club, its first Jewish member. I doubt if he would have done that for Lobengula if he had lived, but he would have done something.

  15. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    800

    Default

    Not that much of an enthusiastic applause when the two speakers were done with their victory speech.

    Vote soliciting on the part of those two and no balls to argue their point on the part of others. They will be after the Jefferson monument next.

  16. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Murvihill View Post
    I agree with you. I can also see how an African-American who walks by that statue everyday could see it as a monument to slavery. Maybe Richmond should be looking for a compromise solution rather than "Keep it up/tear it down", like moving the statue to a neighborhood that wants it, a Confederate graveyard or my first proposal. With today's vitriol in political discourse I don't see how a middle ground could be achieved. It's sad all the way around.
    You can put anything up on private property, the issue is public property and public funds , so why doesn't somebody just buy some land , equally visible equally prominent , or even better some place ( the Tourism Thing) someplace they can sell tickets to see it ..

    Goes both ways .. some say it good to get tourist dollars .. an some don't want tourists like that messing up their town
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  17. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Beach Va, not Va Beach
    Posts
    46,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Murvihill View Post
    I agree with you. I can also see how an African-American who walks by that statue everyday could see it as a monument to slavery. Maybe Richmond should be looking for a compromise solution rather than "Keep it up/tear it down", like moving the statue to a neighborhood that wants it, a Confederate graveyard or my first proposal. With today's vitriol in political discourse I don't see how a middle ground could be achieved. It's sad all the way around.
    Monument Ave starts at Stuart Circle, and goes west beyond the Arthur Ashe monument,

    (as an Aside, the AA statue was added at the request of the locals who wanted a person of color on the avenue, and another recent statue was added, a few blocks down Arthur Ashe Boulevard (used to be just called The Boulevard) of a Black Man on a horse at the Va Museum of Fine Arts, which was considered a great thing and a sign of diversity etc,,,, however protesters broke into the UDC museum next door a week or so ago and tried to burn it up,)


    Monument Ave was, at the time the monuments were installed, one of the more pricey areas to live in RVA, still is,

    the East side is now on the edge of VCU, and a lot of the grand old homes have turned into apt's for the students,

    here is what chaps me in the wrong places, and saying this as a life long resident of the metro area,


    other towns, such as Charleston SC, have managed to tap into the potential $$$ available thru the tourist trade,

    Richmond, instead of following Charleston's example, and using the history both as educational and as a tourist destination, has been too busy since the 60's if not before, shooting itself in the foot over most things historical, as in whoa is me, I am offended, my peoples were soo oppressed,
    while they could have made a few changes, did a few things to promote the history and support the areas,,

    we were the Capitol of the Confederacy, and have the White House of the Confederacy here, yet the City has allowed VCU to all but engulf it, (the MOC has been moved mostly to Appomattox)

    we have Rev War history, some minor 1812 history, and Civil War history,
    Petersburg (crater , and a major shipping hub) just south,
    more than a handful of battles fought in the immediate area,
    slave trade in Shokoe Bottom,
    Poe lived here a bit, and his mother is buried here,
    St John's,
    one of if not the oldest Jewish Cemetery's,
    Tredegar Iron Works,

    etc
    etc

    yet the powers that be would rather spend a few dollars to half ass something historical vs spend some $$ and use it to capitalize the history and tourist industry, (and the resulting $$$ it brings in)
    (looking at the pitiful stuff they did with Lumpkin's jail and the site the Slaves were auctioned at, )


    the Cities leadership would rather spend time crying and being butt hurt instead of actually doing something constructive, and following the path Charleston and other cities (Savannah Ga comes to mind as well) to promote the history, and profit from it,



    but, we are still considered in the South, so there is that stigma, and we are close to DC and Baltimore, so we get that mentality in our elected officials as well,
    what's so funny about peace love and understanding?

  18. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Beach Va, not Va Beach
    Posts
    46,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by collectR View Post
    Not that much of an enthusiastic applause when the two speakers were done with their victory speech.

