Lee Deification of Robert E Lee

[jgoodguy]

Dipping my toe in, I'd want Lee with me rather than against me.

 

[diane]

I've always admired Lee and found him to be a sound person, decent, respectable, Christian, very good man all around. He has been lifted up on high by others, though, and far more than he ever thought he should be lifted. For him, he lost his war, the cause he led was defeated and he did the best he could to divest himself of ill feelings. He tried hard throughout the war to refer to the Federals as 'those people' although a time or two he slipped and said 'the enemy'. He didn't want fellow Americans to be enemies.

Many, many others - some just as good as Lee - couldn't do it and couldn't even pretend to do it. And a few remained bitter and angry, never letting go. Lee deserves to be well thought of and to be considered an American. He didn't think the whole nation was founded wrong, needed to be torn down and redone, but he did believe his duty was to protect his family and his heritage, and that the disagreement was a valid difference in interpretation of the Constitution and the intent of the Founders.

Being human, having a temper, owning slaves, being rather selfish about keeping his daughters home - all these things don't tarnish Lee but are part of the fabric of who he really was. Nothing wrong in seeing the warts. Nothing wrong in admiring the man despite them. He did better than most trying to get rid of them, and considerably better than most in trying to put the country back together and keep people from remaining angry.

 

[jgoodguy]

IMHO Lee's problem is that he died before solidifying his legacy. Instead it was seized by folks with an agenda in mind, obscuring his legacy until recently.

 

[CMWinkler]

J. William Jones was the author of Christ in the Camps. I have not personally verified this quotation.

 

[jgoodguy]

View attachment 112590
J. William Jones was the author of Christ in the Camps. I have not personally verified this quotation.

It is attributed to Jones in several works included his, but the quote is not mentioned by anyone else as near as I can find.
Personal Reminiscences, Anecdotes, and Letters of Gen. Robert E. Lee by Jones
General Robert E. Lee After Appomattox
Maxims of Robert E. Lee for Young Gentle

 

[Rebforever]

"-General Lee was a gentleman and soldier of the highest order who inspired the kind of loyalty and awe from his soldiers not seen in America since George Washington. Lee favored defensive warfare to preserve his army, but he was at his most brilliant when executing daring attacks that produced stunning victories and often defied military logic. Lee's greatest weapons was his uncanny knack for reading an opponent and using insights on the personalities of enemy commanders to discern how best to defeat them.

The Battle of Chancellorsville took place in early May 1863 in Spotsylvania County, Virginia, near the village of Chancellorsville. It is known as Lee's "perfect battle" and was remarkable for several reasons, chief among them was the risky but successful tactic Lee used of dividing his smaller army, not once, but twice, to outflank and route a much larger Union force. Lee's audacity, combined with the Union's timid performance in combat, resulted in a significant Confederate victory."

http://www.spike.com/blog/deadliest-warrior/85086#

 

[Rebforever]

"Civil War Confederate General.
He occupies a unique place in U.S. military history. Dispite his affiliation with the Confederacy, he is often regarded as one of America's greatest soldiers. "

http://www.footnote.com/page/1189_the_funeral_of_gen_robert_e_lee/

 

[Rebforever]

Robert E. Lee: Icon of the South and American Hero

by H. W. Crocker III – American Spectator
"Lee, in the mind of some, has become a sectarian hero, when he used to be a national one. Theodore Roosevelt, scion of a Yankee father and a Southern mother, thought Lee was "without any exception the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth." On Lee's death in 1870, a Northern paper, the New York Herald, editorialized: "Here in the North… we have long ceased to look upon him as the Confederate leader, but have claimed him as one of ourselves; have cherished and felt proud of his military genius as belonging to us; have recounted and recorded his triumphs as our own; have extolled his virtue as reflecting upon us — for Robert Edward Lee was an American, and the great nation which gave him birth would be to-day unworthy of such a son if she regarded him lightly. Never had mother a nobler son…"

http://buchanan.org/blog/robert-e-lee-icon-of-the-south-and-american-hero-649

 

