Longstreet becomes target of Lee's admirers

WashTimes ^ | July 12, 2003 | Ken Kryvoruka

[GOPcapitalist]

Hamilton was as anti-secessionist as anyone could be which is totally in contradiction to your implication.

I never implicated Hamilton as a secessionist, but his close political ally and ideological fellow traveller Timothy Pickering certainly was. Live with it.

[AdamSelene235]

Home rule certainly will not allow Denver to violate the US Constitution. If that hasn't been yet established it will be before all is said and done.

In principle you are correct, in practice a court must agree to hear your case. If the court refuses, you have effectively have no rights.

The case I'm referring to has been denied cert by the Colorado Supreme Court. The defendent was forbidden from mentioning the 2nd Amendment or the Colorado Constitution in his defense (peaceful open carry/civil disobedience case). The city law in question has since been pre-empted by a state law but it looks like the defendent will end up spending time in jail anyway. He's refusing to be arrested pending a respond to his appeal to the Federal Appeals court, so he might be dead soon.

[x]

A search engine gave something like 3100 entries for the "Battle of Fallen Timbers," the vast majority of which refered to a battle fought by "Mad" Anthony Wayne near Maumee Ohio in 1794. I had to go through 130 before I got to your skirmish. A search for "Battle of Fallen Timbers" and "Forrest" yielded 97 results, which actually boiled down to about 40, including some with Forrest McDonald, Forrest Tucker, Edwin Forrest, and the US Forrest [sic] Service.

Well, apparently there was such a battle or fight, "the last action of the battle of Shiloh." I didn't know it, but I'm here to learn, so thanks for the information. I've also learned something about search engines and research. The fact that there are books, articles, parks, and stamps devoted to one "Battle of Fallen Timbers" doesn't mean that there wasn't another one, just as the fact that we all know about Lexington and Saratoga in the American Revolution doesn't mean that we should be skeptical when those names appear in discussion of WWII.

There was a "learning curve" in the Civil War as in other wars. Commanders often lost their first fights to those who were more experienced or more skilled. One of the tests of a commander is whether he was able to get back up, learn from the experience, and apply the lessons he'd learned to the next battle. I'd say Sherman was able to do this, as was Grant. Other generals may not have had the opportunity to apply those lessons or the resources to do so.

I don't know that anyone disputes that the South had some excellent commanders. Others will know more about it than me, but certainly Forrest, Mosby, and Jackson were highly skilled leaders and warriors. Putting everything together at a higher level of command could be a problem, though, as the Union army in the East and the rebel forces in the West both well knew. Comparing field commanders with higher level theater commanders can be deceptive.

[southern cross forever]

Just because she feels that he has been abusive does that give her the right to walk out, taking community property with her, and firing shots at him on her way out the door?

She "FEELS" that she has been abused because she had her teeth knocked out and she has black eyes,
and as far as the rest goes, you'd be shooting too if you were abused, whats wrong with that ? LOL

[justshutupandtakeit]

Of course, that was the entire reason you identified Pickering as a "Hamiltonian." Guilt by association. I guess to you Adams was a "Hamiltonian" too.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Nope merely irrelevent beyond a curious irony. Enemies of America are alike in being enemies of America, Saddam or Jeff Davis.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The constitution clearly defines treason and those who take up arms against the United States are clearly committing treason. Naturally, you must redefine the words in a vain attempt to cover the treason but cannot escape the fact that it does mean what it says.

But none of the D.S. arguments can stand for an instant without redefining words, misstatements, disinformation, distortion or plain ole lyin'. Thats all you have.

[Radtechtravel]

I take your post to be an apology of your incorrect correction of my statement that Forrest beat Sherman head to head at the Battle of Fallen Timbers?

Thank you. Apology is accepted.

No one knows how differently history would have been--and the present, BTW--had Forrest been given a more significant role in the Confederacy.

I still support my belief that Forrest would have made a significant difference in the outcome of the Civil War by reminding all that ol' Bedford was credited by both enemies and allies alike as being the best commander the South had. So said, among others, Sherman, Grant, Joe Johnston and Lee himself. Sherman, who spent many resources trying to kill Forrest, said that he could never figure out what Forrest intended to do, but Forrest always seemed to know what he(Sherman) was doing. Even Jefferson Davis lamented having misunderstood until it was too late the tactical and strategic genius of the "Wizard of the Saddle," Nathan Bedford Forrest.