    Vote soliciting on the part of those two and no balls to argue their point on the part of others. They will be after the Jefferson monument next.
    No Sir,

    all will be removed,

    the argument is that there is law on the books that says they cannot, until July 1, when the new laws from the past session go in effect,

    the Lee statue is owned , iirc, by the state, the rest by the city,

    all are on the Registry of Historic Places, but that will not matter




    FWIW, Davis is buried not too far away in Hollywood Cemetery

    https://www.hollywoodcemetery.org/visit/things-to-see
    what's so funny about peace love and understanding?

  19. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by staffy View Post
    A similar proposition was made some years ago in respect of Cecil Rhodes at a College in Oxford, fortunately sense prevailed.
    Alas, it did not prevail in South Africa with the vandalism and ultimate removal of his statue from the University of Cape Town. This despite the fact that much of the university sits on land which, as the university’s own web site says “ In 1928, the university was able to move the bulk of its facilities to the magnificent site at Groote Schuur on the slopes of Devil's Peak. It was here, on land bequeathed to the nation by Cecil John Rhodes as the site for a national university, that UCT celebrated its centenary the following year.”

    ...but then again one of the twits advocating for the removal of the statue in Oxford was a Rhodes Scholar! This demonstrating once again the absolute lack of basic decorum amongst those who know little of history and desperately hunt for a reason to be offended.


    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32236922
    Last edited by Rooinek; 06-07-2020 at 10:44 AM.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  20. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    .....and more examples of sheer lunacy.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...ed-in-richmond

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-52955868

    It is not only in the States that we see this but the UK too.

    Where does it stop?
    Last edited by Rooinek; 06-07-2020 at 03:38 PM.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  21. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nassaulakes View Post
    "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."
    —Abraham Lincoln Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural address closing statement.

    The full should be read in its entirey. (IMO.) https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln2.asp
    Might have actually gone that way if the traitors hadn't assassinated Him, and got Johnson, that very much wanted a punitive and "Hard Peace" brought it on themselves, probably hardened the attitudes of the folks they tried to assassinate that survived .. gave Southern "Gentlemen" a bad name and destroyed any charity or trust.

    Surrendered and gave their parole and went right back to killing folks, and abandoned all Honor.

    To say nothing of ratifying the 13th, 14th, 15th Amendments with no intention of enacting them in practice, so no Honor or even keeping their word there .. and they want respect? they didn't earn when alive, they were liars and traitors. Murdered their countrymen, violated their oaths , they earned shame and damnation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thomas Jefferson.
    Last edited by AmmoSgt; 06-07-2020 at 06:54 PM.
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  22. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,879

    Default

    Rhodes died childless, for reasons on which conjecture is rife, and went where he couldn't take Groote Schuur with him. The common perception is that Groote Schuur amounted to having his fingers in the till on a grand scale, and it was quite a while before black people could get into that university, or be a Rhodes scholar. Neither is quite the whole truth. Fort Hare University was a college of the university for black students from very early on. Rhodes scholarships were originally limited to citizens of the British Empire, America and Germany. The avowed intention was to further the union of the English-speaking peoples and promote world peace, which suggests that Rhodes had a pretty sharp eye on Germany in 1902. But he laid down that no applicant (for the scholarship) could be refused on grounds of race or religious opinions. The trouble was, scholarships went to people who had gone a considerable distance in education already.

    The question has to be "Why Lee?", and the most likely explanation is that he is the one that would hurt the most. There must be statue somewhere that honour Nathan Bedford Forrest, who although a first-class largely instinctive soldier like Smuts or Ahmad Shah Massoud, was a slave-trader first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, and approximately as debatable responsibility for the Fort Pillow massacre as Yamashita in the Philippines. It is doubtful whether subordinates would have permitted a massacre with Lee or Rommel in the vicinity. Dan Sickles, who pioneered the murder defence of insanity, claimed to be temporary, would be a fairly removable statue if he had rated having one.

    Armies have shifted into strategy by staffwork, and we have surely seen the last of high command being a matter of one man seeing into the mind of one other. I long ago thought Lee was the first and last American general who could have faced up to Napoleon on a good day. I wouldn't expect that to matter much to the statue-removers, but Lee saw the end of slavery as the right way forward, He doesn't appear to have been quite the abolitionist some claim. He didn't free his slaves for sometime after inheriting his rather run-down plantation, and there are allegations that he had slaves flogged for taking advantage of his leniency. But what would collapse of the business have brought them? I could imagine him being pretty much like a West Indies plantation owner of his mature years, not the beginning of the century but later, when they had realised that keeping free workers tolerably happy was a pretty good deal for them. The unbearable flatulence of claiming that plantation slaves were better off than industrial slum-dwellers in the north, becomes fair enough when they had the choice.

