re: Donald Trump: Robert E. Lee was a great General, Lincoln had a phobia he couldn't beat Lee

quote:

---

This is all factually correct, Lee kept crushing every general Lincoln illegally sent south till Grant.

---

Lee turned invader and spurred on the single bloodiest day in American history at Antietam all because his Op orders were found wrapped in tobacco left behind in a field. He was fought to a draw that Lincoln called a win and changed the complexion of the war making it about slavery by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation.

Lee invaded again and bled the Army of Northern Virginia white at Gettysburg because the legendary J.E.B. Stuart sought to embellish his previously untarnished reputation and Lee stubbornly refused to listen to his able subordinate James Longstreet who advised him to reposition his Army on more favorable ground between Meade's Army of the Potomac and Washington.

Whether Lee was tired and sick of the slaughter or was just obstinate doesn't matter. In hindsight it was poor generalship on his part at Gettysburg and worse politics by Confederate civilian leaders for invading in the first place.

The invasions compromised the South's pristine claims as the offended and invaded party, resulted in irreplaceable losses and led to the extended horror of a seemingly endless succession of Federal flanking engagements, Cold Harbor being probably the worst of them.

Lee was an honorable man swept up in events vexing to the soul of any man. His lieutenants contributed greatly to his reputation as a great general as much as did the inferiority of the succession of Federal generals facing him prior to Antietam. That said McClellan fought Lee to a draw at Antietam and Meade whipped him at Gettysburg, not Grant.

During the closing months of the war, Grant (and his subordinates) had industrial might and bottomless replacements to fight a gruesome war of attrition. As Lincoln said, Grant knew the arithmetic. Arithmetic Lincoln knew as well and approved.

The only thing I admire Grant for is his deathbed completion of his memoir to care for his family upon his death.

I hardly think of Lincoln at all.
In his mind he needed to be a
demi-dictator to hold the Republic together and became one. Whatever his intentions on post war conciliation, the monstrous anti-Constitutional federal bureaucracy strangling our liberties is in some measure Lincoln's legacy.

Wow. What utter bullshite. Tell me, which side fired the first shot?

LOL

quote:

---

It would be one sided to say the war described above was over coffee just as it is one sided to say the civil war was over slavery.

---

You can't compare coffee to slavery, dude. The South's entire economy was based around it. To lose it before they were ready to lose it would mean economic ruin. Hence why they reacted the way they did and seceded as soon as an anti-slavery candidate won the White House.

quote:

---

It doesn't matter why the states wanted to secede only that they had the right to do it.

---

The Civil War proved once and for all they didn't have a right to secede. Hence why I laugh at those who say war doesn't solve anything.

quote:

---

It would be like asking us today to go communist and relinquish private property.

You can expect a negative reaction.

---

Except the Republicans weren't asking or forcing the South to relinquish all of their property. In 1860, abolitionists made up a very small percentage of Republicans and were considered radicals by members of their own party. Lincoln was a conservative Republican who, while no fan of slavery, never intended to abolish it.

Lincoln's sole goal was to limit the institution's expansion and keep it contained to the Deep South. But southerners believed the restriction of slavery's expansion would mean the death of slavery itself. The only way the institution and their economy could survive is if it was allowed to expand into the western territories.

If slavery was not allowed to expand, the South would lose its hold on power in the Senate and would eventually lose what they deemed as fair representation in Washington. Free states would be able to dictate to the South through legislation whatever they felt like, thus marginalizing the entire region. That was their thought process anyway.

quote:

---

The Civil War proved once and for all they didn't have a right to secede. Hence why I laugh at those who say war doesn't solve anything.

---

The first 3 bills Lincoln tried to push through all had to do with making secession illegal. Jefferson Davis sat in jail for years before being released and was never put on trial because they had the right to secede. Also, where do you believe your rights come from? Government gains its power from the people, it can't also give the people their rights. Lincoln did not send troops south because the slaves deserved liberty. As you pointed out, Lincoln sent troops south to end the states right to secede. War was the worst possible option to end slavery but the only way to stop secession. The Constitution should read "We the States" but instead of listing all the states, plus not knowing which states would ratify they used "we the people". It is an agreement between the states and the federal gment. They loved their liberty back then and never would've joined if they couldn't leave

quote:

---

Even in Confederate tactical victories you will find casualties were normaly roughly equal, attacking fortified positions usually lead to at least a 3-1 casualty rate, a pre-1863 confederacy could have been strong enough to overcome the manpower advantage if it is willing to fight a war of attrition.

---

Nah...they were always going to be out of bodies, money and morale.

They chose to try and end it quickly and sue for peace because Lee knew they couldn't win shite if it lasted too long. And it lasted about the average of all major wars.

Which was WAY too long for the South. The blockades, the trade wars and the Confederate money that became utterly worthless.

US could have said frick you even if they were to lose battle after battle for 5 more years...they weren't going to sign any peace treaty...it is so absurd a notion that anyone would accept that after all the country had lost to preserve it...oh, lets forget the last 4 years and lets have this hostile neighbor with funny money on our soil.

And that South wasn't strong enough to ever ever ever FORCE the north to sign such a ridiculous treaty and resolution...their only hope was the US had no more taste for war and was like frick it...they will come crawling back in 50 years when the entire globe no longer thinks slaves are such an awesome idea to form the basis of a currency and GNP.