[C. Kelp]

i'll reply to all at once. i think lee was a great general
but i think he is overrated and his strategy flawed and his tactics lucky against inferior opponents until grant and his favor of virginia may have been fatal. cash i know you do not agree but you lectured me before i think.
i should not have gotten into the christianity issue, except it is continually attributed to lee, but i'll pass on that one
i keep hearing about all the effort he put into reunification. he built up a school, he kept quiet. what else ? i am beginning to understand that lee was in an impossible position in the beginning, and desired to remain loyal to everyone, so i am updating my view of him. [edit] keeping quiet must have been very hard pill to swallow for lee but it is important. anything else ? this is my opinion based on my reading so far. i am going to get the book tip provided by unionblue. it looks interesting.

 

[C. Kelp]

I must admit this one puzzled me. Of all the criticism I've heard of Lee over lo these many years, questioning his Christianity is a new one on me.

i question all christian claims because if christians really and truly believed that their soul and eternal life were at stake they would not do the things they do. christianity shares cause with slavery in this struggle .

 

[Aussie Billy Sherman]

In my opinion, Lee delegated too much and gave commanders too much leeway. Often his good plans were not followed through by his subordinates and Lee should've paid closer attention to their efforts. Only someone like Jackson did well with Lee's way of commanding
Lee either should've been more active in following what his men were doing or become more of a figurehead commander of all the Reb armies where he could mould strategy for all the southern armies in the field

 

[Martini-Henry]

The first thing that goes wrong in Battle are any plans you may have made. Could it be that R E Lee was giving his commanders operational flexibility? This "light touch," system was used by the Germans very effectively in WW2. Now this will obviously breakdown when sub unit commanders misinterpret or just make wrong decisions. I do however, believe that Lee was exercising tactical fluidity by allowing his subordinates a greater degree of control than many other of his contemporaries of the time.

 

[TFSmith121]

Given the choices available after JE Johnston was wounded (Lee, GV Smith, or ?) he was the only choice.

Given the reality that GBM was so easily and obviously buffaloed, Lee made the correct if painful decision to (continue Johnston's strategy of) attacking McClellan's army on the Peninsula, and then go big after Pope. In both cases, it paid real - if painfully gained - dividends for the rebellion.

However, the invasion of Maryland did more harm than good, obviously (presumably the strategic results of Polk's invasion of Kentucky should have been an indicator); the defensive strategy that led to the operational victories at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville show the obvious effectiveness of a Fabian strategy.

The 1863 invasion was strategic lunacy, and Lee failed consistently after 1863.

Could the rebels trade space for time? No, but simply remaining on the defensive could have resulted in a stalemate in the east, which would have both freed up at least some resources for the west and given the rebels a better chance at a political victory in 1864 than the chosen strategy, certainly.

Best,

 

[Desert Kid]

I know the US considered them still citizens but they didn't consider themselves so - and, of course, levying war against the US was to the US traitorous and to them not. Which is all moot - they lost so US law prevails. Lee had a special deal, too, with Grant upon the surrender - that's why Grant would have resigned if they'd tried Lee. Lincoln - ok, I'll concede that point since he wouldn't have acted as he did if he didn't think that. Maybe the line between a rebel and a traitor isn't that clear anyway. But he certainly did, as you say, not want any more flashpoints, like hanging Jeff Davis from a sour apple tree. There was no effort made to stop Confederates from heading to Canada, Mexico or wherever they chose to go, or to extradite them from those foreign places. (Not that that would have been very do-able let alone worth it.) Still, in my mind, I'm not so sure those who rebelled were traitors betraying their country since they were attempting to defend/create a new one. Maybe there is no grey area - can't be a little bit pregnant, after all!

P S

Well, heck. I sure flopped around that answer like a fish on the bank!

I look at it this way.

People see the word "traitor" as somehow a bad thing.