    Still, what is a little misinformation, bigotry and ignorance as a self-inflicted wound in the present situation?

    In the UK the demonstrations have been predominantly peaceful, with violence or vandalism by small minorities. In Bristol the statue of a seventeenth century slave-dealer on a rather grand scale has been torn down by demonstrators. Whatever he did, he isn't doing it any more, and he did leave his huge wealth to charities from which many still benefit. it is a very different case from official removal, and may even cut some ground from under the years of call for that to be done. It might be the culprits' bad luck that it took place at the same time as Churchill's statue in Parliament Square was defaced, to the tune of a spray-painted slogan on the plinth below, and a small sign taped to the Churchillian abdomen. Unfortunately it would be counterproductive to invoke the power the police have, to ban the wearing of face-coverings in specified areas.

    Come to think of it, Smuts and his friend and enemy Gandhi are up there in Parliament Square beside Churchill. Cromwell is rather closer to the Parliament he empowered forever, and Washington is a bit further away, but still impressive. If Michael Collins had survived Irish politics to join SOE in WW2 he might have been there too. These things are decided in circles where it isn't quite the thing to resent people who shoot at you. It looks too much like playing to win.

  23. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,318

    Default

    That business in Bristol looked decidedly unpeaceful......little more than vandalism.These men were products of their time and its ridiculous to judge them by modern attitudes and values.

  24. #23
    Clyde's Avatar
    Clyde is online now Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    93,036

    Default

    Caledonian notes "Armies have shifted into strategy by staffwork, and we have surely seen the last of high command being a matter of one man seeing into the mind of one other. I long ago thought Lee was the first and last American general who could have faced up to Napoleon on a good day. I wouldn't expect that to matter much to the statue-removers, but Lee saw the end of slavery as the right way forward, He doesn't appear to have been quite the abolitionist some claim. He didn't free his slaves for sometime after inheriting his rather run-down plantation, and there are allegations that he had slaves flogged for taking advantage of his leniency. But what would collapse of the business have brought them? I could imagine him being pretty much like a West Indies plantation owner of his mature years, not the beginning of the century but later, when they had realised that keeping free workers tolerably happy was a pretty good deal for them. The unbearable flatulence of claiming that plantation slaves were better off than industrial slum-dwellers in the north, becomes fair enough when they had the choice."

    He rather confuses history with ideology I think.

    Lee inherited NO plantations, though apparently he did inherit a few old (by then) slaves when his mother died - they had been hers, and he got them. Have never found out what happened to them, but manumitting them would have been no kindness at that point. No indication he mistreated them I have ever found. The "run-down plantation" mentioned is, I presume Arlington. Belonged to his father-in-law Jackie Custis, step-son of George Washington. The slaves were the inheritance of Lee's wife (as was Arlington). Lee was executor and the will provided that the slaves were to be freed when the debts of the estate were paid or (memory says five years) a fixed period of time had passed, whichever came first. Severe indebtedness (Jackie Custis was a most improvident man and poor business man generally) made immediate freedom (legally) impossible, and the War intervened before the time had run. The Custis slaves didn't seem to understand the rules, or didn't like them, and were a troublesome lot. There were run-aways and intransigent refusals to work, leading to Lee having to hire the services of the Sheriff or Constable to whip some. His correspondence makes it clear he saw no alternative - and that he was seriously bothered by refusals to obey lawful orders and perform needed work. Seems he thought when you got an order, you were supposed to obey...

    Lee, in accordance with law, resigned his commission when his state "went out". He wasn't happy, but thought that is what he needed to do.

