Confederate History (long)

[Rebel_Horseman]

Since there has been discussion in another thread, and for the sake of keeping that thread on topic, I've decided to start this one.



Discussion recently said that the South started the war by firing on Ft. Sumter, we lost, we started the war, Lincoln never owned slaves, and basically all the other typical myths of the war that has been developed by Yankee propaganda to defend their illegal actions.



First let's start with good ol Honest Abe. The Emancipation Proclamation freed those slaves held "within any State or designated part of a State the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States. " Basically he freed slaves that he had absolutely no control over because those States in question were part of the CSA. But, he did NOT do jack about the slaves in areas under Union control. Case in point, the six parishes of Louisiana under their control were excluded from the Proclamation, as was the entire state of West Virginia. Lincoln was a white supremacist, as shown in an 1858 debate where he said, "I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races... " Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus and imprisoned as many as forty thousand indefinitely without charges or access to an attorney, just to silence his opponents in Congress. He knew of the atrocities committed by the Union troops in occupied territories, and rewarded them for their actions. He even promoted one Colonel to Brigadier General because of his ability to ransack Athens, AL and was court martialed for it. Lincoln ordered the mass execution of several Native American tribes in Minnesota.



Next, the South fought to defend slavery. What a load of b. s. It is a proven fact that 70 to 80% of the Confederate soldiers never owned a single slave. I for one would not risk my life to help some rich man keep his slaves. To put this into perspective, during WWII the US lost about 300,000 military personnel. If the US had lost personnel in WWII at the same rate (per capita) that the South lost during the War of Norther Aggression, the loss of American lives would equate to about six million. Pres. Davis' inaugural address did not even mention slavery. Lee did not own a slave as he had freed his slaves long before the war. Likewise, Fightin' Joe Johnston, A. P. Hill, Fitzhugh Lee, and J. E. B. Stuart also were not slave owners just to name a few. There are countless personal letters from troops home disputing that they were fighting to defend slavery. We fought for independence. Why is that so hard to grasp?



We fought for our right to live as we see fit, not now someone thought was the right way to live. My forefathers stood up for what they believed in and that is something to be honored and be proud of. I for one am, and will defend their good name to the death. The war subsided. Gen'l Forrest did start the KKK, as a guerilla warfare movement to battle the Union after the war. It was not the racist thing that the Klan is today. When it started down that path, he disbanded the Klan and closed it down, only to have it reopened again some years later. The Kaln of then is nothing like the Klan of today.

 

[rrausch]

Good post Rebel!

 

[mcoleman]

Was secession the cause of the war and if not then was the cause of the war?



No. Secession is a civil process of withdrawal and has no implications of force, violence or war. It is often written that to prevent secession (keeping the union whole) and slavery were the burning issues that caused the war, but again these are emotional arguments, that when studied, do not have the substance of fact. Economic and trade relations, including tariffs are other issues raised by some as the cause of the war.



The main cause of the war was the Lincoln government of the North’s rejection of the right of peaceable secession of the eleven sovereign states and subsequently the denial of self-government to the nearly 8 million people living in those states. Without consulting Congress, Lincoln sent great armies of destruction to the South. The Southern people had no choice but to defend themselves from this invasion.



There were two factors about the election of 1860 which disturbed the Southerners so badly that Southern states subsequently seceded. First Was the Republican-party platform for 1860. Basically, the Northern capitalists wanted the U. S. government to tax (only) the South deeply, to finance the industrialization of the North, and the necessary transportation-net to support that. In those days, there was no income tax. The federal government received most of its revenue from tariffs on imported goods. The Southern states imported from England most of the manufactured goods they used, thus paid most of the taxes to support the federal government. The Northerners imported very little. In 1860, for example, just four Southern-states paid in 50% of the total tariffs.



In 1860, the averaged tariff-rate was 18. 84%; the Republicans spread the word that they were shooting for 40%--which could bankrupt many Southerners and would make life much harder for most of them. The Republican platform included a transcontinental railroad, following a Northern route, extensive internal-improvements to extend the transportation net for the Northern manufacturers; a homestead act which would eliminate the only other important source of federal funding, etc.



