Comments on: Trump Lawyer Forwards Email Echoing Secessionist Rhetoric

By: mcfly

mcfly — Thu, 17 Aug 2017 16:09:09 +0000

The comparison between Lee and Rommel has been rolling around in the back of my brain (such as it is) for a couple of days now, but you posted about it with more elegance and insight than I could have mustered.

By: SDG

SDG — Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:33:24 +0000

I think there is a lot to be admired about Robert E Lee, but it doesn’t change the fact that he chose to fight for Virginia over the Union. Let’s also not forget that when the war ended Robert E Lee stopped fighting, swore allegiance to the Union and was also opposed to Civil War monuments.

“As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated, my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the Country, would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment; of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour.” – Robert E Lee

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/robert-e-lee-opposed-confederate-monuments/

Personally, though, I think monuments in places like Gettysburg and Antietem should stay. Not to venerate, but to commemorate the struggle on the grounds where they occurred. I find value in seeing monuments that are placed in the exact location where somebody stood at a critical point of battle or where a certain general might have been wounded or killed. I took a self-guided audio driving tour at Gettysburg 6 years ago and those monuments are valuable in imagining the battle as it unfolded.

Get rid of the rest though. If the monument doesn’t mark a place of historic importance, its not serving any purpose, but to fan flames of hate intolerance on one side and oppression on the other.

By: hank

hank — Thu, 17 Aug 2017 12:37:52 +0000

Lee not only had the wrong mission, he failed to carry it out. He didn’t save America, he damned near destroyed it.

Lee is no different than Rommel.
Both were master tacticians and inspiring leaders.
Both were known as honorable, decent men.
Both were humane warriors.
Both were loved by their troops and admired and respected by their opponents.
Both were motivated by patriotism and loyalty to fight for the wrong side.

Rommel even was involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler.

But the Republicans just don’t seem to get it, do they? As always, they miss the whole point. This isn’t about whether or not these were good or bad men, its about the fact that they chose to fight for the wrong side. They only serve to underline the tragedy that evil only exists because honorable and decent men, for whatever reason, choose to support it. The Confederacy and the Third Reich both had one thing in common, they were ideas that felt that some humans beings were intrinsically inferior to others, and that those others therefore had the right, even the obligation, to rule and oppress them. That is just plain wrong and if you can’t see that there is something very wrong with you.

This isn’t about personality, its about ideology. Rommel may have been a nice guy, but he was still a NAZI. He joined the Party.