Thoughts and Ramblings

[deadwoodgultch]

Wow, I am not a historian, just an individual who has an interest in a historical event. I have studied it a great deal and visited the location numerous times. I know I don't have all of the answers. We have missed the opportunity to garner many of those answers, by intimidating a large number of participants, asking leading questions, and allowing flawed translations to stand. We have had discussions elsewhere regarding today's social issues and listeners not really hearing what is being said by speakers.  People killed because of poor training, racial issues, and the like. Crazy Horse was murdered for resisting confinement, bayonetted. Native Americans were afraid to speak up and tell the truth out of fear. When they attempted to speak out they were not listened to. Enough of politics.

Elsewhere on the board we are attempting to play let's make a deal with scenarios . In the real game you don't know what's behind the door until you choose the door until you choose it. Custer had the same problem, he did not know what was behind the door until he chose it. If I had to pick one of Chuck's doors, it would be door 3. The things we often don't take into account are the "oh shit moments" and how the participants react. I think Custer's first "oh shit moment" was when he ascended the bluffs and saw the shear size of his objective/the village. There were many more "oh shit moments" for the participants, to include for the NA's. We on the other hand get to view this battle through the prism/lens of history, even then we get a flawed view.

What is history? Webster defines history as – 1) A chronological record of significant events, such as those affecting a nation or institution, often including an explanation of their causes. – 2)A branch of knowledge that records and explains past events. Unfortunately, there is no established set of rules which govern the separation of the truth from that which is fabricated. An honest telling of the past, with all of its victories and flaws, full of lessons to be learned, that’s how history should be told. Unfortunately, there is a darker side, one full of opportunity for those who take issue with the past, and re-write events with their own biases. Allow me to define a more cynical, yet accurate, analysis of this dichotomy: A tool of manipulation, designed to alter or establish ones understanding of events by use of manufactured circumstances. An alternative paradigm, packaged and submitted in such a manner as to appear factual, thereby skewing historical events for the purpose of establishing a false premise of the past. The later becomes relevant when revisiting the story of the Little Bighorn. Marred by conjecture and historical malfeasance, it becomes difficult to separate fact from fiction. When sorting out documents,  diaries, newspaper articles, eyewitness accounts, and historical conclusions, one must approach the quest for historical fact as a contaminated crime scene. The truth is there, but those who have trampled the scene, and altered evidence make it difficult to find. In the case of a one hundred forty five year old event, much has been said, with conclusions accepted as settled history. The first fact being, there is no such thing as settled history.

We on this board have spent a great deal of time exploring a movement to Ford D. We have spent more time than most in exploring this aspect of the battle than I see elsewhere. Are we right? Have we maybe transposed locations, taken NA testimonies that fit what we want and left out others? I don't think so, but I am sure that there are traditionalists who think so. As recently as last year I witnessed a questioner of a Cheyenne ask a question that turned that Cheyenne off and may have cost some valuable answers. We all need to open our ears and minds, not just on the board.

All we can do is continue to seek with an open mind.

Regards,

Tom

[Beth]

I just had a discussion like this on Facebook when someone bemoaned that removing monuments was destroying history. ;D History can not be destroyed, it just is. It is how we look at history is constantly being reviewed and reshaped.

I do hope that we always seek to view events with an open mind.

[quincannon]

Removing monuments cannot destroy history as you say Beth.

There is not one bloody swastika allowed to be within Germany. You can't even by a model of an Bf109, or an FW190, that comes with decals for the swastika they both wore on the tail. You cannot find that symbol of hate on a German warship that frequently used them for air recognition purposes. The same goes for the tiny little swastika set in the palm tree that marked all the vehicles of the Afrika Korp. You can get the palm tree with a missing space in the trunk though. It is forbidden, against the law to manufacture, sell, or display that universal symbol of hate.

No matter how they try though the Germans can't erase their history of 1933-1945, no more than we can erase the stain on our national honor that was the Southern Confederacy. What the Germans do though is use that history as the primary measure taken against a repetition of it. Having a statue of Robert E. Lee displayed in Richmond or Jackson, Mississippi for many people in 2020, is the same as having Adolph Hitler's statue sitting atop the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin for the average German

[yanmacca]

How things have changed;

In the ancient Indian language of Sanskrit, swastika means "well-being". The symbol has been used by Hindus, Buddhists and Jains for millennia and is commonly assumed to be an Indian sign.
Early Western travelers to Asia were inspired by its positive and ancient associations and started using it back home. By the beginning of the 20th Century there was a huge fad for the swastika as a benign good luck symbol.