Second, if the Republicans somehow managed to gain control of Congress and the White House, they would then be able to use the federal government to enact and enforce their party platform, and thus convert the prosperous Southern states into the dirt-poor agricultural colonies of the Northern capitalists. And given the trends in demographics, the Southern states would never be able to reverse that process. The intent of the Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution would then have been subverted completely: the Southern states would no longer be governed with the consent of the governed, but instead bullied mercilessly by the Northern majority. Why, then, remain in the Union?



After the Republicans gained control of the presidency and the Congress, eleven Southern states eventually seceded from the Union, specifically to avoid becoming the helpless agricultural-colonies of the Northern capitalists. This move took the Northern capitalists completely by surprise. Southern states had been threatening to secede ever since the Tariff of Abominations and the days of Calhoun. The North no longer took those threats seriously. But with the South now gone, there would be no federal funding to industrialize the North--for the Northern citizenry would certainly never agree to be taxed to pay for it. And far worse than that, the many, many Northern-capitalists who had been earning fortunes factoring the Southern cotton-crop, transporting the cotton, and buying the cotton for New England textile-mills now faced financial ruin. The South normally bought its manufactured goods from Britain, anyway. Now, as a sovereign nation, the South could easily cut far better deals with the British financiers,



Ship owners, and textile mills to supply the South with all of the necessary support services, leaving the Northern capitalists out in the cold. There was no way Lincoln or anyone else from the Republican party could possibly talk the Southern states back into the Union now, so he would have to conquer them in war. Lincoln assumed it would be a 90-day war, which the Union Army would win in one battle. If you read Lincoln's first inaugural-address with any care at all, you'll see that it was simply a declaration of war against the South.



What caused the war? Mr. Lincoln. His violation of the Constitution including the sending of hostile invading armies into the South, provoked this war. Had the Southern states been allowed to form their own government, there would have been no war.

 

[Rebel_Horseman]

After posting my first post I got to thinking more and more about the subject, and a quote from Gen'l Lee came to mind that fits here.



In August, 1870many ex-Confederates held a meeting and the Union Gen'l William S Rosecrans was there and questioned Lee. Former Confederate Governor of Texas, Fletcher S. Stockdale, had this to say about Union control, "The people of Texas will remain quiet, and not again resort to forceful resistance against the Federal Government, whatever may be the measures of that government. But, General Rosecrans, candor requires me to explain the attitude of my people. The people of Texas havemade up their minds to remain quiet under al aggressions and to have peace; but they have none of the spaniel in their composition. No, sir, they are not in the least like the dog that seeks to lick the hand of them man that kicked him; but it is because they are a very sensible, practical, common-sense people, and understand their position. They know that they resisted the Federal Government as long as any means of resistence was left, and that any attempt at resistence now must be in vain, and they have no means, and would only make bad worse. This is the view of the matter which os going to keep Texas quiet. " After the meeting Gen'l Lee took Gov. Stockdale to the side and said this, "Governor, if I had forseen the use those people designed to make of their victory, there would have been no surrender at Appomattox Courthouse; no, sir, not by me. Had I forseen these results of subjugation, I would have preferred to die at Appomattox with my brave men, my sword in this right hand. "

 

[mcoleman]

3. 10. Why did the Confederates start the war by firing the first shots on Fort Sumter?



While technically true that the South did fire the first gunshots of the war, this resulted from intentional provocation on the part of the Lincoln administration. By the time Lincoln took office, secession was well under way. The Confederate government had assumed control of numerous U. S. government "Federal" forts, arsenals and mints within the Confederate states. Union Major Robert Anderson secretly and at night moved his garrison from the weaker Fort Moultrie in the Charleston harbor to the stronger Fort Sumter. While this was taking place Lincoln’s predecessor, President James Buchanan, had announced his belief in the right of secession by stating that the U. S. had no right to coerce the Southern states to rejoin the Union. Oddly enough, Lincoln had affirmed his own similar belief on the Senate floor in January, 1848. His position changed drastically once appointed President.



