Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Nazis showing up at places uninvited.


No Excuses

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

Let's put some context to Richmond's sanitization of Lee. He treated slaves "well" right?

 

 

 

What a misunderstood stand up chap.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/

 

How about Lee and his army capturing free blacks of the North and bringing them to the South for enslavement?

 

Gee. I wonder why people think he's a massive piece of ****.

 

 

fake news 

 

MAGA

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhat back on topic... I mentioned that my a guy I went to high school with was one of the people hit by the car. His sister (also in my high school) shared this last night: 

 

I have a young child myself, filled with white privilege, and I'm so thankful that I don't have to teach him from this young age that people hate him for the color of his skin. The pics and vids of her 3 year old hugging the Charlottesville police just tore me up. I'm in tears right now. 

Edited by skinsfan_1215
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/08/you-will-have-to-shovel-our-bodies-into-the-oven-too-father-of-charlottesville-neo-nazi-disowns-him/

 

More at link.

 

 

Quote

You will have to shovel our bodies into the oven, too’: Father of Charlottesville neo-Nazi disowns him


One father of a marcher in Charlottesville, Virginia over the weekend is denouncing his own son after the young man was seen on national news spouting hate.

In a letter to Fargo, North Dakota’s Inforum, father Pearce Tefft wrote that his family wasn’t sure where his son Peter picked up his racist beliefs.

 

Edited by The Evil Genius
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RichmondRedskin88 said:

sidenote: I was discussing this with my girlfriend being that I was history minor with focus on war and American history. 

So then you know that it was the north that actually championed states' rights when refusing to return slaves who had escaped, and that the south repudiated states' rights, insisting that the federal government was required to intervene.

 

You also must know that Lee, despite having the devotion of his troops, was a mediocre general who continually launched frontal assaults on prepared positions.

 

And you must know that the war was fought on slavery, nothing else. Tariffs had already been rolled back. European states offered to back the South if they ended slavery, but the southern states refused. And of course there's a multitude of official confederate and state documents stating plainly that the institution of slavery and the inferiority of the negro race is fundamental to their cause.

 

A good book for those interested is Bonekemper's Myth of the Lost Cause.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

Let's put some context to Richmond's sanitization of Lee. He treated slaves "well" right?

 

 

 

What a misunderstood stand up chap.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-myth-of-the-kindly-general-lee/529038/

 

How about Lee and his army capturing free blacks of the North and bringing them to the South for enslavement?

 

Gee. I wonder why people think he's a massive piece of ****.

 

 

Is George Washington a massive piece of ****?  I think its a fair question

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

So then you know that it was the north that actually championed states' rights when refusing to return slaves who had escaped, and that the south repudiated states' rights, insisting that the federal government was required to intervene.

 

You also must know that Lee, despite having the devotion of his troops, was a mediocre general who continually launched frontal assaults on prepared positions.

 

And you must know that the war was fought on slavery, nothing else. Tariffs had already been rolled back. European states offered to back the South if they ended slavery, but the southern states refused. And of course there's a multitude of official confederate and state documents stating plainly that the institution of slavery and the inferiority of the negro race is fundamental to their cause.

 

A good book for those interested is Bonekemper's Myth of the Lost Cause.

 

Stonewall Jackson was the real military genius, the army of novas fortune changed when he died

 

Most of Lees "brilliance" was defined by necessity born of constantly being outmanned.  When he was even at Gettysburg he didnt win

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zoony said:

 

Is George Washington a massive piece of ****?  I think its a fair question

For what it's worth, I believe Washington's slaves actually belonged to his wife, and he did free them in his will. Hamilton was one of the few founding fathers who was unequivocally anti-slavery...And sadly most history textbooks unfairly maligned him as a monarchist.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StillUnknown said:

 

there is no such thing as a well treated slave

 

anytime you want to make that argument, don't. people might think you are an idiot

 

Hey, you were forcefully taken from your homeland, stuffed in a box, beaten, torn, away from your family, made to work against your will, held against your will, and you or someone else's property..... Like a used yoga mat. 

 

But don't worry, its a well treated yoga mat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Sinister said:

 

Hey, you were forcefully taken from your homeland, stuffed in a box, beaten, torn, away from your family, made to work against your will, held against your will, and you or someone else's property..... Like a used yoga mat. 

 

But don't worry, its a well treated yoga mat.

 

I mean, they were housed and fed. what more could they possibly want?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Riggo-toni said:

 

 

You also must know that Lee, despite having the devotion of his troops, was a mediocre general who continually launched frontal assaults on prepared positions.

 

 

Lee was a poor strategist.  He galvanized troops but made countless wrong decisions.  He was the Rex Ryan of setting up an offensive gameplan.  

 

As far as Charlottesville, it shouldn't be so hard to say wow, neo-nazis are bad.  Nazis are bad, slavery is bad.  Allowing a platform for hatred masqueraded as free speech rallies is bad.  This is literally day one stuff.

 

 

Edited by SkinssRvA
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, zoony said:

 

Is George Washington a massive piece of ****?  I think its a fair question

 

Difference between Lee and Washington was Washington was not fighting for the institution of slavery. Yes he had slaves, yes he was flawed, but his cause wasn't slavery

 

Lee, by choosing to lead the army of Northern Virginia, made his cause slavery and treason

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Yes. Any slave owner is or was. Is that supposed to be a difficult question for people?

 

He, along with the rest of the founders, were men of their time. Ahead of their time in many regards, but on the issue of slavery, they did fail.

 

I have trouble judging Washington & Jefferson based on our morals and ethics of today.

 

I don't have trouble judging Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee, because of the cause they chose to fight for. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RichmondRedskin88 said:

 

 

So the ficus has been on Lee. Lee was a general who was considered one of the most brilliant of his time. He would not fight VA because it was his home.  He did own slaves but they were treated well and he released them actually. 

I am no history major...no degrees in it whatsoever.  

 

But I'm pretty sure Lee didn't actually own the slaves.  They were "inherited" through his wife's family, Custis.  Lee himself came from a poor family.

 

And he did free them, but it was mandated in Custis' will.  Whether he would have done so given complete freedom we will ever know.  

Edited by SkinssRvA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SkinssRvA said:

I am no history major...no degrees in it whatsoever.  

 

But I'm pretty sure Lee didn't actually own the slaves.  They were betrothed through his wife's family, Custis.  Lee himself came from a poor family.

 

And he did free them, but it was mandated in Custis' will.  Whether he would have done so given complete freedom we will ever know.  

:rofl89:

"I never owned that car, it was my wife's."

Dower laws...look 'em up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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