[azranger]

They want to remove the Custer statute in Monroe. It's an interesting discussion. I don't think there is a comparison between Robert E Lee and Adolph Hitler. I do know Nancy Polosi has called the Confederates traitors. I suspect that these discussions will somewhat follow the political lines. I don't think there is many in Germany that are proud of the history under the Hitler era. On the other hand I know that in the South there are lots of people proud of their history. 

The way to erase history in the minds of a vast majority of young people is to do what our public schools are doing.  There are plenty of Youtube videos showing how little some people knew about American history. 

Nancy wants to change the name of our military bases for a political agenda. Fort Bragg and Fort Benning come up as if they are common knowledge among Americans as indicators of traitors being remembered. I would hope that the many soldiers that have served this country well will speak up. I am reasonably sure that the Confederates were pardoned and restored to citizenship. If not the war goes on forever.

History may not be erased if recorded somewhere but without it being in peoples minds the lessons learned are not there for guidance. You can't erase something that was not in a persons mind to begin with. I remember reading in my high school history book that George Custer and the entire 7th cavalry of over 600 men was wiped out at the battle.  

So back to the definition of history, everything in my history book would fit the definition but the facts were wrong. History to individuals can be a case of something never learned, learned but factually incorrect, or learned and accurate. On these boards we struggle within the last two categories.

Regards

Steve

[mac]

Complicated topic!

I was in Germany some years ago and I was at the site for the Winter Olympics of 1936. The ski jump there was purpose built by the Nazi government (I stayed in the same hotel in 2016 as Hitler did in 1936. It was renovated in high Art Deco for his visit and is still interesting in that respect). The point here is that after the war the ski jump was to be renovated, as it is, to this day, still used for international competition. It had been stripped of the swastikas and so on naturally.

There was much debate but ultimately the original brutal, functional, architecture was maintained on the basis that it was not political in nature and importantly told the story of the structure.

One thing is that facts are facts and often people fail to check their facts...and not just in historical studies.

Cheers

[deadwoodgultch]

Steve, I started this thread about history, and learnings missed, ignored, or hijacked. You are right schools do not teach history, geography, civics, or government anymore. Some of these subject are marginalized and used to advance the social agenda de jour. Not that social studies are not important, but call it social studies.

Regarding Lee being compared to Hitler or being treasonous, that is ludicrous. Benedict Arnold was treasonous, Lee resigned his commission and became a citizen of what was being purported as a separate nation. While I may mot agree, with his move or motive, he made a clean break, he told his former nation what he was going to do. He took no action against this nation until the break was declared. Lee's family before and after the ACW have a long and honorable history to our nation and it's military. 

Robert E. Lee was a United States Army engineer officer from 1829 to 1855. His first assignment was as assistant engineer of fortification work on Cockspur Island in the Savannah River. For a time he worked under the command of Lieutenant Joseph Mansfield, Corps of Engineers, who would be killed at Antietam leading a Union Army corps. In 1831 Lee went to Fort Monroe, Virginia, as assistant engineer responsible for the outworks and approaches to Fort Monroe and preparatory work for construction of Fort Calhoun, now Fort Wool, Virginia.

Lee went to the Chief of Engineers Office as administrative assistant in 1834 and to St. Louis, Missouri, in 1837 as supervising engineer of navigation work on the Mississippi River.  From 1841 to 1846 Lee was supervising engineer for repair of the forts in New York harbor.

In 1846 Robert E. Lee went to war for the first time. Initially he was General Wool’s chief engineer in the campaign in northern Mexico. Assigned as an engineer staff officer to General Winfield Scott in 1847, he participated in all the main battles from Vera Cruz to Mexico City. Recognized for his daring reconnaissance and suggestions on battlefield tactics, he received three brevets: Major at Cerro Gordo, Lieutenant Colonel at Contreras and Churubusco, and Colonel at Chapultepec.