In these next two incidences, the pattern of provocation by the North that caused the shots to be fired, which was not necessary, should be fully obvious.



The South’s first shots were fired on the ship "Star of the West" and only after having given a bow shot as a warning not to proceed. She carried provisions to re-supply Fort Sumter and the 200 armed men in her hold. The ship’s mission was to have been a secret. The plan was devised by Union General Winfield Scott and followed through by order of President Buchannan. An important fact about that incident which is often left out of the story is that the ship "Star of the West" after being warned with a bow shot, kept moving forward. It did not heed the warning. It was fired upon again, and was hit twice.



So, who started the war? The North did through this first incident of provocation. The firing the warning shot and the later shots and hits on the "Star of the West" did not have the desired effect by Scott and Buchannan to incite the Northern people enough to call for war.



Remember that South Carolina had legally seceded from the Union with the united States, and Fort Sumter was on South Carolina land. After South Carolina seceded, the fort was still manned by a Union garrison. The South Carolina demanded possession of the fort and offered to pay for it. The Lincoln administration promised that the garrison would leave. However, Lincoln sent Federal war ships, which were supposed to be ships providing provisions for the men there, but instead were actually war ships. When General Beauregard learned of the ships sailing for Fort Sumter, he demanded that Major Anderson, the Union general in charge of the garrison, surrender the fort, or he would commence firing. Anderson refused to surrender, and Beauregard gave the order to fire before the garrison could be reinforced by the Federal war ships.



In short, South Carolina wanted her property back, offered to buy it back, and were promised to be given it back. When the promise was found out to be a lie, they were forced to take it back with force. Lincoln knew he could not gain support of the Northern people for war, so he forced the South into a position of "firing the first shots", This allowed him to trick the North and the world, and as we see now most history teachers into thinking, "Look, Confederates fired on our United States flag. They want war. " You can see this was a propaganda stunt staged by the Northerners to win sympathy for the political aspirations of Lincoln. Once the Fort was fired on the fleet then continued on, as planned to Florida.



The Official Record discloses that beginning 20 January 1861, the Governor of South Carolina arranged to supply the garrison of Fort Sumter with fresh meat, vegetables, and groceries. At the time of the attack, it was reported that 4 weeks of rations were on store at the fort.



Firing on Fort Sumter did not mean the South wanted war. No one was hurt in the firing and Lincoln knew that the Confederates would have to gain control of this fort that had been erected for the defense of and now commanded the entrance to the city of Charleston, one of the busiest seaports at the time. A cold and calculated move that would cost thousands of lives in the next 4 years.

 

[JPope]

The Reconstruction period, now that was a wonderful example of humanism if there ever was one (sarcasm!!) !!!!

Not disputing anyones facts above but wonder how the history and present feelings would have played out if the Reconstruction period would not have been so brutal, rife with criminal activity etc.

 

[ndurbin]

what I quoted in the other post was from the website. Most of it is from CSA officer reports and was put together by a Union officer.



Was it unconstitutional to leave the Union? No one really knows, but it never said it was constitutional either. From what I read in these posts, the South left because they didn't agree with the republican platform. Obvilously most of the nation agreeded with it or Linclon wouldn't have been elected. Does this give the South the right to leave the Union because they dont agree with what the majority of the country wanted? Again no one really knows, but I don't believe it does. What did the founding fathers set the country's gov't. up on? The ability for the gov't to change to fit the country. The south resisted that change.



I don't care much what arguement they use for why the CSA left, it usually comes back to states rights and taxes. Well again I ask what state right did you want? Slavery. You'll counter with something to the effect of "we wanted to live as we see fit. " Well how did you want to live? In a society of wealthy superior white plantation/farm owners with black inferior slaves.

What caused the war? Mr. Lincoln. His violation of the Constitution including the sending of hostile invading armies into the South, provoked this war. Had the Southern states been allowed to form their own government, there would have been no war.

How did he send hostile invading armies into the South? How was it unconstitutional, if you didn't follow the constitution?