The problem is, the good old US of A was born in treason, we are a festering nest of traitors. That tradition continued with the Republic of West Florida, the Republic of Texas, and yes, the Confederate States of America. The only difference is that the Confederates lost. Then you can twist that even further and say yes, Newt Knight was a traitor, and so was Sam Houston, or Thaddeus Kosciusko, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Jeff Davis, Thomas Jefferson, and many a host of others from our history.

You cannot condemn the Confederates without condemning at least everybody else for a hundred years prior. So I do find it funny when we see a New Englander go on about those "traitorous slave beaters" in the Deep South while at the same breath grasping for the Minutemen and the Founding Fathers fail to see the irony of their indignation.

 

[Martini-Henry]

I look at it this way.

People see the word "traitor" as somehow a bad thing.

The problem is, the good old US of A was born in treason, we are a festering nest of traitors. That tradition continued with the Republic of West Florida, the Republic of Texas, and yes, the Confederate States of America. The only difference is that the Confederates lost. Then you can twist that even further and say yes, Newt Knight was a traitor, and so was Sam Houston, or Thaddeus Kosciusko, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Jeff Davis, Thomas Jefferson, and many a host of others from our history.

You cannot condemn the Confederates without condemning at least everybody else for a hundred years prior. So I do find it funny when we see a New Englander go on about those "traitorous slave beaters" in the Deep South while at the same breath grasping for the Minutemen and the Founding Fathers fail to see the irony of their indignation.

I think you nailed it mate.

 

[Schwallanscher]

The first thing that goes wrong in Battle are any plans you may have made. Could it be that R E Lee was giving his commanders operational flexibility? This "light touch," system was used by the Germans very effectively in WW2. Now this will obviously breakdown when sub unit commanders misinterpret or just make wrong decisions. I do however, believe that Lee was exercising tactical fluidity by allowing his subordinates a greater degree of control than many other of his contemporaries of the time.

emphasis mine

make that at least 1870/71 - we call it auftragstaktik

 

[Martini-Henry]

emphasis mine

make that at least 1870/71 - we call it auftragstaktik

I bow before your Knowledge. I haven't studied that period in any great detail. However the fact that, that, tactical approach was used successfully that far back proves it's success.

 

[Schwallanscher]

we invented a new type of school for that - to get educated nco.s - auftragstaktik goes down to squadlevel. you don't tell your sarge 'at 0615 you'll advance to that bridge and ...' what you say is 'i'll have breakfast at 0900 on the other side of that river tomorrow - and i won't swim'

 

[Tin cup]

I look at it this way.

People see the word "traitor" as somehow a bad thing.

The problem is, the good old US of A was born in treason, we are a festering nest of traitors. That tradition continued with the Republic of West Florida, the Republic of Texas, and yes, the Confederate States of America. The only difference is that the Confederates lost. Then you can twist that even further and say yes, Newt Knight was a traitor, and so was Sam Houston, or Thaddeus Kosciusko, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Jeff Davis, Thomas Jefferson, and many a host of others from our history.

You cannot condemn the Confederates without condemning at least everybody else for a hundred years prior. So I do find it funny when we see a New Englander go on about those "traitorous slave beaters" in the Deep South while at the same breath grasping for the Minutemen and the Founding Fathers fail to see the irony of their indignation.

I don't understand how people can even compare the Rev War folk with the Confederate folk. The folk who became "Confederate", did so for a cause so bad, and for such a terrible reason, that I dare not insult the Rev War folk with the comparison.
The Folk wishing to gain independence for perpetual slavery, HAD representation, (prior to the Civil War) the Rev War people only dreamed of having, prior to their war!

The comparing of the two, needs to stop.

Kevin Dally

 

[Schwallanscher]

I don't understand how people can even compare the Rev War folk with the Confederate folk. The folk who became "Confederate", did so for a cause so bad, and for such a terrible reason, that I dare not insult the Rev War folk with the comparison.
The Folk wishing to gain independence for perpetual slavery, HAD representation, (prior to the Civil War) the Rev War people only dreamed of having, prior to their war!

The comparing of the two, needs to stop.

Kevin Dally

that doesn't change that both are technically traitors when they start their 'projects'