From 1848 to 1852 Lee was supervising engineer for construction of Fort Carroll near Baltimore, Maryland. In 1852 he accepted an assignment as Superintendent at the United States Military Academy, a position reserved for Corps of Engineer officers until 1866. While at the Academy, Lee encountered cadets who would be prominent in the coming Civil War to include Union generals James McPherson, Philip Sheridan, and O.O. Howard, and Confederate generals John B. Hood and Jeb Stuart. Lee left the Corps of Engineers in 1855 when he accepted an assignment as a Lieutenant Colonel in the 2d Cavalry Regiment.

Lee's father, Henry Lee III (January 29, 1756 – March 25, 1818) was an early American Patriot and politician. He served as the ninth Governor of Virginia and as the Virginia Representative to the United States Congress. Lee's service during the American Revolution as a cavalry officer in the Continental Army earned him the nickname by which he is best known, "Light-Horse Harry".

Thomas Sim Lee (October 29, 1745 – November 9, 1819) was an American planter and statesman of Frederick County, Maryland. Although not a signatory to the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation or the US Constitution, he was an important participant in the process of their creation. Thomas Sim Lee was the second State Governor of Maryland, serving twice, from 1779 to 1783 and again from 1792 to 1794. Thomas Sim Lee also served as a delegate of Maryland in the Congress of the Confederation in 1783 and was a member of the House of Delegates in 1787. He worked closely with many of the Founding fathers and himself played an important part in the birth of his state and the nation. He was the son of Thomas (died 1749) and Christiana (Sim) Lee, a grandson of Philip Lee, and descended from the "Blenheim" Line of the Lee family of Virginia. Richard Lee I was his great-great-grandfather.

Lee's nephew, Fitz Lee, also a Confederate General, was later the Consul General to Cuba/Havana 1896-1898, and was commissioned Maj. Gen. USV during the Span/Am War retired a USA BG. He had also served as the 40th Gov. of VA.

Francis Preston Blair Lee (1857–1944) was a Democratic member of the United States Senate, representing the state of Maryland    from 1914–1917. He was also the great-grandson of American patriot Richard Henry Lee, father of E. Brooke Lee comptroller of Maryland and "Father of Silver Spring" and grandfather of Blair Lee III, Lieutenant Governor of Maryland from 1971–1979 and Acting Governor of Maryland from 1977–1979.[11]

Judge Charles Carter Lee, a direct descendant of Henry Lee III (Lighthorse Harry), was selected to represent the United States at the 2008 Olympic Games as the United States Olympic Committee's Chef de Mission. Judge Lee, a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge since 1989, was also involved with the 1984 Summer Olympics as he headed a delegation sent to China after the Soviet Union announced a plan to boycott the Olympics in Los Angeles. These talks concluded with China's formal agreement in writing to participate in the 1984 Olympics. And, oh yes, for you Navy buffs, I need to include Rear Admiral Wallis A. Lee Jr. No they are all not all children or grandchildren, but they are all members of one of the first families of America. That family started out as traitors to the Crown, even though through the Custis/Washington branch were related to King George.

I watched Jay Leno's Jay Walking bits, questioning the young public, enough that they have no clue about current events, much less history. Amd, it has only gotten worse.

Regards,

Tom

[quincannon]

No Tom, you started this thread about those who would change history over time, and "over time" in Steve's case is less than two weeks. The history is that it was a Republican who introduced legislation as part of the Defense Appropriations as to change the name of those ten Army posts over a three year transition period, and that legislation was voted out of committee, with total bi-partisan support, allowing the Army to do what it has wanted to do for a long time. The legislation has not yet gotten to the House, and therefore Pelosi has nothing officially to do with it as of yet. Many good soldiers have already spoken up about this matter, and voiced their opinion through their leaders. They no longer want these names for these bases, and are willing to pay the price of tradition, in the interests of the country's well being

It was also a Republican, Tim Scott of South Carolina, that started the freight train of sweeping police reform heading down the track a 100 miles an hour, downhill, that will run over each and every police department in the country, if those departments doing not join the rest of us in the 21st Century.

It was the Republican governance in Arkansas that requested that that state two allotted statues in Statuary Hall in the U S Capitol be removed as they were statues dedicated to Confederates and replace them. One will be replaced by Johnny Cash, and I think the other is yet to be decided.

Steve seems to want to change the historical definition of treason as well, the taking up arms against your country. What is it about the taking up arms by the Confederate Army against the United States that he does not understand.