When armies did invade the South, they were a seperate country (by secession remember?). They had left the Union long before any army invaded the South. Secession started in Nov. '59, when did the first major battles start, June '60. Did Linclon bait the South into firing first? Maybe he did. Would he have stood a chance had he shot first? No, he would have been impeached.

My forefathers stood up for what they believed in and that is something to be honored and be proud of. I for one am, and will defend their good name to the death.

I respect your forefathers for fighting for what they believed in and I do honor them for it. I also honor my forefathers for what they fought for. Does honoring CSA soliders and remembering their sacrifices mean I have to agree with why they fought? No, I honor them as well as Union soliders for the sacrifices they made. I wont call Lee, Davis, Jackson, Longstreet or any other southern leader a bigot or racist. I would ask that you do the same to honor Union soliders and leaders. Anyone who does this in my opinion is a bigot, racist or whatever themselves.



Nathan

 

[Rebel_Horseman]

Nathan, I will thank you to never post to another thread regarding this issue because you have proven your inability to read fact and comprehend. Furthermore you directly took a jab at me and my heritage and for that I do not appreciate it. Why do people who do not live in the South, don't like the South, and think we are evil becase of propaganda continue to swiftly classify us as bigots and racist? You know nothing about us yet you think you have a right to tell us who we are. That is one of the main reasons why we left in the first place. There is a whole entire page of fact above that dispels everything in your post, yet you obviously did not take the time to read it.



No matter how many times we say it, people like you do not have the mental capacity to grasp it, the war was not about defending slavery. Lincoln got elected becasue he didn't even appear on half of the ballots. His election was a sham.

 

[mcoleman]

Lincoln was not elected by the people. In the majority of the states he received no popular vote. The Liberals seem to think a lot of todays Presidents are elected the same way. The war was unconstitutional because he didn't have the approval of the house to go to war and the Constitution approved of succession. It was very important to the founding fathers that the states had the right to succeed. They afterall had successfully succeeded from the British not to long ago and held that very close to their hearts as a belief. He had quite the contrary of a house resolution to go to war but his way of fixing that was to suspend the writ of habeaus corpus and jail the elected folks and newspaper people that sided against him. The Sons of Union Veterans often agree on the true history of the South with us instead of the Politically correct version. Contrary to what the newsmedia and various hate groups would have you believe most of the League of the South members do not hate or disrespect anyone, They are fighting to have their heritage remembered as the Liberals and PC crowd are trying to erase it everyday or misconstrue what the war was about to convince more folks that the south was wrong. Most of my people never owned slaves but they fought because their land was invaded by a tyrant. Thanks to general order #11 a lot of them were driven from their land and had to watch in horror as Union soldiers burnt their homes and all of their belongings. During the reconstruction period many of them were hung or otherwise driven from their homes as the Northern invaders continued to destroy the south. Shermans march to the sea was not against an Army but against women and children. He murdered 1000s of innocents but you don't see the SCV preaching against the SUV. Or trying to have their symbols removed from public places. Telling their kids they are wrong for wearing their GGG Grandparents flag to school or any of the other issues that the League of the South and SCV members are facing everyday. Here in Missouri our piece pf crap Gov. and his cronnies had the flags removed from the graves of our ancestors so the war is still being fought everyday from our perspective. My sons and their kids and so forth need to remember what the War for Southern Independence was fought for and not what some Politically Correct idiot in an office somewhere wants them to believe. It would be disrespectful to their GGG Grandparents if they didn't learn the actual truth of the war and not the onesided speel of the Victor.

 

[ndurbin]

Rebel_Horseman: I am not suppose to be offended by the jabs your taking at my Union ancestors? Your attitude towards anybody that has a different opinion about southern history is what I normally run into as an SUV member and Union civil war reenactor. Nothing but disrespect.



Do I agree with everything Linclon did? No.



Again I well ask what state right did they want? I don't need a long complicated answer about how Linclon said this or said that. Or how after the war they were mistreated. Just a simple answer will do.



I have no problem with the CSA flag being flown in honor of CSA veterans. It's when used otherwise I have a problem.