    As best I can tell, Lee wasn't an "Abolitionist" as generally understood. But he was of the opinion that slavery was a bad thing for all involved and it would be a good thing if a way past it could be found. I feel sure he would have embraced a system of compensated abolition, but neither the Yankee villains who had gotten rich on buying slaves and running them into the US when that was legal nor Southern planation owners could see a way to make that work. Especially the Yankee money-men who might expect to have to help pay...
    Absent comrades (sound of breaking glass)

  25. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Clyde a lot of traitors didn't have slaves .. but they killed loyal Americans by the thousands to preserve white supremacy/ racism/ break up the union/ and slavery all the same. Read any of the articles of Secession or the arguments in favor that Southern traitors made at the time .. they even claimed it was backed by the Bible and Christianity those were some sick sadistic b#$tards, all because they wanted to preserve how they made their money
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  26. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Beach Va, not Va Beach
    Posts
    46,449

    Default

    Why Lee?

    as in why remove the statue or why was it put up?


    he is a Virginian, served the country well and served his State as well as the Confederacy well after the succession,

    traitor is a bit harsh Ammo, he , and all those that fought, on both sides, are considered US Veterans


    his statue is the only one owned by the State of Virginia, the rest are City property
    what's so funny about peace love and understanding?

  27. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    3,533

    Default

    I think you are being a bit harsh in calling Southerners traitors. So far as i'm aware they had a difference on the question of State rights v Federal powers, still in play today.
    It caused mayhem in families, between lifelong friends and perceived loyalty to their places of birth.
    As you say, many who fought for the South never had slaves, so we have to look for other motivations for the reasons why the choice was made.

  28. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    Clyde a lot of traitors didn't have slaves .. but they killed loyal Americans
    Just to be sure I understand your logic.

    According to you Washington, Franklin, Adams, Paine, Madison et al were traitors? They were, after all, loyal to the colonies and as such were traitors to the legitimate government that ruled the 13 Colonies.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  29. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Beach Va, not Va Beach
    Posts
    46,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by staffy View Post
    I think you are being a bit harsh in calling Southerners traitors. So far as i'm aware they had a difference on the question of State rights v Federal powers, still in play today.
    It caused mayhem in families, between lifelong friends and perceived loyalty to their places of birth.
    As you say, many who fought for the South never had slaves, so we have to look for other motivations for the reasons why the choice was made.
    glad to see someone studied history and gets it,


    that is exactly what I was taught in Grade school history , (45-50 yrs ago)
    what's so funny about peace love and understanding?

  30. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyman1903 View Post
    Why Lee?

    as in why remove the statue or why was it put up?


    he is a Virginian, served the country well and served his State as well as the Confederacy well after the succession,

    traitor is a bit harsh Ammo, he , and all those that fought, on both sides, are considered US Veterans


    his statue is the only one owned by the State of Virginia, the rest are City property
    Not exactly https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/co...iers-veterans/ they get headstones and it was passed when only 1 confederate soldier remained alive more as a graveyard maintenance deal , with maybe a touch of reconciliation and it made a lot of Confederate Families mad that their dead were being compared to Union Soldiers. As can be expected there is a lot of stolen valor by confederates pretending they were somehow honorable ,, funny In fact the last surviving "confederate" solider who died in 1959 was a total fraud and never served at all.. typical of confederate honor, it's myth. Traitor is harsh? tell Webster and amend the US Constitution

    Article III, section 3 of the U. S. Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." But confederates and their supporters lie about that to well it was just "a states rights thing" ( they never even saw it as possibly a HUMAN rights thing because they didn't see slaves as Humans and anybody that perpetuates that myth is saying the same thing) Have you ever read the voted on and passed articles of secession from the various states that turned traitor ? you really should, they are quite clear it's about slavery.

    If folks are such big fans of history, why do you make up lies and myths and not just go with the actual true on the record history? And if the battle Flag is somehow Honorable why is it used at lynching , killings, church burnings, and to celebrate segregation like they did on school admissions or is all that somehow Honorable?

    each State clearly stated why they were seceding when they did , and voted on it as their official reasons. The BS reasons only came after they lost, and usually by clowns complaining about revisionist history out of their other face.
    Last edited by AmmoSgt; 06-08-2020 at 07:09 PM.
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  31. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post

    In fact the last surviving "confederate" solider who died in 1959 was a total fraud and never served at all.. typical of confederate honor, it's myth.

