(September 11, 2017 at 12:37 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote: There are no monuments to Hitler in Berlin.

That's only because he lost.   Oh.  Robert E Lee lost too.

Erwin Rommel has no less than three army bases in Germany named after him. Also two museums, a public memorial, and also Jah knows how many public streets in Germany, as well as establishments in Mersa Matruh, where he once held a command.

I suppose not entirely cottoning to the Nazi ideology helped with that; sort of why I think Robert E. Lee, who didn't particularly care for slavery, deserves a pass despite fighting for a nation whose sole raison d'etre was the preservation of slavery in its worst forms. I'm sure I've discussed to death the long-standing disconnect between why many Confederates fought for the South and why the South split in the first place.

There are not-exactly-racist reasons the Confederacy still has admirers is all I'm saying.

Quote:Erwin Rommel has no less than three army bases in Germany named after him.

Let's be serious, here.  Germany was notoriously short of victorious generals in the 20th century.

Rommel also had the virtue of being murdered by the nazis after the Valkyrie plot.

(September 11, 2017 at 1:36 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Erwin Rommel has no less than three army bases in Germany named after him.

Let's be serious, here.  Germany was notoriously short of victorious generals in the 20th century.

Rommel also had the virtue of being murdered by the nazis after the Valkyrie plot.

So you're saying Beccs murdered Rommel? 

Go figure. She probably used her scalpel too.



I am NOT calling Beccs a Nazi, for what it's worth.. but there was a Valkyrie plot involved and well... I was trying to be funny.

(September 11, 2017 at 1:21 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:

(September 11, 2017 at 12:37 pm)Minimalist Wrote: That's only because he lost.   Oh.  Robert E Lee lost too.

Erwin Rommel has no less than three army bases in Germany named after him. Also two museums, a public memorial, and also Jah knows how many public streets in Germany, as well as establishments in Mersa Matruh, where he once held a command.

I suppose not entirely cottoning to the Nazi ideology helped with that; sort of why I think Robert E. Lee, who didn't particularly care for slavery, deserves a pass despite fighting for a nation whose sole raison d'etre was the preservation of slavery in its worst forms. I'm sure I've discussed to death the long-standing disconnect between why many Confederates fought for the South and why the South split in the first place.

There are not-exactly-racist reasons the Confederacy still has admirers is all I'm saying.

While I appreciate your point of view (yes, Lee wasn't a supporter of slavery per se, so much as he was a loyal Virginian in an age when people often considered their first allegiance to their state), I still find it hard to give him a pass. He was the best general in the U.S. army, and I believe that had he assumed command of the Army of the Potomac, as Lincoln wished, the war would have been considerably shorter and much less blood would have been spilled. Instead, we had a disastrous revolving door of generals (McClellan, Hooker, Burnside) whose strategic and tactical ineptitude resulted in monstrous casualties without ever managing to capture Richmond -- and all despite decisive superiority in numbers and materiel.

(September 8, 2017 at 10:13 pm)Tres Leches Wrote: If it pisses off the racists, then 1,000 of the statues should be erected.

-Teresa

You've got a problem with racists? Then let me tell you something bucko, I have no problem with you.

(September 11, 2017 at 11:49 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:

A Theist Wrote:That's what I was asking you dumb fuck when you replied to CJ,

"Statues on public property are maintained by tax dollars along with everything else on the property."

Since you're concerned over maintaining statues and monuments with taxpayers' money are you suggesting then that all statues and monuments of every kind on public property that are funded by taxpayers be removed....and as CJ pointed out to you will those taxpayer funded statues and monuments include the removal of those that are dedicated to MLK, Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln?

I'm wondering how anyone could possibly conclude that the statue's maintenance in the public square being paid for by taxpayers is the ONLY reason GS has a problem with confederate statues on the public square. How is it not glaringly obvious that he's objection is to CONFEDERATE monuments being maintained by taxpayer funds? There's nothing inconsistent about thinking monuments to traitors to the USA shouldn't be maintained at the expense of US taxpayers.

---

bennyboy Wrote:I'm personally against the statue removal.  I'd also be against the removal of Hitler statues in Berlin.  I mean. . . you don't want to have too many of them, but seeing how important figures in history looked is interesting and educational.

This shit about things representing ideas is bullshit.  So General Lee was a slaveholder.  His statue isn't enslaving anyone, and its existence doesn't necessarily imply endorsement of slavery.  He was an important player in American history, and I see no problem with his image being displayed.  Now, I wouldn't call the park, "Southern Freedom Memorial Park" or something, but that's a different issue.

There are no monuments to Hitler in Berlin.

I can attest to that, as I'm in Berlin. The closest think they have to a statue of Hitler in the city is the original bell from the original belltower at the Olympiastadion still has its nazi symbology. Which the tourist board talking about the bell finds quite strange.

Rev. Rye Wrote:

Minimalist Wrote:That's only because he lost.   Oh.  Robert E Lee lost too.

I suppose not entirely cottoning to the Nazi ideology helped with that; sort of why I think Robert E. Lee, who didn't particularly care for slavery, deserves a pass despite fighting for a nation whose sole raison d'etre was the preservation of slavery in its worst forms. I'm sure I've discussed to death the long-standing disconnect between why many Confederates fought for the South and why the South split in the first place.

As a slave-owner who doesn't particularly care for slavery, Lee is damned with faint praise.

(September 11, 2017 at 4:22 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

Rev. Rye Wrote:I suppose not entirely cottoning to the Nazi ideology helped with that; sort of why I think Robert E. Lee, who didn't particularly care for slavery, deserves a pass despite fighting for a nation whose sole raison d'etre was the preservation of slavery in its worst forms. I'm sure I've discussed to death the long-standing disconnect between why many Confederates fought for the South and why the South split in the first place.

As a slave-owner who doesn't particularly care for slavery, Lee is damned with faint praise.

REL had a black brother (but so did all of the other slavers).

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vieilles_a...915774564/

---

Even today REL is killing Americans.

Crane Crashes Heading To Remove Confederate Statue
UPDATED: September 11, 2017 3:10 PM
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2017/09/10/crane...-accident/

"DALLAS (CBSDFW.COM) – Officials said that a crane that was on its way to remove the Robert E. Lee statue at Lee Park in Dallas was involved in a crash that killed one person.

According to officials, a semi-truck collided with the crane at SM Wright Freeway and Linfield Avenue."

Quote:yes, Lee wasn't a supporter of slavery per se,

Yeah, um, actually he thought it was about the best thing available for the blacks.  What he did not like was the impact it had on whites.  There is a letter that he wrote to his father-in-law which lays out his position.  It's not so clear cut that he "opposed" slavery.

(September 11, 2017 at 6:30 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:yes, Lee wasn't a supporter of slavery per se,

Yeah, um, actually he thought it was about the best thing available for the blacks.  What he did not like was the impact it had on whites.  There is a letter that he wrote to his father-in-law which lays out his position.  It's not so clear cut that he "opposed" slavery.

Lee was basically an asshole.  He said that it took 2,000 years for Christianity to make its effect felt and that if it took another 1,000 or 2,000 years for the whites to give black people their freedom then it was OK with him because God knows what's best.
http://civilwarhome.com/leepierce.htm