Surprise eulogy for Lee (Abolitionist gave unexpected speech about the general)

kypost ^ | 08-18-2003 | Jim Reis

[wasp69]

If Confederate rebels had resorted to guerrilla warfare they would have been slaughtered in no time by the U.S. Army, and they knew it.

Oh, goody! Now we're down to hypotheticals. Wrong, again. General Lee, unlike some Generals from the other side, did not believe in the concept of total war nor did he believe in putting the South through more suffering. However, he did discuss just that option with one of his Captains (Porter, I believe) and he knew that if he could make it to the Blue Ridge mountains, they could hold out damn near forever. Fortunately for everyone, as the New York Times pointed out, he chose the honorable solution; which, BTW, alludes to the man's charcter which was the original point of my original post and a point which you still can't refute with any substance. As far as "slaughtered in no time", why don't you ask some of our SPEC WAR guys how easy it is to get rid of irregulars in the mountains of Afghanistan? I have and it takes considerably more than "no time".

By 1865, the southern economy was no longer able to support an insurgency.

These were men who were used to making do without enough of anything and who were also battle hardned veterans who learned to live off the land at an early age. They didn't need money or manufacturing from the Southern States, they would have raided Federal outposts and supply convoys and taken what they needed.

The mountainous areas of Appalachia and the Ozarks, where guerrillas would presumably run around, were predominately Unionist.

No they weren't and I think I can safely presume, as with most of your counterpoints, you have absolutely nothing to back that up.

Guerrillas would have had no way to keep control over slaves, which was the reason they went to war in the first place.

They wouldn't have needed slaves and you should know better than to try and put that "it was all about slavery" crap by me.

Faced with white guerrillas, the U.S. Army would have turned the 200,000 blacks and 100,000 southern whites in the U.S. Army into a very effective counterinsurgency force, which backed by the rest of the U. S. Army, would have slaughtered any guerrrilla wannabes.

Ooohhh, goody! Another hypothetical backed with no substance. You may want to try and read some actual history about Confederate guerilla warfare and how effective it was. Start with Mosby, Quantrill, Nancy Hart, and good ol' Anderson "Devil Anse" Hatfield. These were very effective irregulars and, guess what, the Federals couldn't catch them or stop them.

Why don't you try and do some actual research before you post? Can you try and at least make this a little bit more fun?

[Grand Old Partisan]

I'm tired of re-fighting the Civil War with treason-enthusiasts. Perhaps there is a website less patriotic than Free Republic more suited to your aspirations.

[wasp69]

I'm tired of re-fighting the Civil War with treason-enthusiasts.

Well I'm sure you are. When you constantly get pounded with documented fact and nothing to counter with, it kinda makes you look like a partisan hack that can do nothing better than spout the party line. It also doesn't help that you go away name calling, either. But, that's what most liberals do. Glad you were kind enough to reveal yourself.

Perhaps there is a website less patriotic than Free Republic more suited to your aspirations.

Coming from someone who couldn't keep their bias out of a funeral thread for a fallen warrior, your charge of being "less patriotic" means about as much as your opinion; nothing. BTW, I have heard this same song and dance from you before. Do yourself a favor and don't reply to me if you don't want show yourself for the false patriot, and intellectually dishonest, fraud you really are.

[4CJ]

Grand Old Partisan: I'm tired of re-fighting the Civil War with treason-enthusiasts. Perhaps there is a website less patriotic than Free Republic more suited to your aspirations.

See #1722 and my reply here. He's economizing on his posts. Must be a shortage of words somewhere.

[WhiskeyPapa]

There is an interesting anecdote in at least one biography of Lee. I hope I recount it accurately here. It seems that after the War, Lee was in the congregation of a church when communion was held. A black man went to the rail and none of the whites in the congregation would go up and kneel next to the man. Seeing this, Lee rose, strode forward, and accepted communion next to him.

Didn't happen.

Walt

[WhiskeyPapa]

Jefferson Davis did not order guerrilla warfare, to which he was in fact strongly opposed.

Davis continued resistance to the lawful authority long after there was no point to it. He also wanted to continue to resist after Johnston and others told him it was absolutely hopeless.

The fact that he had to be run down in women's clothes ought to tell you something.

Walt

[GOPcapitalist]

Hey Walt - quick question for you. I'm trying to locate the source and context of a quote by James McPherson, and seeing as you are the resident keeper of McPherson quotes, I figure I should ask your advice.

A while back you posted a quotation from the good doctor in which he stated, in reference to Lincoln's speeches between 1854-60, that the "central message of these speeches showed Lincoln to be a 'one-issue' man -- the issue being slavery."

Do you remember the book from which this came and the page number where it may be found? Also - if you have a copy of the full quote could I ask you to share it once again? Thanks in advance.

[WhiskeyPapa]

It's from "Drawn with the Sword."

Walt

[4CJ]

Didn't happen.

Ya think?

