USAians: What are you doing on this loooong MLK weekend?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Apparently not .

Apparently to Ben, being beaten to a pulp and then telling all your troops to lay down their arms when you could have continued a futile guerrilla campaign means everything is forgiven.

I guess so!

[Ben Kenobi]

So I imagine it would be rather unlikely for a General George Washington Day to be celebrated in the British Empire, or Sam Adams Day, or a day for any of the other leaders of our rebellion. We aren't part of your empire anymore, so they aren't traitors. The South is still part of our empire, so their heroes are traitors.

First off it ain't our empire. We got our independence without having to take up arms against the British.

As for all having being forgiven, I think that happened quite some time ago. The British decided it was better to sign peace then continue to fight. Once they made sure the French wouldn't carry on, they weighed the cost of defeating the US with the benefits, and decided it was best to let you guys go.

A better example would be whether there are days in Scotland celebrating William Wallace, which they are, he was considered to be a patriot in Scotland, and the English let them celebrate their scottish heritage.

Same with Virginia. The US isn't a unitary state like France, you are even more decentralised then a federation, which Canada is, as your states have more powers then the provinces.

As such I think it's perfectly valid for states to celebrate their heroes, even if they aren't heroes in the rest of the nation. The north can have their Grant days and the south has their Lee days.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
First off it ain't our empire. We got our independence without having to take up arms against the British.

You got the same Queen, you're still part of the Empire.

As for all having being forgiven, I think that happened quite some time ago.

That's got nothing to do with it. I'm still rather sure that there wouldn't be a Day celebrating our break away.

The British decided it was better to sign peace then continue to fight. Once they made sure the French wouldn't carry on, they weighed the cost of defeating the US with the benefits, and decided it was best to let you guys go.

You're half right and half wrong. It was after it was obvious that France, the Netherlands, and Spain (but especially France) were going to keep aiding us that Britain realized it wasn't going to be worth the effort of holding on to us.

A better example would be whether there are days in Scotland celebrating William Wallace, which they are, he was considered to be a patriot in Scotland, and the English let them celebrate their scottish heritage.

Scotland, however, successfully won its independence and held it for three centuries. It was only when the Scottish King became the English King that things changed. Since Scotland voluntarily united with Great Britain, it would be expected for them to keep their heroes.

As such I think it's perfectly valid for states to celebrate their heroes, even if they aren't heroes in the rest of the nation. The north can have their Grant days and the south has their Lee days.

We don't have Grant Days or even days celebrating the victory over the great treason. All we have is Thanksgiving, celebrating the victory at Gettysburg, and that's been completely stripped of its original intent.

In any event, it is highly distasteful to celebrate the leaders of a treasonous rebellion which existed solely for the purpose of maintaining white supremacy. In fact, given when the holiday was created, it likely has more to do with celebrating white supremacy itself than remembering Lee and Jackson.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
First off it ain't our empire. We got our independence without having to take up arms against the British.

You got the same Queen, you're still part of the Empire.

Well...technically speaking the Queen of Great Britain isn't the Head of State of Canada. The Queen of Canada is. It just happens to be the same person who is simultaneously but independently both. Being in personal union with the Crown is different from having a foreign monarch as your ruler.

[Ben Kenobi]

You got the same Queen, you're still part of the Empire.

Right. So when the Queen jumps up we do her bidding, eh?

That's got nothing to do with it. I'm still rather sure that there wouldn't be a Day celebrating our break away.

Honestly you guys are like best buds now. Things have changed. Part of that was the recognition that it did no good to continue fighting. Part of that is the first and second world wars.

You're half right and half wrong. It was after it was obvious that France, the Netherlands, and Spain (but especially France) were going to keep aiding us that Britain realized it wasn't going to be worth the effort of holding on to us.

Not by the end of 1782. The British started to win against France and Spain and the Netherlands, so their alliance started to crumble. France decided to sign peace with the British, even though they had captured several Caribbean colonies, and were holding ground in India.

The number one clause for the peace treaty? Recognition of the 13 colonies as indepedent. France agreed to restore status quo ante bellum in exchange for US independence and Spain got Florida.

Scotland, however, successfully won its independence and held it for three centuries. It was only when the Scottish King became the English King that things changed. Since Scotland voluntarily united with Great Britain, it would be expected for them to keep their heroes.