I am well aware of what the local SCV members do. I am an SUV member and a Union civil war reenactor. The local SCV chapters around here are nothing but disrespectful and trouble. Do we try to be cordial yes, it is them who are not. I don't know if all SCV chapters and CSA reenactors are this way or not but the local groups I have had encounters with are. Many of the group I reenact with left CSA reenacting outfits because of this.

 

[Rebel_Horseman]

I see your point Nathan, and I took your previous post as being disrespectful and a little degrading. . sorry. Most of the SCV camps, of which I am a member, are not trouble makers per-say. We love to work to teach true Southern history, and most of us reenact the many battles in this area. I know of several SCV members who are also members of the SUV. Maybe those folks out there in KS are a little more rowdy than us.



We simply wanted to be able to live under a just Constitution that would not be circumvented. We saw it circumvented by the election of Lincoln, by the unjust tarriffs placed on our goods and services, etc. Slavery was a dying issue. I have read that many Confederate officers advocated the freeing of all slaves, and enlisting them in our defense. The Confederate government was in the process of establishing colonies in the Indies and Africa, so that the slaves could be freed and returned to their rightful homes. We didn't want to be told what to do by someone from another land that did not know us and how we viewed life, nor did they care a red nickle about us (except our money). I don't think it's as much of a state's rights, even though it certainly was, as it was an inherent right of all... to be governed by your elected peers.

 

[ndurbin]

Rowdy is an understatement most of the time. And I apoligize if I may have been disrespectful and degrading that was not my intention.



I can understand some of those points. I have alittle trouble with agreeing that slavery was a dying issue. To me it seems that before the invention of the cotton gin it was dying out but once it was invented plantation owners saw they could work more ground so they increased the demand for slaves. To me it just seems slavery played a bigger part then people believe or want to believe it did. I believe why many of the Southern officers wanted to free the slaves and enlist them was because they knew they needed soliders. And many of the Southern officers were brilliant military officers. I don't know if that really means they were against slavery or were just being shrewd to hide it (much like Linclon was shrewd enough to hide somethings).



Nathan

 

[Sled Puller]

Whats really silly about this, is the last three Presidents are SOUTHERNERS, one from California, then another SOUTHERNER,(Jimmy was bonafied rebel, listen to him talk!!)



YA'LL WON, and STILL DON"T REALIZE IT!!!!!

 

[mcoleman]

Lee was against slavery and spoke out about it. He only fought for the South because his homestate of Virginia was invaded. Jefferson Davis had even put out a bill that would have abolished slavery around the end of 1864 but since they lost the war it wouldn't have mattered. Even if they would have never had slavery in the south it wouldn't have mattered. Lincoln didn't care about slavery anyway. He wanted their resources and revenues. I still find it amusing that people think the war was about slavery when only 6% of the population had slaves to begin with. 90% of those men were fighting because their homelands were invaded by a foreign force. Much like we would fight today if the USA was invaded by a foreign force. Do you thing US Grant was fighting to end slavery? He still had slaves at the end of the war.

 

[mcoleman]

Sleddy I don't think Jimmy had any rebel in him. I still wonder if he has anything at all in him everytime I see him on tv. Besides politicians is for politicians nowdays. They only support what benefits them and could care less what the people think. I don't care what banner their flying. They are no longer up there to serve us.

 

[Sled Puller]

I think the northern soldier may have been mislead more than the southern-but the results were the same-men died on both sides for unjust, fake, if you will, causes. Oh, we know what they THOUGHT they were fighting for, but it wasn't the case.



The South firing on Fort Sumter was no doubt a major rallying cry to the North. Doesn't matter whether it was provoked or not. That is what sparked the Northern people into backing a war effort. Big Mistake, that shooting.



I believe it was the stupidest war we were ever in.



And any talk of future seccesion, is the stupidest thing I have heard since.

There are no clear lines, the country is too large, too diverse for a shooting battle.



The battle needs to be fought at the ballot box, and in the courtroom.