Forrest often demonstrated his grasp of strategic matters. By raiding the heart of Memphis itself in 1864, he caused a forced withdrawal march of an entire Union army sent into Mississippi to defeat him.

In that Memphis raid, Forrest's men entered the private residences of three Generals, including the Commander Cadwallader Washburn, who barely escaped capture in his bedroom by running barefooted in his night clothes out the back door through a garden into an alley, running a mile to reach an outpost. Forrest did have the pleasure of returning Washburn's dress uniform in exchange for a brand new Confederate uniform expertly made by his personal taylor who still resided in Memphis, Forrest residence prior to the outbreak of the War..

The former Union commander at Memphis quipped, "Sheramn replaced me because I could not keep Forrest out of West Tennessee and now my replacement, Washburn, can't keep him out of his own bedroom."

[Radtechtravel]

X says, "A search for "Battle of Fallen Timbers" and "Forrest" yielded 97 results, which actually boiled down to about 40, including some with Forrest McDonald, Forrest Tucker, Edwin Forrest, and the US Forrest [sic] Service."

Next time try narrowing the search parameters. I suggested "Forrest" and "Fallen Timers,". If you had tried google you would have gotten results on the first page had you thought to use "Forrest" or "Nathan Bedford Forrest" with "Cavalry" and "Fallen Timbers".

Nonetheless, you were quite able to find the historical reference were you not?

[GOPcapitalist]

Of course, that was the entire reason you identified Pickering as a "Hamiltonian."

I identified Pickering as a Hamiltonian Federalist because he WAS a Hamiltonian Federalist? Do you dispute this? If so then prove me wrong.

Guilt by association.

Too bad for you that the association is genuine.

I guess to you Adams was a "Hamiltonian" too

No. Adams battled with the Hamiltonian wing of the Federalist Party. Pickering, who was Adams' Secretary of State, was fired in 1800 by Adams for aligning with Hamilton and pushing a Hamiltonian agenda.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Your second sentence contradicts your first.

Adams found that Hamilton actually controlled his entire cabinet for three years.

[GOPcapitalist]

Your second sentence contradicts your first.

And exactly how does the sentence "Do you dispute this?" contradict the sentence "I identified Pickering as a Hamiltonian Federalist because he WAS a Hamiltonian Federalist." The answer is it doesn't nor can it since the second was a solicitation of YOUR opinion as it pertains to the first.

Adams found that Hamilton actually controlled his entire cabinet for three years.

...and one of the foremost among them was a Hamiltonian Federalist named Timothy Pickering. That same Timothy Pickering, who was still a Hamiltonian Federalist serving in the Senate in 1804, advocated forming a New England confederation with Great Britain that same year. Live with it.

[labard1]

If one accepts the metaphor of an abused spouse having a right to depart a marriage with her own property (true in all community property jurisdictions), the issue is conceded. The other side denies ANY right to leave, regardless of provocation. The argument about taking community property and a parting shot are both logically red herrings.

The Federal government was funded primarily by a tariff on imports from Europe, which protected Northern industry and disadvantaged the South. It was well understood then that the tariff was a functional equivalent to a tax on exports of Southern cotton (it's a simple economic concept that no competent economist would dispute). The refusal of Northern police and juries to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act (notwithstanding its being lawfully passed by the US Congress), removed a major benefit promised to the South in the last attempt at a global compromise of North-South disputes.

[rustbucket]

yawn

Not a very good advertisement for your objectivity. I think I'll pass on buying your book, which you hawked at me using FReepmail.

[stainlessbanner]

which you hawked at me using FReepmail.

I think we've all gotten those spam FReepmails. I'm surprised FR allows this behavior to continue.

[Dead Dog]

Grant was a fighter, very aggressive, and was not at all afraid of taking casualties to achieve his goals; and I have great respect for him, even though I am a Southerner).

So did Longstreet. I'm reading his autobiography now. Great read BTW.

I'm sure not one to criticise Lee, but I'm sure if he could do it again, he would NOT attack the angle.

Rev. Pendleton should have paid more attention to that little "Baring false wittness" thing.