VOSA

Liberal Looney Toons, Part II

83 posts in this topic

Just now, Smokey 1 said:

Whatever you think of the flag or display would be only be your opinion and would not necessarily be evidence of bigotry of the owner.  People see things differently, to you in your mind it represents evil but to someone else it could represent something benign.  

Fair point. But it is not libel to identify the owner of a property and any businesses he owns. Or even to add, "if you don't think we need this kind of display in our town, tell him by staying away from his business."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duke of Earl said:

President Dwight D. Eisenhower had this to say about Lee in a letter to a critic who questioned why a portrait of Robert E Lee was among the four great Americans on his office wall:

Eisenhower is entitled to his opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Evil Yoda said:

Eisenhower is entitled to his opinion.

I guess you and your sign will be off to Abilene soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Evil Yoda said:

Fair point. But it is not libel to identify the owner of a property and any businesses he owns. Or even to add, "if you don't think we need this kind of display in our town, tell him by staying away from his business."

Go ahead, give it a try.  Be interesting to see what happens.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VOSA said:

I guess you and your sign will be off to Abilene soon.

LOL  Good one 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"General Wolseley, commander-in-chief of the armies of Great Britain,
himself a nobleman and perhaps the leading military critic of our age,
closes a remarkable article upon General Lee with these words:
 
"When Americans can review the history of their last great rebellion
with calm impartiality, I believe all will admit that General Lee
towered far above all men on either side in that struggle. I believe he
will be regarded not only as the most prominent figure of the
Confederacy, but as the Great American of the nineteenth century, whose
statue is well worthy to stand on an equal pedestal with that of
Washington, and whose memory is equally worthy to be enshrined in the
hearts of all his countrymen."
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Duke of Earl said:

"General Wolseley, commander-in-chief of the armies of Great Britain,
himself a nobleman and perhaps the leading military critic of our age,
closes a remarkable article upon General Lee with these words:
 
"When Americans can review the history of their last great rebellion
with calm impartiality, I believe all will admit that General Lee
towered far above all men on either side in that struggle. I believe he
will be regarded not only as the most prominent figure of the
Confederacy, but as the Great American of the nineteenth century, whose
statue is well worthy to stand on an equal pedestal with that of
Washington, and whose memory is equally worthy to be enshrined in the
hearts of all his countrymen."
 

Clearly General Wolsely misjudged the ability of Americans - especially today's citizens - to observe history from a "calm impartiality". 

While I admire General Lee for his leadership abilities and tactical genius (Gettysburg notwithstanding), and to an extent understand that loyalty to one's state still (for many) trumped loyalty to the United States at that time, I have to temper that respect because his loyalty to Virginia directly supported the enslavement of human beings. 

If we observe statues and names as commemorating or accepting an ugly piece of our history versus honoring a lost cause, maybe we can at least reach a tolerance of understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Duke of Earl said:

As I think you know, those that say that would be wrong. The treaty ending the War of 1812  was over  by the time the Battle of New Orleans took place . No cell phones 

Somewhat the point of the commemoration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Duke of Earl said:

"General Wolseley, commander-in-chief of the armies of Great Britain,
himself a nobleman and perhaps the leading military critic of our age,
closes a remarkable article upon General Lee with these words:
 
"When Americans can review the history of their last great rebellion
with calm impartiality, I believe all will admit that General Lee
towered far above all men on either side in that struggle. I believe he
will be regarded not only as the most prominent figure of the
Confederacy, but as the Great American of the nineteenth century, whose
statue is well worthy to stand on an equal pedestal with that of
Washington, and whose memory is equally worthy to be enshrined in the
hearts of all his countrymen."
 

Why should I, or anyone else, care?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Struds said:

Clearly General Wolsely misjudged the ability of Americans - especially today's citizens - to observe history from a "calm impartiality". 

While I admire General Lee for his leadership abilities and tactical genius (Gettysburg notwithstanding), and to an extent understand that loyalty to one's state still (for many) trumped loyalty to the United States at that time, I have to temper that respect because his loyalty to Virginia directly supported the enslavement of human beings. 

If we observe statues and names as commemorating or accepting an ugly piece of our history versus honoring a lost cause, maybe we can at least reach a tolerance of understanding.

Keep in mind that he refers to the Civil War as "their last great rebellion", a strong indication of where his sympathies lie, which tends to lead to the white supremacists' strategy of focusing on the military aspect while ignoring the bondage aspect. Reducing this war of massive liberation to the stifling qualities of a rotten way of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Smokey 1 said:

Go ahead, give it a try.  Be interesting to see what happens.  

Of course, if the racist who endorses the Confederacy retaliates in some fashion, then HE is guilty of a crime, no? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Evil Yoda said:

Of course, if the racist who endorses the Confederacy retaliates in some fashion, then HE is guilty of a crime, no? :)

I suppose that would depend on the particulars of what each did.  

For example if someone tried to take down a flag on someone else's property then the owner should be able to use enough force to prevent the theft/destruction short of killing the thief. 

