Yes, after the war, all was eventually forgiven, and nobody was tried as traitors.
But tell us, FRiend, which part of the word “treason” do you not understand?
/////////////
Well, FRiend, I will give you that Robert E. Lee, et al, were “traitors” to the US when you give me that George Washington, et al, were “traitors” to Great Britain.
We celebrate the right to secede from oppressive central Government.
In my view, the Confederates exercised precisely the same prerogative in choosing to secede from the Union that the original Thirteen Colonies did in choosing to secede from the King’s Realm.
Moreover, I have to ask you. What were the Yanks thinking when they actually FORGAVE a bunch of untrustworthy traitors? Answer? I honestly believe that down deep they knew these were no traitors. Subsequent history has borne out the wisdom of this decision (to drop any charges of treason).
Or, my short answer: Treason, my a$$.
I will give you that. Even though the actions of the Founders predates the definition of treason as laid out in the Constitution their actions would certainly have qualified as treason by anyone's definition.
In my view, the Confederates exercised precisely the same prerogative in choosing to secede from the Union that the original Thirteen Colonies did in choosing to secede from the King’s Realm.
And I'll grant you your view if you will identify the oppression that caused their secession. Unlike the Founders, who had no say in their government, the Southern states were represented in both houses of Congress, over-represented in the House. Southerners had held a disproportionate number of high level positions in Congress and the government. If the central government was indeed oppressive then the South played a large part in making it so. And replaced it with their own oppressive central government once they rebelled.
What were the Yanks thinking when they actually FORGAVE a bunch of untrustworthy traitors?
When you get right down to it, it was one Yankee who actually FORGAVE the South's acts of treason; Andrew Johnson. He issued three amnesty proclamations during his term which basically pardoned almost all the rebel leadership. He did this against the wishes of Congress, who were all out for a bunch of hangings. So your belief that "down deep they knew these were no traitors" is not supported by the facts.
There’s precious little comparison between the patriots of 1776 and the insurrectionists of 1861. But at least Washington had the integrity to acknowledge what he was doing was rebellion.
So what exactly is your problem, pal, in confessing that of course Washington & company were traitors to Great Britain.
What did you fantasize the Revolutionary War was all about -- a picnic in the park?
On signing the Declaration of Independence, Benjamin Franklin famously quipped:
Why else do you suppose they went through all the trouble of specifically defining "treason" in their new Constitution?
man_in_tx: "We celebrate the right to secede from oppressive central Government.
In my view, the Confederates exercised precisely the same prerogative in choosing to secede from the Union that the original Thirteen Colonies did in choosing to secede from the King’s Realm."
First, we certainly don't "celebrate" the unhappy necessity of sometimes waging war against powers whose continuing oppressions are unacceptable -- be it "taxation without representation" or military attacks on the US or allies.
But, regardless of Confederate myths the contrary, the two situations -- 1776 and 1860 -- were entirely different.
For example, the Declaration of Independence came after many years of a long train of abuses listed item by item, including:
man_in_tx: "Moreover, I have to ask you. What were the Yanks thinking when they actually FORGAVE a bunch of untrustworthy traitors? Answer?
I honestly believe that down deep they knew these were no traitors."
First of all, a certain Robert Kennedy was captured & hanged as a Confederate traitor in 1865, for his role in a plot to burn down much of New York City.
But nobody I know of who served in uniform was ever tried or hanged as a traitor.
Second, the issue was in doubt for several years, but was eventually decided by the magnanimity of leaders like Ulysses Grant and Tennessee-born President Andrew Johnson.
In Grant's eyes, his deal with Lee was: you surrender unconditionally, and there will be no military trials for treason.
Except in 1860 there was no oppressive central government from which to secede.
Washington, Hancock, Adams, Jefferson, were all faced with the fact that Britain had occupied Boston, and were starving the people there as their response to the Tea Party.
The government of Britain had begun the war, sending parties of soldiers in battalion strength in an attempt to capture citizens and steal colonial arms that were never the property of the English government.
There is no correspondence between 1860 and 1775. If you think there is, I can only recommend that you do some research.
I think the clear thinking GOP in the north...not the radicals.....
Figured making peace with the South was easier and less costly than subjugation
And the men who had actually fought in the war had no more stomach for it
Unlike the radicals who had endured the war at home
The Union commanders gave good terms in my view
Unlike the typical freeper of the NeoYankee brigade who I have seen occasion claim all slaveholding families in the South should have been hanged to a man woman or child and compare our ancestors to Nazis
Its not really about the history then its about something personal now