    If folks are such big fans of history, why do you make up lies and myths and not just go with the actual true on the record history?
    Tarring the Confederate Army because an old man lied about service has about as much logic as tarring the US Army because of Pvt Manning or Bergdahl.

    Both are utterly illogical.

    ....and yes I know my history.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  32. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooinek View Post
    Tarring the Confederate Army because an old man lied about service has about as much logic as tarring the US Army because of Pvt Manning or Bergdahl.

    Both are utterly illogical.

    ....and yes I know my history.
    you do? really ? and you are prepared to say only one guy lied about his service.. I think if you scratch the surface you will find as many lied as deserted.

    The total number of Confederate deserters was officially 103,400. Desertion was a major factor for the Confederacy in the last two years of the war. According to Mark A. Weitz Confederate soldiers fought to defend their families, not a nation. and you are saying they all told the truth and I'm basing my statement on one lone fake. Okaaay

    and they did such a good job of adhering to their parole oaths

    they are all "honorable " men by confederate standards
    Last edited by AmmoSgt; 06-08-2020 at 07:25 PM.
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  33. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Beach Va, not Va Beach
    Posts
    46,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    Not exactly https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/co...iers-veterans/ they get headstones and it was passed when only 1 confederate soldier remained alive more as a graveyard maintenance deal , with maybe a touch of reconciliation and it made a lot of Confederate Families mad that their dead were being compared to Union Soldiers. As can be expected there is a lot of stolen valor by confederates pretending they were somehow honorable ,, funny In fact the last surviving "confederate" solider who died in 1959 was a total fraud and never served at all.. typical of confederate honor, it's myth. Traitor is harsh? tell Webster and amend the US Constitution

    Article III, section 3 of the U. S. Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." But confederates and their supporters lie about that to well it was just "a states rights thing" ( they never even saw it as possibly a HUMAN rights thing because they didn't see slaves as Humans and anybody that perpetuates that myth is saying the same thing) Have you ever read the voted on and passed articles of secession from the various states that turned traitor ? you really should, they are quite clear it's about slavery.

    If folks are such big fans of history, why do you make up lies and myths and not just go with the actual true on the record history? And if the battle Flag is somehow Honorable why is it used at lynching , killings, church burnings, and to celebrate segregation like they did on school admissions or is all that somehow Honorable?

    each State clearly stated why they were seceding when they did , and voted on it as their official reasons. The BS reasons only came after they lost, and usually by clowns complaining about revisionist history out of their other face.
    https://www.truthorfiction.com/confe...r-federal-law/


    It’s true that Union and Confederate soldiers are considered U.S. veterans under federal law, and that they would be entitled to the same benefits as Union soldiers today.
    what's so funny about peace love and understanding?

  34. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    you do? really and you are prepared to say only one guy lied about his service.. I think if you scratch the service you will find as many lied as deserted.
    Yes I do know history but your argument is illogical. Did many Confederates lie, of course who said they did not? Did Confederates desert? Yes. Did Union troops desert? Yes. Did a Union troops lie? Yes.
    Would you like to speak about Union behavior in the occupation of Fredericksburg? Outrageous but even that does not tar the entire Union Army.

    Is the Army to be tarred, en masse, because of Manning.
    The Marines because of Lonetree.

    A man lied so what? You are hanging your logic on nothing.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  35. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lyman1903 View Post
    https://www.truthorfiction.com/confe...r-federal-law/


    It’s true that Union and Confederate soldiers are considered U.S. veterans under federal law, and that they would be entitled to the same benefits as Union soldiers today.
    well you know what benefits a deserter gets

    you have to serve Honorably and nobody , it seems can find that law

    https://uscode.house.gov/statutes/pl/85/810.pdf

    intercostal waterways ?? really ? find something different
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  36. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooinek View Post
    Yes I do know history but your argument is illogical. Did many Confederates lie, of course who said they did not? Did Confederates desert? Yes. Did Union troops desert? Yes. Did a Union troops lie? Yes.
    Would you like to speak about Union behavior in the occupation of Fredericksburg? Outrageous but even that does not tar the entire Union Army.

    Is the Army to be tarred, en masse, because of Manning.
    The Marines because of Lonetree.