 

[loncray]

I'm kinda curious on something. As I understand things, before President Lincoln called for a draft to add a load of soldiers to the US Army, Virginia was actually considering NOT seceding from the Union. It was the issue of sending a new load of troops that caused the Virginia legislature to vote to secede. It wasn't invasion that caused Robert Lee to fight, it was that he'd already joined the Virginia military (later the heart of the Confederate military) and they fought after secession. Is this knowledge correct? Curious to see what Rebel_H and others have to say. I'm pretty certain that, had Virginia NOT seceded, the Confederacy would've been doomed militarily far quicker.

 

[mcoleman]

That is what the League of the South is trying to do. They are not interested in succession they are interested in preserving our heritage for future generations before the hate groups succeed in getting it all removed from existence. Some of the Liberal groups are even trying to ban the Confederate Holidays that have been in existence for years in southron states among many other current issues. The Constitution Party is the main Political party that the group as a whole is backing. That shooting was a big mistake but it was a calculated mistake by Ape Lincoln. The South Carolinians even offered to buy the fort back since it was in a succeeded state but Lincoln wouldn't hear of it. He knew exactly what he was after. He sentenced 600,000 people to death with his private agenda. Worse than any other conflict we have ever been involved in worldwide. We know what are history is and no kind of BS from the Liberal or PCs will ever change our history books and what we teach our children which is the truth. You will find that most CSA historians have large libraries as they all fear exactly what is happening on a daily basis. Their right to free speech is being stomped on by greedy Politicians looking for votes from special interest groups. That war was stupid but it was fought for the exact same reasons as the Revolutionary War. Which was rights and freedom from taxes and revenues and a foreign invader.

 

[mcoleman]

Robert E. Lee

We shouldn’t let the month of January slip by without paying our respects to one of finest men our country has produced; Robert E. Lee. January 19, was the 195th anniversary of the birthday of Robert E. Lee; a very special day, not only for Southerners but for all Americans who admire true heroes.



Unlike media created heroes, Lee doesn’t have a hint of scandal that has to be covered up. The facts of his life may be recounted without modification. Theodore Roosevelt characterized Lee this way: "the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth. " Lee is also venerated in Europe as evidenced by this tribute by Winston Churchill: "one of the noblest Americans who ever lived. "



In 1998, a Midwestern college decided to publish a book about the persons they considered to be six authentic heroes of our nation. They selected George Washington, Daniel Boone, Louisa May Alcott, George Washington Carver, Robert E. Lee, and Andrew Carnegie. Excellent choices; a group of outstanding people and a selection made without kowtowing to current political trends.



Robert E. Lee’s father was a Revolutionary War hero, a three-time governor of Virginia and a congressman in the U. S. House of Representatives. Two members of the Lee family risked their lives by signing the Declaration of Independence. Lee married Mary Custis, great-granddaughter of George Washington and she inherited Arlington House, Washington’s antebellum estate in Virginia that eventually became home to Lee, Mary, and their seven children, before being confiscated by Lincoln. He turned it into a Union cemetary with an eye to making a return to its owners impossible.



After graduating from West Point, Lee became a member of the U. S. Army and began a long and remarkable military career. He distinguished himself in the Mexican War earning three honorary field promotions. His accomplishments were many including Assistant to the Chief of the Engineer Corps and Superintendent of West Point. In later years he was appointed president of a college in Lexington, Virginia that was later renamed Washington and Lee University in honor of his outstanding years of service.



Interestingly, when the Civil War started, Robert E. Lee was offered the command of the Union forces, but after his home state, Virginia, seceded, he resigned from the U. S. Army and joined with the Confederates. Many people wonder why Lee would turn down the command of the Union forces and support the Confederacy. But loyalty was one of Lee’s bedrock traits and he couldn’t wage war against Virginia and the South. Also, recent historians are presenting a more balanced view of the long festering and complex events leading to the Civil War. (An example being inequitable tariffs – the South paid 87% of the nation’s total tariffs in 1860 alone. ) The new research contained in these books puts a new light on Lee’s decision to fight for the South.



I suspect that another reason Lee decided to support the South was President Lincoln’s refusal to meet with Southern representatives to try to reach a compromise to avoid war. Although members of Lincoln’s own cabinet as well as newspapers in America and Europe encouraged the President to attempt a negotiated settlement, he remained adamant. Lincoln rejected all requests for discussions that might have led to a peaceful resolution.



