Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Would you have fought?


thebluefood

What do you think of the new site?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think of the new site?

    • Amazing
      30
    • Cool
      24
    • Could be better
      5
    • A letdown
      5

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

"The path out of darkness begins with those exasperatingly persistent individuals who are constitutionally incapable of capitulation." (Winston Churchill)

"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; because there is not effort without error and shortcomings; but who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly. So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."

(Theodore Roosevelt)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mod trolling?

I'm a fan of Arnold, but how else should we treat the biggest traitor in our history? He tried to give away the entire North, and cut of New England. Had he succeeded, we would have lost the war. I wish more people understood his importance pre-traitor (Saratoga, Lake Champlain, Fort Ticandaroga), but you can hardly expected us to treat the guy like a hero.

By the way - he was a TERRIBLE general for the British. His brillance ended at Saratoga.

I have seen mods playing devils advocate before to encourage discussion (and I was teasing btw)

depends on whose point of view. for us he was someone who followed his conscience after being treated shabbily by corrupt people within the continental government following his service. but history is writen by the victor. all in all he was a great general and a real patriot, He was a decent general for the british btw not terrible. as for the traitour comment, he just didnt have the same opinions of the government as you do. in his opinion the continental government were the traitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen mods playing devils advocate before to encourage discussion (and I was teasing btw)

depends on whose point of view. for us he was someone who followed his conscience after being treated shabbily by corrupt people within the continental government following his service. but history is writen by the victor. all in all he was a great general and a real patriot, He was a decent general for the british btw not terrible. as for the traitour comment, he just didnt have the same opinions of the government as you do. in his opinion the continental government were the traitors.

Not sure how you can view him as anything but a traitor - he was twice over. First, he commited the ultimate act of treason against the British (same as all of the Fathers) by participating in the Revolutionary War. Then, when he felt he was snubbed by Washington and Congress, he effectively took his ball and went home. There was a reason he didn't raise through the ranks in the British army and then ended up a lonely old man - nobody trusted him.

I actually agree with him that he was unfairly snubbed, but to view him as anything but a traitor is just wrong. And he didn't trade sides because of any personal beliefs as far as the Revolution went - he traded sides because he was a sniveling little snot who didn't get his way. It always shocks me to read about this period and how often generals viewed their honor as being besmirched. Pretty much every British general tried to hand in their resignation multiple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how you can view him as anything but a traitor - he was twice over. First, he commited the ultimate act of treason against the British (same as all of the Fathers) by participating in the Revolutionary War. Then, when he felt he was snubbed by Washington and Congress, he effectively took his ball and went home. There was a reason he didn't raise through the ranks in the British army and then ended up a lonely old man - nobody trusted him.

I actually agree with him that he was unfairly snubbed, but to view him as anything but a traitor is just wrong. And he didn't trade sides because of any personal beliefs as far as the Revolution went - he traded sides because he was a sniveling little snot who didn't get his way. It always shocks me to read about this period and how often generals viewed their honor as being besmirched. Pretty much every British general tried to hand in their resignation multiple times.

Snivelling little snot? so it had nothing to do with his political enemies somehow deciding that despite him paying for a large part of one of his campaigns through his own pocket that he was guilty of economic malfeasance? wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snivelling little snot? so it had nothing to do with his political enemies somehow deciding that despite him paying for a large part of one of his campaigns through his own pocket that he was guilty of economic malfeasance? wow.

Hey, I said he got screwed. You said it had something to do with him not believing in the cause. And he was a whiner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people get disillusioned with a cause when people involved in said cause screw them over for political gain.

True. Funny thing is - I probably have a better view of him than most Americans. I think he is one of the most misunderstood and underappreciated characters in our history. I wish more people understood just how important he was to our history (mainly due to his effort at Saratoga). It's nice to discuss him with someone that actually has a more favorable view of him. :cheers:

ps. That being said. I still think he was a little ***** for selling out his country and a cause that he believed in. If Andre hadn't been caught (by a bunch of random drunkards), our history would be VERY different. West Point was much too important to be in the hands of the Brits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think about the man this way...

http://www.amazon.com/review/R8B1GV9VFER04

By James Yanni

This review is from: Benedict Arnold, Revolutionary Hero: An American Warrior Reconsidered (Paperback)

It's an obvious concept if you think about it: our automatic thought when we hear the name "Benedict Arnold" is clearly a matter of perspective, not simple truth. The victors write the histories. Had Britain won the war, Arnold would have been, at worst, someone who saw the writing on the wall and got out while the getting was good, and at best, a prodigal son who'd seen the light and returned to the fold, renouncing his treason against king and country.

The first beauty of this book is that by simply existing, it forces you TO think about it; most people never do. But beyond that, it gives a meticulous history of the man, admitting his flaws (he was ambitious and more than a bit prickly about what he saw as slurs on his personal honor) but also pointing out the many positives that most Americans are completely unaware of: he was one of the greatest generals in the rebel cause, generous, courageous, honorable, and brilliant. So why did this man turn against the cause he'd fought for? Partly because he was disillusioned by the behavior towards himself and others by what he saw as a congress interested more in political connections than competence in awarding military honors, partly because he came to believe that said congress's incompetence rendered the American cause unwinnable. An error, and a serious one, but one which must be balanced against the fact that his contributions at the battle of Saratoga were largely responsible for the American victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really have no idea. I'm generally a pretty conservative person by nature and don't like change. But, it may depend on who I was friends with and where I lived and such as well.

It was a pretty even split amongst those who supported the rebellion, those who were loyalists and those who plain just wanted to be left alone and didn't care. So it's not really a clear cut decision in my mind. I try to take out my feelings in this and transplant them into that time period, but yet retain the type of person that I am. That sort of thing 'transcends' time, sort of. Yet having the knowledge of Awsomesauce America, through the benefit of hindsight, definitely muddy's the waters, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polywog, I wrote a paper on famous "traitours" only to find that my preconceived notions of Arnold were completely wrong, I didnt actually read that book but will go and buy it now.

Rince, the issue I take with calling him a whiner and a traitour is simple, I think Arnold felt betrayed , first by being passed over for command when he was clearly the best man for the job, and more importantly he lost his personal fortune funding the war because of political enemies making what were unfounded accusations that ended up being upheld because of politics. frankly he got screwed and became disillusioned. and as for turning traitour? he felt that he was actually returning to the right side after being misled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rince, the issue I take with calling him a whiner and a traitour is simple, I think Arnold felt betrayed , first by being passed over for command when he was clearly the best man for the job, and more importantly he lost his personal fortune funding the war because of political enemies making what were unfounded accusations that ended up being upheld because of politics. frankly he got screwed and became disillusioned. and as for turning traitour? he felt that he was actually returning to the right side after being misled.

Reasons don't matter. He switched sides in the middle of a war. That, by definition, is a traitor.

Again though, I agree he did get screwed. But so did a lot of people (especially the rank and file) and they didn't try to undermind the entire country.

Keep in mind, Rince, that Ryman is coming from a society who never grew the balls to rebel against the English. :silly:

:ols::ols::ols::ols:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...