"[A] tall-well dressed, black man stood and strode to the rail. There followed a pregnant pause. According to one witness, "Its effects upon the communicants was startling, and for several moments they retained their seats in solemn silence and did not move, being deeply chagrined at this attempt to inaugurate the 'new regime' to offend and humiliate them...". Then another person rose from the pew and walked down the aisle to the chancel rail. He knelt near the black man and so redeemed the circumstance. This grace- bringer, of course was Lee. Soon after he knelt, the rest of the congregation followed his example and shuffled in turn to the rail...Lee's actions were far more eloquent than anything he spoke or wrote."
Emory M. Thomas, Robert E. Lee: A Biography, W.W. Norton & Company Ltd, 1995, p. 372.

[GOPcapitalist]

It's from "Drawn with the Sword."

Thanks. I'll pull it up at the library. Do you know the page number or chapter?

[nolu chan]

LINK

General Grant National Memorial

Riverside Drive at West 122nd Street
Manhattan

Why Go To Grant's Tomb?

The best reason to go to Grant's Tomb is to say that you have been there and have seen it. Since the memorial is free and open seven days a week, it is relatively convenient. So if you have a couple of hours to kill while you are in the city and have some interest in Grant, we recommend that you take a trip over to the northern section of Riverside Park and look around. While in the neighborhood, be sure to stop by Columbia University, Riverside Church, and The Cathedral of St. John The Divine.

Some years back it was a bit of a scandal that Grant's place was a night time hangout for drug dealers and such and that it had become sort of a big public urinal.

[nolu chan]

[GOP] Robert Lee's reputation owes much to the fact, as events in Iraq now show, that many people think that there is nothing really wrong in terms of character and action with killing U.S. soldiers.

I believe you have never been in the military and it is a matter beyond your ability to comprehend. Of course, I would never presume that such a trivial point would stop you from exercising your right to mental defecation.

Consider that two boxers get in the ring and try to beat each other's brains out for 12 rounds. And consider, as frequently happens, when the fighting is over they throw their arms around one another and show their respect for the person who was trying to punch them senseless.

The soldiers on both sides could easily understand and respect the other for fighting with valor and bravery.

Go defecate on the political whores, such as Lincoln et al, who prostituted every law in the land for political purposes.

Few respect politicans or those who pimp for them.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Didn't happen. Ya think?

"[A] tall-well dressed, black man stood and strode to the rail. There followed a pregnant pause. According to one witness, "Its effects upon the communicants was startling, and for several moments they retained their seats in solemn silence and did not move, being deeply chagrined at this attempt to inaugurate the 'new regime' to offend and humiliate them...". Then another person rose from the pew and walked down the aisle to the chancel rail. He knelt near the black man and so redeemed the circumstance. This grace- bringer, of course was Lee. Soon after he knelt, the rest of the congregation followed his example and shuffled in turn to the rail...Lee's actions were far more eloquent than anything he spoke or wrote." Emory M. Thomas, Robert E. Lee: A Biography, W.W. Norton & Company Ltd, 1995, p. 372.

I don't think, I know.

Just because something appears in a book does not make it true.

I have -three- biographies of Lee in which the story does not appear:

"The Making of Robert E. Lee", by Micheael Fellman, "Lee Considered" by Alan Nolan, and "The Generals" by Nancy Scott Anderson and Dwight Anderson.

Walt

[GOPcapitalist]

Just because something appears in a book does not make it true.

Now that's an odd statement to originate from none other than Mr. "It appears on the ACW moderated newsgroup and therefore must be true" himself!

[Ohioan]

That's the best you can do to convince me that killing U. S. soldiers is a good idea?

What a piece of errant demagoguery! For a thousand years, before the Communists and Nazis reversed the trend, men of character, faith and honorable principles, accorded their battlefield foes respect--the exception being only when they violated the standards of men of honor. You, apparently prefer a regression to total barbarism. Your fanaticsm hardly makes the Republican Party sound appealing to the uncommitted.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[4CJ]

I don't think, I know

Were you there?

[4CJ]

Now that's an odd statement to originate from none other than Mr. "It appears on the ACW moderated newsgroup and therefore must be true" himself!

That refutes everything he every posted ;o)

[WhiskeyPapa]

I don't think, I know

Were you there?

Implicit in your school yard taunt is the implication that you -were- there?

Were you?

Walt

[4CJ]

mplicit in your school yard taunt is the implication that you -were- there?

Implicit in your school yard response is the implication that UNLESS you were there, it didn't happen. I guess the founding of our country didn't take place, the DoI, the Revolutionary War, WWI etc.

[4CJ]

The fact that he had to be run down in women's clothes ought to tell you something.

A lie. By Waltian standards if I have a book that does no so state then the account must be a lie. But for further credence try this:

'The controversy that was to rage over whether Davis had worn a disguise was further complicated by the testimony of another Federal observer who had encountered the Confederate President during the confused moments of his capture. Captain James H. Parker, who claimed that he recognized Davis at first glance, denied that the captive had sought a cowardly way to escape: "I defy any person to find a single officer or soldier who was present at the capture ... who will say upon honour that he was disguised in women's clothes ... His wife ... behaved like a lady, and he as a gentleman, though manifestly chagrined at being taken into custody." And Parker, as he said, was qualified to judge: "I am a Yankee, full of Yankee prejudices, but I think it wicked to lie about him."'
Burke Davis, The Long Surrender, New York: Random House, 1985, p. 145.