Robert E. Lee vigorously opposed slavery and as early as 1856 made this statement: "There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. " Lee also knew that the use of slaves was coming to an end. Cyrus McCormick’s 1831 invention of the mule-drawn mechanical reaper sounded the death knell for the use of slave labor. Before the Civil War began, 250,000 slaves had already been freed.



Robert E. Lee did not own slaves, but many Union generals did. When his father-in-law died, Lee took over the management of the plantation his wife had inherited and immediately began freeing the slaves. By the time Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, every slave in Lee’s charge had been freed. Notably, some Union generals didn’t free their slaves until the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868.



During the Civil War, Union commanders pillaged the South, abusing civilians in unspeakable ways, destroying railroads and factories, and burning private homes, public buildings, schools and libraries. Union forces also slaughtered livestock and decimated crops, after they took what they wanted.



Periodic reports detailing their carnage were sent to General Halleck in Washington who shared them with President Lincoln. In a typical report issued on September 17, 1863, Union General Sherman added this comment; "We will remove every obstacle-if need be, take every life, every acre of land, every particle of property, everything that to us seems proper. " Halleck showed this report to Lincoln, who enjoyed it so much that he demanded that it be published.



When Robert E. Lee invaded Pennsylvania, many Southerners hoped that he would give the Yankees a taste of their own medicine. But Lee was a man of integrity. Not only did he prohibit "wanton injury to private property," he also ordered his soldiers to pay for any supplies taken from civilians.



Most histories have treated General Lee kindly, even those written shortly after the Civil War. This respect accorded to Lee infuriates those who want to tarnish his reputation, and they have even managed to force textbook writers to reword their references to Lee and, in many cases, delete any mention of him.



Also, some cities have removed portraits and other Lee memorabilia as a result of pressure from politicos who haven’t taken the time to learn the facts about this famous Southern gentleman. Portraits and plaques honoring Lee have been slashed and burned, and statues of the General have been spray-painted with obscenities.



Never the less, current biographies continue to enhance Robert E. Lee’s well-earned reputation. One journalist, after reviewing many of these new histories made this comment. "The South may have succumbed to overwhelming military force, but it triumphed in at least one sense. It produced perhaps the greatest symbol to come out of America’s most disastrous conflict, someone who combined combat and moral excellence and who, once defeated, worked to heal the wounds of war. It is a record that deserves to be retold constantly. "



Years after the war, Lee still commanded respect in both the North and the South. On one occasion he was approached by a group of businessmen concerning a questionable commercial venture. After offering the General $50,000, they told him; "You will have to do nothing. All we want is the use of your name. " Robert E. Lee’s response was what we would have expected;



"Sirs, my name is the heritage of my parents. It is all I have, and it is not for sale. "



If I had to pick one American to represent the best values of our nation, I would choose Robert E. Lee. He stands taller than anyone else. We must continue to honor him every January on the anniversary of his birth because;



"Men of such magnitude are rare in history. They come but once in a century

 

[Rebel_Horseman]

loncray, I can't say I've ever heard discussions regarding the statements you made. It is possible that it is accurate, but I have nothing to corroborate nor deny those claims. Do you remember where you heard it? I'd be interested in reading this analysis.



Personal opinion here... had we not had Lee on our side, the war would have probably been somewhat shorter. However, remember that we had other great leaders on our side besides Lee. The reason that lee is so paramount is becasue the majority of the fighting was east of the Missisippi River. The Army of the Trans-Mississippi (AoTM) only fought in a handful of battles, and the last major battle of the war was fought in this theater. We had such strong leaders as Stonewall Jackson, Fighting Joe Hooker, Joe Johnston, JEB Stuart, Nathan Bedford Forrest, AP Hill, et. al. who were very capable leaders. Lee was definately our greatest leader becasue he did the most... not trying to discount that. Virginia did her fair share of providing troops for the war, but no more than the other states, as well as the men form the border states and territories that fought with us. I just can't see Virginia being the key to our success outright, although they nodoubt played a major role. But that's just my opinion.