Posted on 10/16/2018 7:26:21 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Donald Trump spoke at a rally in Lebanon, Ohio, Friday and decided to give a little Civil War history lesson to illustrate a point about native Ohioan Ulysses S. Grant.
It's not surprising that Twitter exploded in rage:
Robert E. Lee was not a great general, President Trump.
He waged a war to hold onto the legal institution of white supremacy. https://t.co/TZvUood3kg
Southern Poverty Law Center (@splcenter) October 13, 2018
And now that Lost Cause "history" is being perpetuated by President of the United States. Robert E. Lee was not an incredible general. And monuments to his name are not "beautiful."
Southern Poverty Law Center (@splcenter) October 13, 2018
Robert E Lee was part of a faction that was willing to rip this nation apart to protect its own interests at the expense of other people & the Constitution. https://t.co/1OV96ytz79
Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) October 13, 2018
Robert E. Lee was a traitor and a loser. Just like Donald J. Trump.
Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) October 13, 2018
Seven thousand Ohioan soldiers--fighting for the Union--were killed during the Civil War. Trump praises Robert E. Lee, who led the troops that killed them. And Trump's Ohio supporters cheer. Now that's deplorable.
David Corn (@DavidCornDC) October 13, 2018 You know what? All of this is true -- to one degree or another.
But Trump never said that Robert E. Lee was a great person. He said he was a great general. And therein lies the story. Left-wing hysterics are entitled to their opinion about Lee, Grant, Lincoln, and Trump. But Robert E. Lee's generalship, while much criticized, is considered by many historians to be without peer in U.S. military history -- and not just revisionist historians of the "Glorious Lost Cause."
Several of his victories are studied to this day at military academies around the world. He did more with less than any other general except perhaps George Washington. And perhaps the surest sign that Lee was a great general was the way the men under his command felt about him.
Say what you will about him, but just because he was a slave owner doesn't make him a poor general.
Trump, however, bollixed up the story on Lee and Grant, demonstrating a Bluto-like knowledge of history.
"So Robert E. Lee was a great general. And Abraham Lincoln developed a phobia. He couldnt beat Robert E. Lee," Trump said before launching into a monologue about Lee, Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant. "He was going crazy. I dont know if you know this story. But Robert E. Lee was winning battle after battle after battle. And Abraham Lincoln came home, he said, 'I cant beat Robert E. Lee,' " Trump said.
"And he had all of his generals, they looked great, they were the top of their class at West Point. They were the greatest people. Theres only one problem they didnt know how the hell to win. They didnt know how to fight. They didnt know how," he continued.
Trump went on to say, multiple times, that Grant had a drinking problem, saying that the former president "knocked the hell out of everyone" as a Union general.
"Man was he a good general. And hes finally being recognized as a great general," Trump added.
To quote Boon, "Forget it. He's rolling."
Grant was not a drunk. The origins of this pernicious falsehood lies with jealous rivals and bitter Southrons who couldnt accept that Grant whipped Lee and the rest of Johnny Rebs ass and crushed the foolish rebellion.
Cold Harbor was a harbinger of WWI’s trench warfare.
The General Lee was a great Car.
It could fly through the air and come down without a scratch while outrunning every Police Interceptor sent after it.
It had the best Horn too, even better then the one on a Roadrunner.
Great general doesn’t mean great cause, or even a great person. The WWII Japanese had some great generals fighting for a rotten cause.
Robert E Lee was part of a faction that was willing to rip this nation apart to protect its own interests at the expense of other people & the Constitution. https://t.co/1OV96ytz79
Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) October 13, 2018
Yeah, thats right. That faction was called democrats.
Yup. What he lacked in tactical brilliance he more than made up for in brutal practicality. His Vicksburg campaign bordered on brilliant.
Total nonsense. Utterly moronic historic ignorance
Grant was far better commander then Lee.
His Vicksburg campaign is still being studied at West Point. He is also the only Union General to force the surrender of 3 Confederate armies.
The US Civil war was the prototype for Modern War. What seemed so shocking to his Democrats poltical foes (Both Confederate and in the North) was Grant was the 1st General on either side who understood that the only path to victory was the utter defeat of the Souths will to wage war. The only way to end the war was beating the South until it was on its knees.
So since they could not argue the facts, they engaged in Democrat Politics 101, the smear job. Grant historical legacy "as a drunk", only now being corrected by modern historians, was largely a fabrication of Lincolns, Democrat political foes, and sore losers Southern Generals.
Lee was promoted past his competency level. He would of been much better staying as an Army General and someone like Albert Sidney or Joe Johnson being the over all commander.
Lee never grasped the war was national in scale. He focused on Virginia only and, arguably, cost the South the war by refusing to look at the strategic picture on the other fronts.
In addition, Grant understood the strategic priorities of the North in a way Lee never did for the South. Lees biggest failing, like the French in WW1, believed offensive warfare was the key. He never understood that given the South deficits in material and manpower, he need to win by outlasting the north. Fredricksburg, and possible 2nd Manassas were Lees only true victory. In the rest of his battler he continually lost a greater portion of his force then the North. The result is all of his victories were Phyrric. They won a short term respite in exchange for irreplaceable casualties
Washington was by far a greater General then Lee. Washington, facing much the same sort of odds as Lee with a much weaker supply base grasped the need to simply outlast the British. If Lee had been half the General Washington was, the South might have won the war.
yes but how many slaves did Grant own?
And yet the left thinks the Kenyan cocksucker was an American.
Grant was ferocious and he ruthlessly used every advantage to crush his enemy. His campaign against Vicksburg is still studied today.
He was, however, a crappy politician. He was too trusting.
That’s good. Me, too.
Lee was a great general when he worked out his plans until Longstreet vetted them. When he hatched something and ran with it despite holes percieved by Longstreet, not so much.
As long as he worked within the framework of being the leader of a competent staff, he was good. But he was not a good solo planner.
Y’know, given the level of alcohol consumption in that era, Grant might have only been a little above normal.
HE WAS THE DEMOCRAT GENERAL
The generation of Southern Ohioans who grew up after the terrible war, had profound admiration for both men. And were aware,also, of the noble risk that General Grant--himself a great admirer of Lee--took, in his threat against anyone who would try to prosecute Lee.
I think that Lee was pretty generally idolized by West Point graduates in the 19th Century.
It is all part of how truly our President understands "winning" in multiple senses. (Now is truly the time to help him demonstrate that trait!!) A vote for Trump supporters, today, is the best way, I know to honor the memory of both Generals!!
William Flax
yes but how many slaves did Grant own?
><
At least one.
Lee’s greatest enemy was attrition.
And unlike Lee, Grant learned from his error. His slipped away from supposed genius Lee and crossed the James river in one of the most brilliant feat in the Civil War.
Grants biggest problem in the East was being hobbled with divisional and brigade commanders who were completely defensive minded out of fear of Lee. Petersburg VA should of taken long before Lee ever got his troops moving if Grant's tactical commander on the scene Quincy A. Gillmore' had had even a modicum of skill.
Grant was a drunk.
Grant freed his slaves he got from his Father in Law.
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.