Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 7:31:00 PM (view original):
Another valid point Wylie. You're on a roll. So, if I recall my history correctly. The Great Confederate General Robert E. Lee was at West Point (US Army) at the Academy (along with many of the eventual Union Officers such as Custer, etal.) Lee was extremely torn about his own loyalty and to whom, but ultimately decided he could not take up arms against his own State and citizen/neighbors/family. Certainly, as a military man, the opportunity for an immediate (likely) leadership position within the Confederate Army may have figured into his decision as well I suspect.

1. Robert E. Lee fought for team slavery in the civil war, against the United States.

2. Robert E. Lee himself was against statues of Confederate veterans.

3. Robert E Lee fought for Virginia

Yet General Lee commanded troops from 13 different traitorous states that invaded Maryland and Pennsylvania

traitor not

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 7:31:00 PM (view original):
Another valid point Wylie. You're on a roll. So, if I recall my history correctly. The Great Confederate General Robert E. Lee was at West Point (US Army) at the Academy (along with many of the eventual Union Officers such as Custer, etal.) Lee was extremely torn about his own loyalty and to whom, but ultimately decided he could not take up arms against his own State and citizen/neighbors/family. Certainly, as a military man, the opportunity for an immediate (likely) leadership position within the Confederate Army may have figured into his decision as well I suspect.

1. Robert E. Lee fought for team slavery in the civil war, against the United States.

2. Robert E. Lee himself was against statues of Confederate veterans.

Thomas Jefferson owned slaves should we start to trash him too?

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 9:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 7:31:00 PM (view original):
Another valid point Wylie. You're on a roll. So, if I recall my history correctly. The Great Confederate General Robert E. Lee was at West Point (US Army) at the Academy (along with many of the eventual Union Officers such as Custer, etal.) Lee was extremely torn about his own loyalty and to whom, but ultimately decided he could not take up arms against his own State and citizen/neighbors/family. Certainly, as a military man, the opportunity for an immediate (likely) leadership position within the Confederate Army may have figured into his decision as well I suspect.

1. Robert E. Lee fought for team slavery in the civil war, against the United States.

2. Robert E. Lee himself was against statues of Confederate veterans.

Thomas Jefferson owned slaves should we start to trash him too?

That's a criticism of Jefferson. However, Jefferson was against the institution of slavery and still fought for the Union. Not a literal traitor to the USA. Did not fight in a war for slavery.

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 9:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 9:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 7:31:00 PM (view original):
Another valid point Wylie. You're on a roll. So, if I recall my history correctly. The Great Confederate General Robert E. Lee was at West Point (US Army) at the Academy (along with many of the eventual Union Officers such as Custer, etal.) Lee was extremely torn about his own loyalty and to whom, but ultimately decided he could not take up arms against his own State and citizen/neighbors/family. Certainly, as a military man, the opportunity for an immediate (likely) leadership position within the Confederate Army may have figured into his decision as well I suspect.

1. Robert E. Lee fought for team slavery in the civil war, against the United States.

2. Robert E. Lee himself was against statues of Confederate veterans.

Thomas Jefferson owned slaves should we start to trash him too?

That's a criticism of Jefferson. However, Jefferson was against the institution of slavery and still fought for the Union. Not a literal traitor to the USA. Did not fight in a war for slavery.

Now you're just picking and choosing points. Pretty sure Lee just wanted to defend his home state of Virginia and was not a supporter of slavery. You see the slippery slope here?

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 10:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 9:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 9:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 7:31:00 PM (view original):
Another valid point Wylie. You're on a roll. So, if I recall my history correctly. The Great Confederate General Robert E. Lee was at West Point (US Army) at the Academy (along with many of the eventual Union Officers such as Custer, etal.) Lee was extremely torn about his own loyalty and to whom, but ultimately decided he could not take up arms against his own State and citizen/neighbors/family. Certainly, as a military man, the opportunity for an immediate (likely) leadership position within the Confederate Army may have figured into his decision as well I suspect.

1. Robert E. Lee fought for team slavery in the civil war, against the United States.

2. Robert E. Lee himself was against statues of Confederate veterans.

Thomas Jefferson owned slaves should we start to trash him too?

That's a criticism of Jefferson. However, Jefferson was against the institution of slavery and still fought for the Union. Not a literal traitor to the USA. Did not fight in a war for slavery.

Now you're just picking and choosing points. Pretty sure Lee just wanted to defend his home state of Virginia and was not a supporter of slavery. You see the slippery slope here?

Again, Lee fought for a side of a war that was explicitly fighting for slavery. Jefferson didn't. I draw the line there. He fought against the United States. There is no slippery slope. That's a fallacy. The line needs to be drawn somewhere. I choose to draw it at 'pro slavery, traitor' but if you think we need to glorify that, then you can disagree.

Jefferson fought for the US who had slavery vs. England who didn't have slavery? What are you talking about?!?!?!?!

The revolutionary war was not about slavery. The civil war was.

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 11:20:00 AM (view original):
The revolutionary war was not about slavery. The civil war was.

Civil war was about the Confederate States leaving the union if they chose to stay no one would care.

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 11:20:00 AM (view original):
The revolutionary war was not about slavery. The civil war was.

Civil war was about the Confederate States leaving the union if they chose to stay no one would care.

What does a dumb *** green card ruskie know about the Civil War? Lee and everyone who participated in the southern treachery are traitors.

Posted by bad_luck on 4/4/2019 7:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 6:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/4/2019 5:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 2:11:00 PM (view original):
"I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place."

Must not have worked very well. They's all over the place.

What was the statute of Pancho Villa in Tucson supposed to do for me? If I remember correctly the steed he's astride has no balls.
The mexicans all claim this is BS, false. The great Villa would NEVER ride a mare............. they're wrong, like most who just believe the latest scuttle...... in reality Villa's favorite horse was a mare, he named it Siete Laguas (7 leagues) supposedly for how far it could traverse in a day.

Bit of a border legend 'ol Doroteo Arango as he was born. Robin Hood to some. A terror to others.

I meant emotionally. Many statues were built by white supremacists in the 1920's and 60's, times of uprising in the black communities. Statues serve as a constant reminder of the subjucation of the black communities.

In addition, statues glorify people. They are NOT how we view history. When you build a confederate statue, you are glorifying someone who fought for the institution of slavery.

I would suggest moving these statues to museums and graveyards.

Not sure about whether the statues are glorifying someone who fought for slavery. Many men and women who fought in the Vietnam war were against the war, but that is what their country asked them to do. Is a statue of a Vietnam vet glorifying that stupid war?
Personally I have why the people in the south built statues of confederate ware soldiers. Neither do you, as I doubt you were there at the time.

In this case, they were fighting against their country.

And, even if they felt conflicted, we don't memorialize traitors. And that's what confederate statues do.

In your opinion, that is what they do. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of people in the south don't view the confederate soldiers as traitors. I am not defending them, but most of them probably felt they were fighting for an accepted way of life. In the south at that time, it was an accepted way of life.
Just because south carolina puts a statue of a confederate soldier up, that does not mean you have to memorialize whoever the statue is of.

That’s literally what a statue is, though. A memorial.

Reading comprehension...learn it. I said because SC puts up a stature, that does not mean YOU have to memorialize whoever that statue is of.

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 10:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 3:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/4/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 4/4/2019 1:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 4/4/2019 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/4/2019 11:54:00 AM (view original):
Wow, twice in like 3 days that bob and I couldn't agree more.

Damn. Sad thing is there's been a few others, too. Like you said blind monkeys and apologists and nuts and screws.

So the other time we agreed was on the electoral college matter? Is that right?
I'm so opposed to eliminating that I can't spout it articulately enough.

On this team "nickname" so-called issue. In all fairness I must admit to being from Arizona where we've had loony politicians for EVER! AND, a few years back we had one/some (including a Gov.) who went about trying to "officially" change names on Mtn. Pks, freeways, etc in a misguided effort to eliminate "offensive" terms from being used in our colloquialisms, maps, and such. So, there went Squaw Peak, and the Squaw Peak Freeway, although we still have numerous Squaw Peaks, Squaw Pk, Drives, Lanes, etc. Not to mention Sally's nipple, Fern's *** (can we say that?) Miners *****, **** Rock (a GREAT campsite that I won't reveal any more info about regarding it's location!!) and all sorts of Indian heads from Mazatzal to Cochise, to Geronimo. Plus we celebrate cliffs with names that denote horrid historical events like Apache Leap (check out what supposedly happened their!) and have a High School named after Cortez for goodness sake!!

IMO, it's stupid to even go there. You can't (and shouldn't!!) sanitize history, It is what it is. Human behavior. Thus, looking backwards, all sorts of atrocities are seen, worrying about the name of some particularly memorable rock structure is just bordering on lunacy.

Argue/debate important stuff, not the trivial. Try debating the importance of the 9th Amendment instead......... or (actually) ANY of the 1st ten!
That's possibly worthwhile.
But, no matter what someone else things of that particular mountain in Phoenix, to me it's always gonna be Squaw Peak.
Janet Napolitano can bite my hind end on that issue!

I'm sure Janet will be thrilled about that, Bob!!

My view on all the PC **** is we have taken it way to far. Maybe the Washington Redskins should change their team name, but Colonials??? Give me a break! Who, exactly does that offend? And whoever it is, needs to get a life. I think there are more important things to worry about then some team being called the Colonials.

Personally, I don't care if people in the south hang confederate flags. It is part of their heritage. Not a part I would be proud of, but that is just me. I don't care if there are statues of Robert E Lee or Jefferson Davis. If it really bothers someone, than don't go to the south.

I disagree with you on the statues part. Many were built by the KKK to keep black people in their place.

just shows how stupid the KKK can be. How is a statue going to keep anyone in their place? if a statue would do that, then practically anything would do it.

Really? You don't think that a statue glorifying people who may have held your ancestors in bondage isn't dehumanizing?

If you were raped, would you want your rapist to have a statue glorifying him in the city?

let me know when a city puts up a statue of a rapist and I will consider answering a very dumb question.

Posted by cccp1014 on 4/5/2019 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 4/5/2019 11:20:00 AM (view original):
The revolutionary war was not about slavery. The civil war was.

Civil war was about the Confederate States leaving the union if they chose to stay no one would care.

.... Right. And they left the Union because they wanted to preserve slavery.