    A man lied so what? You are hanging your logic on nothing.
    Union deserters got tried confederate deserters lied
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  37. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    'Merca.
    Posts
    24,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    Not exactly https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/co...iers-veterans/ they get headstones and it was passed when only 1 confederate soldier remained alive more as a graveyard maintenance deal , with maybe a touch of reconciliation and it made a lot of Confederate Families mad that their dead were being compared to Union Soldiers. As can be expected there is a lot of stolen valor by confederates pretending they were somehow honorable ,, funny In fact the last surviving "confederate" solider who died in 1959 was a total fraud and never served at all.. typical of confederate honor, it's myth. Traitor is harsh? tell Webster and amend the US Constitution

    Article III, section 3 of the U. S. Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." But confederates and their supporters lie about that to well it was just "a states rights thing" ( they never even saw it as possibly a HUMAN rights thing because they didn't see slaves as Humans and anybody that perpetuates that myth is saying the same thing) Have you ever read the voted on and passed articles of secession from the various states that turned traitor ? you really should, they are quite clear it's about slavery.

    If folks are such big fans of history, why do you make up lies and myths and not just go with the actual true on the record history? And if the battle Flag is somehow Honorable why is it used at lynching , killings, church burnings, and to celebrate segregation like they did on school admissions or is all that somehow Honorable?

    each State clearly stated why they were seceding when they did , and voted on it as their official reasons. The BS reasons only came after they lost, and usually by clowns complaining about revisionist history out of their other face.
    Ammosarge, this is too much. You should be ashamed. And shunned.
    You remain marginally disappointing. Nevertheless, I still like you ... not a lot, but I like you ....

  38. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    Union deserters got tried confederate deserters lied
    What are you talking about???


    https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org..._the_civil_war

    The first executions for desertion in the Army of Northern Virginia took place at Mount Pisgah Church on August 19, 1862, when three men of Brigadier General William B. Taliaferro's division and two from Brigadier General Jubal A. Early's division—all from the Shenandoah Valley or from the counties of what is now West Virginia—were shot by firing squad under orders from Lieutenant General Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson. As Colonel Samuel Bassett French, Jackson's aide, wrote, "the preservation of the army itself was dependent on the maintenance of discipline, and discipline could not be had if desertions were longer to go unpunished."
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  39. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by limpetmine View Post
    Ammosarge, this is too much. You should be ashamed. And shunned.
    you do whatever you want won't change the truth amend the Construction revise History what ever you need to do

    That's why I call all this BS a myth .. not my fault you believe it
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  40. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooinek View Post
    What are you talking about???


    https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org..._the_civil_war

    The first executions for desertion in the Army of Northern Virginia took place at Mount Pisgah Church on August 19, 1862, when three men of Brigadier General William B. Taliaferro's division and two from Brigadier General Jubal A. Early's division—all from the Shenandoah Valley or from the counties of what is now West Virginia—were shot by firing squad under orders from Lieutenant General Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson. As Colonel Samuel Bassett French, Jackson's aide, wrote, "the preservation of the army itself was dependent on the maintenance of discipline, and discipline could not be had if desertions were longer to go unpunished."
    so you are saying they shot over 100,000 deserters .. that's discipline

    so why wasn't the Army maintained ? They guy was right let it go unpunished and the Army collapse , and it did.
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  41. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    so you are saying they shot over 100,000 deserters .. that's discipline.
    No I am simply stating that your argument is wholly bereft of logic.

    I said nothing about executing 100,000 deserters I just demonstrated that despite your “claims” the Confederacy did try deserters.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  42. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooinek View Post
    No I am simply stating that your argument is wholly bereft of logic.

    I said nothing about executing 100,000 deserters I just demonstrated that despite your “claims” the Confederacy did try deserters.
    and I'm saying after the war they were all honorable veterans

    get mad at me all you want .. I'm just pointing out who disgraced the confederate army and probably was a big reason that cost you the war.
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  43. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    and I'm saying after the war they were all honorable veterans

    I'm just pointing out who disgraced the confederate army and probably was a big reason that cost you the war.

    Cost me the War????? I have no connection, on either side to that war.

