“I think that Robert E. Lee, as a traitor and betrayer of his solemn oath before God and the Constitution, was a much greater terrorist than Osama Bin Ladin… after all, Lee killed many more Americans than Bin Ladin, and almost destroyed the United States. What do you think?”
So wrote Lt. Col. Robert Bateman in an August 14, 2013 Esquire essay entitled, The Meaning of Oaths and a Forgotten Man. You can read the full essay here.
2 comments:
No, I think not.
This is one of the easiest and most tired arguments to make. I really don't know why we still have to have these divisive arguments.
Some crazy person could say, "Lincoln is like the President of Syria. He is willing to destroy his own cities and kill his own people to save his country." I don't agree with that. I think it is stupid. These are two different and separate things and issues 150 years apart.
To judge Lee and the other Confederates with this wonderful hindsight and act like we (of all people) are perfect is just absurd.
I like to study and respect them all. Lee, Jackson, Lincoln, Davis, Sherman, Grant, Thomas etc. And of course the truly brave (usually) soldiers of both sides, white and black.
I just don't think this "He's a traitor", "No, He's a War Criminal" gets us anywhere in the pursuit and study of history.
Chris
I just hope we're not heading down the Thomas Buell "George Thomas is God" argument with this, also.
Chris
Post a Comment