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hst2 said:

Keep in mind that he refers to the Civil War as "their last great rebellion", a strong indication of where his sympathies lie, which tends to lead to the white supremacists' strategy of focusing on the military aspect while ignoring the bondage aspect. Reducing this war of massive liberation to the stifling qualities of a rotten way of life.

Are you saying that you believe anyone who primarily studies the military aspects of the CW is a white supremacist?  :lol:

You get more ridiculous everyday.  

 

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on you slackers! Three pages? This is disgraceful.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Smokey 1 said:

Are you saying that you believe anyone who primarily studies the military aspects of the CW is a white supremacist?  :lol:

You get more ridiculous everyday.  

 

CW? I was refering to The Last Great Rebellion. ;)

Almost everyone I have come across who concerns himself primarily with the battles and the military is a defender of white supremacist idea.

They have great difficulty in coming to terms with this. Many feel their words are misinterpreted.  But by so many?  It seems unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hst2 said:

CW? I was refering to The Last Great Rebellion. ;)

Almost everyone I have come across who concerns himself primarily with the battles and the military is a defender of white supremacist idea.

They have great difficulty in coming to terms with this. Many feel their words are misinterpreted.  But by so many?  It seems unlikely.

Everyone is a closet white supremacist except you. We get it. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hst2 said:

CW? I was refering to The Last Great Rebellion. ;)

Almost everyone I have come across who concerns himself primarily with the battles and the military is a defender of white supremacist idea.

They have great difficulty in coming to terms with this. Many feel their words are misinterpreted.  But by so many?  It seems unlikely.

  I doubt you even know or met anyone who is a CW historian.  You are clearly just making things up again.  So dishonest, so pathetic, so typical.

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Smokey 1 said:

  I doubt you even know or met anyone who is a CW historian.  You are clearly just making things up again.  So dishonest, so pathetic, so typical.

Don't you fancy yourself as one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hst2 said:

Don't you fancy yourself as one?

Nope, even though I was a history major for one year my degree is not in history but I know, read and have met quite a few legitimate CW historians.

Edited by Smokey 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Smokey 1 said:

Whatever you think of the flag or display would be only be your opinion and would not necessarily be evidence of bigotry of the owner.  People see things differently, to you in your mind it represents evil but to someone else it could represent something benign.  

Let's test this theory. Take a Nazi flag for example. Do you think this could ever mean something "benign"? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Heisenberg said:

Let's test this theory. Take a Nazi flag for example. Do you think this could ever mean something "benign"? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

That symbol means something different to different people around the world. The first and only negative connotation to the symbol related to its appropriation by the Nazis. In the eyes of most of the western world the symbol is forever tainted as a result, but there are still other cultures that see it based on its pre-Nazi era meanings and are not reviled by it. As a westerner and the son of a deceased WW II veteran I personally find it to be a disgusting symbol, but I recognize that my view is not the only view that is legitimate.

I would not have the gall to travel to Asia and tell a Buddhist Monk that he is wrong to use that symbol in it's ancient spiritual meaning just because Hitler defiled it in the 1930's.Would you?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Heisenberg said:

Let's test this theory. Take a Nazi flag for example. Do you think this could ever mean something "benign"? 

There  is no  valid comparison between German Nazis and American Confederates.

The  U S government supplies grave markers for Confederate  Americans. George Patton's 3 rd Army killed hundreds  of thousands of Nazis. Two of his ancestors were killed fighting for the Confederate States of America . Audie Murphy , the  most decorated American of WW II was from Texas , a former Confederate State.  The U. S government erected a monument  to Confederates at Point Lookout Maryland where it murdered over 4000  Confederate prisoners.  

Confederate flags  are American flags

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Smokey 1 said:

Nope, even though I was a history major for one year my degree is not in history but I know, read and have met quite a few legitimate CW historians.

I wasn't referring to historians, I was referring to folks like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Duke of Earl said:

There  is no  valid comparison between German Nazis and American Confederates.

The  U S government supplies grave markers for Confederate  Americans. George Patton's 3 rd Army killed hundreds  of thousands of Nazis. Two of his ancestors were killed fighting for the Confederate States of America . Audie Murphy , the  most decorated American of WW II was from Texas , a former Confederate State.  The U. S government erected a monument  to Confederates at Point Lookout Maryland where it murdered over 4000  Confederate prisoners.  

Confederate flags  are American flags

 

 

Indeed, to Patton, Nazi were like democrats or Republicans.

The Nazis were, unfortunately, more like us than we are to admit, racial supremacy being a pillar of both societies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Duke of Earl said:

There  is no  valid comparison between German Nazis and American Confederates.

Both groups were white supremacists. I know people, including you, try to pretend the Civil War was about states' rights, but the only right those people cared about was the right to enslave. The rich folks wanted slaves for economic reasons; they got the poor to fight for them (as the rich often do), but a lot of those poor were also racists who would have owned slaves if they could have. Each time you try to rehabilitate Confederates, expect people who know the truth to rebut you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now