Seems to me that the prerequisite for being pardoned is the acceptance of guilt on the part of the person being pardoned. That's what the statues say anyway. So then a Confederate that was pardoned and received his citizenship back,  still committed treason so that does not change a thing about what they did, The only thing different is that they were forgiven. Some Confederates were never pardoned, nor was their citizenship restored, Davis and Lee were two that come to  mind.

One final word. Those that stand in the way of generational change will get run over by it. History only moves forward, never backward. Those that seek to either regress or be stagnant are really the the most selfish of the selfish, all of them for different reasons. Selfish in a sense that they as individuals do not want to change, so they, by their words and actions don't want anyone else to do so either.

Can't understand why Nancy Peolsi scares the shit out of Steve the way she does. She is really a nice little eighty year old lady from Fells Point, Baltimore, that grew up on Jack's corned beef and crabs out of the Chesapeake Bay. She called every one Hon, male or female, and was a fan of both the Colts and Dem O's, could not stand the city that was their neighbor 40 miles to the south, and her idea of fun was sitting on the marble stoop on Saturday night. So much for the big bad Arizona Ranger that totes the Big Iron and ran Texas Red out of town.  Afraid of a little girl.

[deadwoodgultch]

I know why I started this thread, and so stated. You are, however entitled to your opinion. By the way the Ranger in the Marty Robbins song was from Texas, that is "Settled History".

Regards,
Tom

[quincannon]

You are revising history again Tom. The Ranger in the Marty Robbins song was an ARIZONA RANGER sent to rid the town of Texas Red. Read the goddamned lyrics, then you may apologize for your inaccurate statement on this board, apologize to Marty for changing his words, and to Marty Robbins fans everywhere for your rash misjudgment in this matter. You may receive a pardon, but I understand it is completely up to Nancy Pelosi.

Agua Fria (Cool Water) is a town in Maricopa County, Arizona, and Texas Rangers have no jurisdiction in Arizona Tom. Do you need the big four to complete your education - History, Law Enforcement,  Geography, and Music Appreciation. It would seem so. 

[Beth]

Funny how the Romans and Egyptians tried to erase history all the time, they destroyed monuments, chiseled out names, anything to remove names from history-yet we still know the history of men like Nero, Caligula, Akhenaten, and Hatshepsut to name a few. You can not destroy history. Time however gives us the ability to put things in perspective.

Perhaps one thing to remember about the Civil War was it was 4 years-a very small slice of time as far as the history of the world and even in the history of the US. Why do we let those 4 years define so much of our country? Why do we still fight this war?

[quincannon]

We fight it Beth because some people refuse to realize they had the shit beaten out of them, by the Army and people of the United States. Sometimes in my most angry moments, I think we should have hung every goddamned man who wore gray, and every one that supports them, then and now. Had we done so though, we would not be the United States, that shows mercy when mercy is important, shows forgiveness, even though some of the forgiven, do not wish such forgiveness, and shows respect for the rule of law, that binds us all.

We shall never achieve that "More Perfect Union" our Founders dreamed of, but it does not mean we should not keep trying, and treat those that stand in the way, in the same manner we treat a turd, wash them down to sewer, with due process.

[deadwoodgultch]

Well, well, you do know Marty's song, after all. See what I mean about history? Ian, may have believed me, maybe even the casual reader. Yet you have still not dissected my full post from this morning, so am I to assume that you agree with me about Lee not committing treason? In that you can't commit treason against a nation you have already severed ties with. Was Lee charged with treason? He certainly was, On June 7, 1865, Underwood’s grand jury indicted Robert E. Lee for treason, charging him with “wickedly, maliciously, and traitorously” carrying on war against the Constitution and the “peace and dignity” of the United States of America. Lee faced death by hanging, if found guilty of the charges.with treason. It is interesting how this played out. Even though Lee was no longer bound to the Constitution of a nation he no longer belonged.

The New York Times was a leading proponent for treason charges against Lee, writing in a June 4, 1865 editorial: “He has ‘levied war against the United States’ more strenuously than any other man in the land, and thereby has been specially guilty of the crime of treason, as defined in the Constitution of the United States,” and “whether Gen. Lee should be hung or not, is a minor question.”

President Andrew Johnson was another advocate of harsh treatment for Lee and his generals, but he was soon to learn his views were in direct contrast to those of the North’s war hero, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant. The Appomattox terms of surrender offered and signed by Grant included the clause “…each officer and man will be allowed to return to his home, not to be disturbed by United States Authority so long as they observe their paroles and the laws in force where they may reside.” Grant had wanted peace and included this line to ensure there would be no future reprisals against the Confederates.