    As I student of military history I cannot deny the courage and honor of many who fought on BOTH sides. Similarly as a student of history I find the tearing down of monuments to put us in the same bucket as ISIS and the Talibs with regard to HISTORY. It is a outrage pure and simple.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

  44. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    Clyde a lot of traitors didn't have slaves .. but they killed loyal Americans by the thousands to preserve white supremacy/ racism/ break up the union/ and slavery all the same. Read any of the articles of Secession or the arguments in favor that Southern traitors made at the time .. they even claimed it was backed by the Bible and Christianity those were some sick sadistic b#$tards, all because they wanted to preserve how they made their money
    I think the preservation of slavery in the mid-nineteenth century was monstrously wrong, and I don't think, despite all that gets said about states' rights, the secession was about much besides that one, big, malodorous right. But it would be wrong to call those who fought for the South traitors in any convenventional or legal sense. The role of the US government as a paramount authority had grown considerably in the lifetimes of many then alive, and wasn't nearly as widely agreed as it later would be. Many, including Lee, were deeply tormented by the conflict of loyalties, before deciding that their prime duty was to their state. I don't think the old clichι of brother against brother was often true. Families usually went the same way. But it did what many would consider as bad, by splitting military units.

    it puzzles many that people fought for the Confederacy, and fought extremely well, who neither owned slaves or expected to. But a classical education was common in the Southern upper classes, and brought with it a knowledge of what slavery did to Rome. Slaves, sometimes rented-out slaves who hardly ever worked for their owners, did most of the manual work, while free plebeians turned into a largely unproductive class, kept sweet with bread and circuses. In the American South, manual workers were often undercut on wages by slaves, and thought of total emancipation as economic wipeout for them.

    Of course there were plantations which treated their slaves barbarously, and balanced out lasting power and maintenance costs as a factory would its machines. The common claim was that the new, very large factory-farming plantations in the southwest were much worse than those on the Atlantic coast. Equally there were plantation owners who prided themselves on knowing their slaves, and giving them a good life. Some never flogged anyone, and despised those who would have a field hand washed for the young master's recreation. Much has been made of the black Jeffersons, verified by DNA testing and acknowledged as family by the right-side-of-the-blanket descendants. But like a young executive and the typing pool, that.

    I am sure both sides executed deserters, with minimal formality in times of stress, but 100,000 is a wild and offensive guess. I am reminded of the writings of Lieutenant Spears, liaison officer with a French army, who became a personal friend of generals, and later himself a major-general and adviser to Churchill. He was particularly fond of General Maud'huy, although he considered him to have reached his limit at command of a division. At one point during the frightful strain of the 1914 great retreat, the general had to condemn a soldier for desertion when he may have been little more than a straggler, and found him in an extreme state of mental breakdown. The general explained politely and calmly that if the army broke down, their country would be lost. So he had to die, and for the good of the army he had to compose himself and go calmly to death, knowing that he served his country in so doing, as much as anyone could by dying in battle. The man went happily to death - well, just a little unhappily I suppose - and the army held toether until in due course Joffre saw the moment which Churchill had predicted as the fortieth day, years earlier.
    Last edited by Caledonian; 06-08-2020 at 08:33 PM.

  45. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    13,044

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooinek View Post
    Cost me the War????? I have no connection, on either side to that war.

    As I student of military history I cannot deny the courage and honor of many who fought on BOTH sides. Similarly as a student of history I find the tearing down of monuments to put us in the same bucket as ISIS and the Talibs with regard to HISTORY. It is a outrage pure and simple.
    Okay fine vote you conscience if you're eligible stay out of US politics if you aren't a citizen
    Three People to never believe

    A Religious Leader who tells you how to Vote

    A Politician who tells you how to Pray

    And

    A Draft Dodger who tells you how to be a Patriot

    And Smiling Bob

    Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country.”
    — PATRICK HENRY

    https://orders.stansberryresearch.co...T137955&page=1

  46. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmmoSgt View Post
    Okay fine vote you conscience if you're eligible stay out of US politics if you aren't a citizen


    You are crossing all sorts of lines, but I guess from the safety of a keyboard you can do that.

    I am a proud American, this is my country!

    My family just happens to have come over the pond in the years well after the war.
    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est

Page 1 of 11 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •