Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Robert E.Lee overrated?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by BadKharma View Post
    It was not that simple. If you tour the southern states today you will hear the war had nothing to do with slavery but state rights.
    If it was primarily about slavery why did Lincoln wait until Gettysburg to make the Emancipation Proclamation.
    He didn't.

    Lincoln issued the Emmancipation Proclamation after the Battle of Antietam, almost 9 months earlier.

    It went into effect on 1 JAN 63, six months before Gettysburg.

    There was widespread dissent within the union ranks at first over it. Many soldiers stating they had enlisted to preserve the Union, not end Slavery.

    Emancipation Proclamation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
      Lincoln issued the Emmancipation Proclamation after the Battle of Antietam, almost 9 months earlier.

      It went into effect on 1 JAN 63, six months before Gettysburg.
      And to be exactly accurate, it had no effect on the slaves that were under Union control. Ironic, isn't it? I believe that DELAWARE - loyal, never-seceded, troops levied to subdue the South - was technically the last state to abolish slavery.

      Comes right back to states' rights, at least on some level.

      Comment


      • #93
        And now, we're WAY off the reservation.:))

        But last bite at the apple: can one be in violation of one's oath of office if one RESIGNS that office BEFORE committing any offence against that oath? Was Robert E. Lee still bound by the obligations of an oath of office that he no longer held? Don't think so.

        NOT A TRAITOR.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Bluesman View Post
          And now, we're WAY off the reservation.:))

          But last bite at the apple: can one be in violation of one's oath of office if one RESIGNS that office BEFORE committing any offence against that oath? Was Robert E. Lee still bound by the obligations of an oath of office that he no longer held? Don't think so.

          NOT A TRAITOR.
          Since I took that oath myself my feeling is it is for life. An oath is not something one casts aside.



          It was within Lee's rights as a citizen to do what he did but he also would have ot face the consequences of that act...just like all other Federal officials who served the Confederacy. That they did not get tried for treason does not make their actiosn any less treasonous.
          “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
          Mark Twain

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Bluesman View Post
            And to be exactly accurate, it had no effect on the slaves that were under Union control. Ironic, isn't it? I believe that DELAWARE - loyal, never-seceded, troops levied to subdue the South - was technically the last state to abolish slavery.

            Comes right back to states' rights, at least on some level.
            So a document effective 1 January 1863 is justification for actions in 1860 and 1861? It doesn't follow
            "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

            Comment

            Working...
            X