When Lee, who was preparing to apply for amnesty, became aware of the indictments, he wrote Grant asking if the Appomattox terms were still in effect.

After reading Lee’s letter, Grant forwarded his own views to Secretary of War Edwin Stanton on June 16, 1865:

In my opinion the officers and men paroled at Appomattox Court-House, and since, upon the same terms given to Lee, cannot be tried for treason so long as they observe the terms of their parole. This is my understanding. Good faith, as well as true policy, dictates that we should observe the conditions of that convention. Bad faith on the part of the Government, or a construction of that convention subjecting the officers to trial for treason, would produce a feeling of insecurity in the minds of all the paroled officers and men. If so disposed they might even regard such an infraction of terms by the Government as an entire release from all obligations on their part. I will state further that the terms granted by me met with the hearty approval of the President at the time, and of the country generally. The action of Judge Underwood, in Norfolk, has already had an injurious effect, and I would ask that he be ordered to quash all indictments found against paroled prisoners of war, and to desist from further prosecution of them.

Grant also visited personally with President Johnson to discuss the situation, but was dismayed to find that Johnson fully intended to let the proceedings continue. Grant insisted the Appomattox terms be honored. Johnson asked when the men could be tried. “Never,” Grant responded, “unless they violate their paroles.”

Andrew Johnson, however, was just as stubborn as Grant and told the general he wouldn’t interfere with the prosecution. Grant too refused to back down, telling the President he would resign his commission if the surrender terms were not honored. Johnson realized he had lost; the public would never support him over the far-more popular Grant. Word was sent to the U.S. District Attorney in Norfolk to drop the proceedings.

Regards,
Tom

PS I would have fought for the Union and don't know what my opinion would have been after that.

[quincannon]

What a bull shit excuse about Lee. He committed treason.

In 1865 if Grant had wanted anything from an ice cream cone to being declared Lord High Commissioner of Madam Fluffy's Downtown Bordello, with all privileges appertaining, it would have been granted by either Johnson or Congress. Grant kept his word to Lee, and his loyalty to Lincoln and these United States, by his actions at Appomattox and later.

You really must do better than that. I admire Lee greatly for his qualities as a gentleman and a soldier. I do not and will never admire his flirtation with treason, supporting the most horrible cause imaginable - human bondage. In the final analysis the Confederacy committed both a moral outrage and a mortal sin against God Almighty, and there is no escaping that either then or now. How anyone can dare call themselves Christian and support in any way shape or form the abomination that was the Confederacy is beyond my power to comprehend. They are selfish hypocrites every goddamned one of them.

[deadwoodgultch]

Lee left his former country 8 days after Ft. Sumter was fired upon, resigned his commission and of that time had not lifted a finger against the USA, only served it well. Do you disagree with anything I said about his service to the USA up until he left it. I hate that we had slavery in this country. I hate that it took a war to abolish it. The man did the right thing, he was up front about it.

Now I will tighten your jaw again. I believe confederate soldiers are veterans of this country just as their union brethren. They fought for a flawed system, but damn few of those, the cannon fodder owned slaves. But, in losing they brought about a stronger Union. They, their Union brethren. and freed slaves carried the Industrial Revolution on their backs and in 50 years brought us into a modern growing country and world. They could also be known as the other greatest generation.

Hell, this board was formed on the back of a man who fought to preserve the Union, but he was a racist Democrat. I guess that is why they have removed the signs proclaiming Monroe was his home town and there is movement afoot to remove his statue.

We live 155 years after the ACW took place we certainly can judge by our value system today but we did not walk in the shoes of the average folk of that day. How many of those that fought to end slavery in the south did not want those same blacks in their neighborhood or town. going to school with their kids? I think the last big school segregation fight was in Boston. We need to wake up and become one nation, one people, with one set of rules and we need to remember our history and not continue to commit the same mistakes over and over again. The articled below refers to what happened starting 109 years after the civil war. And, not in Mississippi!

www.globalblackhistory.com/2017/11/forgotten-history-desegregation-boston-public-schools.html
www.globalblackhistory.com/2017/11/forgotten-history-desegregation-boston-public-schools.html

Regards,
Tom