Slavery's scar on the state borders in the US

[Underseer]

[YOUTUBE]QAlWqi-VQsc[/YOUTUBE]

How endless squabbling between free states and slave states led to the shape of the state borders west of the Mississippi river.

Also, Robert E. Lee wasn't an abolitionist. He just assumed that the pro-slavery set (of which he clearly included himself) would eventually lose the argument on moral grounds, but argued that abolitionists wanted abolition too soon because God clearly wanted slavery to keep happening. Isn't it convenient how that imaginary friend always seems to take philosophical positions that are convenient to believers?

 

[untermensche]

Lee has been made into a god.

He was an ambitious man that wanted to win in battle.

He won most of the time, a great commander with a brilliant strategic mind.

As far as morality?

He is worthless.

 

[repoman]

Lee has been made into a god.

He was an ambitious man that wanted to win in battle.

He won most of the time, a great commander with a brilliant strategic mind.

As far as morality?

He is worthless.

Lee was our Rommel.

 

[Copernicus]

Lee married Mary Anna Custis, great granddaughter of Martha Washington. Her family was a large wealthy slave-owning family. Although Lee and those who revere him have tried to whitewash his support for slavery, he never really deviated from the tradition of many prominent southerners, including George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, and many others--that slavery was a moral wrong that would eventually fade away. They were reluctantly required to maintain the institution, because their personal wealth and family well-being depended on it. Like George Washington, many felt that their slaves owed them their labor in return for the expense of feeding, clothing, and sheltering them. Washington himself was known to become furious when he felt slaves were not making an honest effort to fulfill their duties. Lee appears to have been a little more ambivalent about such things, leaving the management of his slaves for others to handle.

 

[SLD]

Lee has been made into a god.

He was an ambitious man that wanted to win in battle.

He won most of the time, a great commander with a brilliant strategic mind.

As far as morality?

He is worthless.

Lee was a shitty commander who fought without serious imagination or innovation. He never developed a coherent strategy for the South. He was marginally successful against others who fought like him, but against more competent commanders and real fighters like Grant he got defeated and sucked into a war of attrition he should have known he could never win. He had so much success early in his life that he couldn’t handle defeat properly. Grant was a far better commander who understood warfare so much better than he did. Had Grant been in charge at Antietam the war would’ve ended by 63. I would never compare him to Rommel.

SLD

- - - Updated - - -

Lee married Mary Anna Custis, great granddaughter of Martha Washington. Her family was a large wealthy slave-owning family. Although Lee and those who revere him have tried to whitewash his support for slavery, he never really deviated from the tradition of many prominent southerners, including George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, and many others--that slavery was a moral wrong that would eventually fade away. They were reluctantly required to maintain the institution, because their personal wealth and family well-being depended on it. Like George Washington, many felt that their slaves owed them their labor in return for the expense of feeding, clothing, and sheltering them. Washington himself was known to become furious when he felt slaves were not making an honest effort to fulfill their duties. Lee appears to have been a little more ambivalent about such things, leaving the management of his slaves for others to handle.

OK George. You know longer have to feed and clothe me. See ya later dude!

 

[untermensche]

Lee has been made into a god.

He was an ambitious man that wanted to win in battle.

He won most of the time, a great commander with a brilliant strategic mind.

As far as morality?

He is worthless.

Lee was a shitty commander who fought without serious imagination or innovation. He never developed a coherent strategy for the South.

I separate a great combat commander from a strategist.

A commander inspires and motivates people to endure hardship and fight.

Every great strategist needs a lot of great commanders.

Lee was a great commander. Like Washington he inspired his officers and men.

Washington was not a very good strategist. He lost a lot of battles.

But sometimes just being a good commander is enough.

 

[SLD]

Lee has been made into a god.

He was an ambitious man that wanted to win in battle.

He won most of the time, a great commander with a brilliant strategic mind.

As far as morality?

He is worthless.

Lee was a shitty commander who fought without serious imagination or innovation. He never developed a coherent strategy for the South.

I separate a great combat commander from a strategist.

A commander inspires and motivates people to endure hardship and fight.

Every great strategist needs a lot of great commanders.

Lee was a great commander. Like Washington he inspired his officers and men.

Washington was not a very good strategist. He lost a lot of battles.

But sometimes just being a good commander is enough.

I’d still disagree. A great commander wouldn’t have ordered his men to charge headlong into a fortified position especially after Fredericksburg.

And many of them didn’t. They weren’t as stupid as they’re made out to be. Many made a modicum of a showing and turned around.

 

[untermensche]

I separate a great combat commander from a strategist.

A commander inspires and motivates people to endure hardship and fight.

Every great strategist needs a lot of great commanders.

Lee was a great commander. Like Washington he inspired his officers and men.

Washington was not a very good strategist. He lost a lot of battles.

But sometimes just being a good commander is enough.

I’d still disagree. A great commander wouldn’t have ordered his men to charge headlong into a fortified position especially after Fredericksburg.

And many of them didn’t. They weren’t as stupid as they’re made out to be. Many made a modicum of a showing and turned around.

You're still talking about strategy.

The fact that most did it proves he was a great commander.

Who should not have thrown his army against those defenses.