Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I did a search but I don't see where this has been posted. Moderator, delete if it has and point me to a link. I would be most interested to read any comments by those who have a knowledge of the Civil War.
US Army War College considers removing prints depicting Robert E. Lee, Confederate generals
Published December 18, 2013 FoxNews.com
Portraits of Confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. (National Archives)
The U.S. Army War College in Pennsylvania is considering removing prints that depict Robert E. Lee and other Confederate generals after at least one official questioned why the school honors those who fought against America.
The college is currently conducting an inventory of its paintings and photographs, which feature Confederate generals such as Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson. The school plans to re-hang the images later in specific categories to showcase the military’s history, the Washington Times reports.
“There will be change: over the years very fine artwork has been hung with care – but little rationale or overall purpose,” US Army Major General Tony Cucolo, the commandant of the college, said in a statement posted on the school’s website Wednesday afternoon.
“I will… approach our historical narrative with keen awareness and adherence to the seriousness of several things: accurate capture of US military history, good, bad and ugly; a Soldier’s life of selfless service to our Nation; and our collective solemn oath to defend the Constitution of the United States (not a person or a symbol, but a body of ideals),” he added. “Those are the things I will be looking to reinforce with any changes to the artwork.”
But college Spokeswoman Carol Kerr told the newspaper that at least one official -- who was not identified – asked the administration why the school honors generals that were enemies of the U.S. Army.
“There will be a dialogue when we develop the idea of what do we want the hallway to represent,” she said. “[Lee] was certainly not good for the nation. This is the guy we faced on the battlefield whose entire purpose in life was to destroy the nation as it was then conceived. … This is all part of an informed discussion.”
The U.S. Army War College, which opened in Carlisle in 1901 to study the lessons of war, graduates more than 300 officers, foreign students and civilians each year, the Washington Times reports.
Before the college opened, Lee led the Army of Northern Virginia for the Confederate States of America during the Civil War. Lee and Jackson are both graduates of the United States Military Academy in West Point, N.Y. Click for more from the Washington Times.
Well I can't think of two of the worst examples for any member of the U.S. Military's officer corps to aspire to than Robert E. Lee of Stonewall Jackson because the essential characteristic that with the exception of the Civil War has been the respect for the political process and the peaceful transition of power.
Now if the idea is to honor great military minds, then by all means keep their pictures on the war, and add Rommel or Gudarin. Perhaps Zhukov, Konev or Timoshenko. Other wise wave good bye to the Robert E. Lee.
Well I can't think of two of the worst examples for any member of the U.S. Military's officer corps to aspire to than Robert E. Lee of Stonewall Jackson because the essential characteristic that with the exception of the Civil War has been the respect for the political process and the peaceful transition of power.
Now if the idea is to honor great military minds, then by all means keep their pictures on the war, and add Rommel or Gudarin. Perhaps Zhukov, Konev or Timoshenko. Other wise wave good bye to the Robert E. Lee.
What is the problem with Stonewall? He was a graduate of the U.S. Army educational system. Did a good job as an artillerist in Mexico using some innovative tactics. After the war he resigned his commission (as many others did) and taught at a Virginia state run military school. During that time he also taught Sunday School including to black children. I do not believe he owned any slaves.
He commanded the VMI detachment at the trial of John Brown supporting the established legal process. When the seccession craze occurred in Virginia he took a low profile and tried to keep the VMI cadets under control.
He answered the call of the state of his birth (who was also his employer) and trained troops to defend that state. The brigade that he organized was from an area not known for it's extensive slave holding and many if not most of the valley troops he commanded were fighting to defend their valley and there state. I believe some very honorable U.S. Army regiments trace their lineage back to Stonewalls Brigade.
I do not believe there are any dishonorable black marks on his record during the war. Any civil war or revolution is ugly and the winner gets to write the history.
What the article doesn't say is that When Lee's citizenship was reinstated it was not at the request of himself or his family. He had never applied for the amnesty that was offered to ex-confederates. I remember the reinstatement controversy at the time. Many believed he considered the loss of his citizenship his personal punishment for his acts.
