“He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbour without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile. He was a Caesar, without his ambition; Frederick, without his tyranny; Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward.”
Robert E. Lee was a great man and should serve as example for all of us. Some will agree with this statement while others will disagree. That’s okay. It’s That’s way with humans. I admire Lee tremendously, have read most all that has been written by him and about him. And nothing can deter me from the belief that he lived an exemplary life.
Geez. I am a Yankee (even though born in VA)and I respect and admire the memory of General Lee. By all accounts, he was all that he was made out to be, and more.
Eisenhower was a military man...I would fully understand that he, even being a Pennsylvanian, would admire and respect the man.
Traitor? No, just doing what he thought was right.
What irritated me more was seeing him played in “Gettysburg” by a Leftist dumbass like Martin Sheen.
THAT bothered me.
and they have a picture of Woodrow Wilson.
well that's it for me....I'm outta here.
The man helped to lead an armed revolution against the United States of America. Whatever his other qualities, I find that hard to respect. And yes I am a Southerner.
As a military man, Dwight Eisenhower respected the abilities of other military men. He was a great admirer of both Lee and Grant.
Ike’s image as avuncular and laid back is one that is refuted by his letters.
In many ways he was a conceited self promoter.
Never went to church before he got into the WH.
Appointed Earl Warren.
Polish Resettlement Act 1947 - wasn’t he also part of the betrayal of Poles who were sent back to the gulags?
At every chance, Eisenhower frustrated Patton from victory, Patton was victorious anyway.
Lee is not at all comparable to the Confederate leaders. Robert E. Lee was always opposed to slavery and freed his slaves long before the war. He was strongly opposed to secession, pointing out that the Confederate movement was an attempted revolution against the Revolution of 1776. He only agreed to fight for Virginia after she seceded. He was constantly at odds with the slavemaster Confederate leaders during the war and was never allowed to command more than his own Army of Northern Virginia until the final weeks of the war.
Slavery was dying out in the civilized world at that time anyway
I am NOT arguing in favor of slavery- you knee-jerkers just relax.
I am saying remove slavery from the equation and NOW ask yourself- Does the federal government have to ability to tell states what they can do?
If, instead of slavery, the south was fighting to prevent the federal government from forcing them to ..oh, I dunno..buy health insurance, for example.
Now whose side are you on? All the states at the time agreed to join the US union with the expectation they could withdraw if they disliked what the federal govt was doing
This sounds like communist garbage/liberalism. Not even going to waste one more second with this.
Funny...tempers STILL run hot over the Civil War.
As someone who was born in VA, raised around the world as a military brat, and came of age as a Yankee, I never thought much about the Civil War past the historical dates, battles and so on.
When I went in the US Navy, for the first time in my life I was called “Damn Yankee”!
That just FLOORED me! I had no idea.
Let’s keep it civil here folks, so we don’t have a war...:)
Okay, this northerner admires Robert E. Lee.
My question for you is, why are you spamming FR with blog excerpt after blog excerpt? You already spammed FR yesterday on the same topic. Maybe you could have piggybacked onto that same thread?
Given the juvenile nature of your posting which consist of an over reliance on ad homine attacks and emotional statements of opinion present as "fact", it is impossible for anything think adult mind to to take your ignorant rants seriously
You are in way way way over your competency level on this issue.
Nice you have feelings, unfortunately for you feelings are not facts. Learn the difference.
Slavery was the “irreconcilable difference” that split the North and the South. All the other issues could of been resolved through the political process in place. To ignore that basic fact in an attempt to rewrite history to fit a current political doctrine is silly. That slavery was the root cause of the US Civil War in no way invalidates the current arguments over the 10th Amendment and State Sovereignty.
This is one of the reasons I quit the History profession. This constant attempt to use history to justify current political dogmas. It is wrong when the Left does it, it is equally wrong when those on the Right do it.
The facts are the facts, that they do not fit a current political dogma of this or that political faction is irrelevant.
I suggest you all quit trying to revise history to justify your current political opinions
Ike also didn’t believe there were any traitors in the state department after World War II.