Engaging in rebellion and war against The United States. Our nation is under no obligation to honor it's enemies.
Benedict Arnold was a very capable soldier too, before he turned his coat. I don't understand why he's vilified but the southern traitors get a pass.
Although it was bad ideology and a terrible cause, the Confederates still represented an ideology and a cause. Benedict Arnold represented betrayal for petty ego and personal gain. Perhaps not a pass, but we might assign the rebels a place in hell further away from the furnace than Arnold's.
What the article doesn't say is that When Lee's citizenship was reinstated it was not at the request of himself or his family. He had never applied for the amnesty that was offered to ex-confederates. I remember the reinstatement controversy at the time. Many believed he considered the loss of his citizenship his personal punishment for his acts.
...snipped...On May 29, 1865, President Andrew Johnson issued a Proclamation of Amnesty and Pardon to persons who had participated in the rebellion against the United States. There were fourteen excepted classes, though, and members of those classes had to make special application to the President.
Lee sent an application to Grant and wrote to President Johnson on June 13, 1865:
Being excluded from the provisions of amnesty & pardon contained in the proclamation of the 29th Ulto; I hereby apply for the benefits, & full restoration of all rights & privileges extended to those included in its terms. I graduated at the Mil. Academy at West Point in June 1829. Resigned from the U.S. Army April '61. Was a General in the Confederate Army, & included in the surrender of the Army of N. Va. 9 April '65.
Lee signed his Amnesty Oath on October 2, 1865, but was not restored to full citizenship in his lifetime. (General Records of the Department of State, RG 59)
On October 2, 1865, the same day that Lee was inaugurated as president of Washington College in Lexington, Virginia, he signed his Amnesty Oath, thereby complying fully with the provision of Johnson's proclamation. But Lee was not pardoned, nor was his citizenship restored. And the fact that he had submitted an amnesty oath at all was soon lost to history.
More than a hundred years later, in 1970, an archivist at the National Archives discovered Lee's Amnesty Oath among State Department records (reported in Prologue, Winter 1970). Apparently Secretary of State William H. Seward had given Lee's application to a friend as a souvenir, and the State Department had pigeonholed the oath.
In 1975, Lee's full rights of citizenship were posthumously restored by a joint congressional resolution effective June 13, 1865....snipped....
Well I can't think of two of the worst examples for any member of the U.S. Military's officer corps to aspire to than Robert E. Lee of Stonewall Jackson because the essential characteristic that with the exception of the Civil War has been the respect for the political process and the peaceful transition of power.
Now if the idea is to honor great military minds, then by all means keep their pictures on the war, and add Rommel or Gudarin. Perhaps Zhukov, Konev or Timoshenko. Other wise wave good bye to the Robert E. Lee.
In a mild bit of defense of the two men.. Partly because I did graduate from Stonewall Jackson High School..
At the time, they did not feel that they were rebelling against the US. History, as always, is written by the victors. The Confederacy seceded from the Union, which was believed at the time to be legal by them,illegal according to the North. So, to these men, they were not rebelling against the US, they were defending the independence of their homeland.
Short of a very small number of battles, such as Gettysburg and Antietam, the war was fought in the south. To Lee and Jackson, this was an invasion of their homeland, not them rebelling against the US. It's also why (usually with a wink and grin) why the Civil War will often be referred to as the War of Northern Aggression in the south. You also have to remember that far moreso in the 1800s than today, you identified with your state, not the country. You would identify yourself as a Virginian or Georgian, or from South Carolina.. Not as an American. The power was with the states, not the federal government as it is today.
Both men were well respected before, during and after the war in both the North and South. Lee and Jackson were far more god-like in the south of course, but.. Also remember that Lee led the charge that the war was over and we were once again one nation after the war was over.
At the end of the day, to me.. What these two men accomplished on the battlefield, both for and against the US, makes them worthy of respect. Just as another piece of info.. MANY people point to the death of Jackson as the reason the south ultimately lost the war and there's a very good case to be made of that. Had he lived, the mistakes made at Gettysburg may not have happened. That battle may have gone to the Confederacy.. And.. Who knows.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wednesday afternoon.