The Act of Union subsumed Scotland within England, it's only been in the last few years that Scotland has had it's own parliament.

We don't have Grant Days or even days celebrating the victory over the great treason. All we have is Thanksgiving, celebrating the victory at Gettysburg, and that's been completely stripped of its original intent.

That says something right there. There is nothing stopping the north from celebrating Grant days, why don't they do so?

In any event, it is highly distasteful to celebrate the leaders of a treasonous rebellion which existed solely for the purpose of maintaining white supremacy. In fact, given when the holiday was created, it likely has more to do with celebrating white supremacy itself than remembering Lee and Jackson.

Finally, I was waiting for this one.

Is this why Lee owned slaves? You celebrate days for other slaveowners like Washington. Why shouldn't Lee deserve his own day considering that he refused to own slaves?

Like I said, Lee is odd. He was loyal to Virginia and fought honourably for a cause that he was not entirely invested. He saved a large number of Union lives at Appottomatox, and for that should be honoured by the people of Virginia.

Are you aware Che, that Lee opposed secession? He was offered command of the Union armies by Lincoln and turned them down.

Why would Lincoln offer a traitor command of the Union forces?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Honestly you guys are like best buds now. Things have changed. Part of that was the recognition that it did no good to continue fighting. Part of that is the first and second world wars.

That's got nothing to do with it. Very few countries celebrate the people who fought against them, let alone defeated them. I doubt you'd find a statue of Napoleon or Joan of Arc in Great Britain either. Why are you even arguing this? This is so stupid that you can only be doing this because you like to argue and don't care whether or not there's even a point?

Not by the end of 1782.

We defeated Great Britain decisively in 1781.

The British started to win against France and Spain and the Netherlands, so their alliance started to crumble. France decided to sign peace with the British, even though they had captured several Caribbean colonies, and were holding ground in India.

Uh, no. Britain had seized some of the Antillies, France retook those little Islands off Nova Scotia and defeated the British in India and captured Minorca. France was holding its own and was able to re-establish itself as a continental power as a result of the war.

The number one clause for the peace treaty? Recognition of the 13 colonies as indepedent. France agreed to restore status quo ante bellum in exchange for US independence and Spain got Florida.

We secretly negotiated our peace with Great Britain following Yorktown. This hampered French and Spanish negotiations, since we had won the major victory.

Finally, I was waiting for this one.

Is this why Lee owned slaves? You celebrate days for other slaveowners like Washington. Why shouldn't Lee deserve his own day considering that he refused to own slaves?

Washington doesn't have his own day anymore. It's President's Day now, for all the Presidents. In any event, Washington is considered the father of the country, and Lincoln (who also had a day) was the savior of the country. Who did he save it from? Lee and Jackson and their traitorous ilk!

Like I said, Lee is odd. He was loyal to Virginia and fought honourably for a cause that he was not entirely invested.

So it would be acceptable for Germany to have an Erwin Rommel Day or Japan to have a Yamamoto Day? I think not. Acting honorably and recognizing reality do not make you not a traitor.

Why would Lincoln offer a traitor command of the Union forces?

Cuz he wasn't a traitor at the time, you dumbass! He became a traitor after Lincoln offered him command.

[Ben Kenobi]

That's got nothing to do with it. Very few countries celebrate the people who fought against them, let alone defeated them.

Civil wars are a different matter entirely.

I doubt you'd find a statue of Napoleon or Joan of Arc in Great Britain either.

You will find ones of Cromwell.

Why are you even arguing this? This is so stupid that you can only be doing this because you like to argue and don't care whether or not there's even a point?

I care because I think you are wrong. Lee wasn't a traitor.

We defeated Great Britain decisively in 1781.

Indeed. Won the battle, but not the war. Great Britain was very stubborn.

Uh, no. Britain had seized some of the Antillies, France retook those little Islands off Nova Scotia and defeated the British in India and captured Minorca. France was holding its own and was able to re-establish itself as a continental power as a result of the war.

Yes, but Britain was willing to fight it out to the bitter end. As ill-conceived and damaging as the war was, France couldn't keep their coalition together. We see the same against Napoleon. Napoleon defeats one coalition, and Britain makes another. Napoleon defeats another coalition, and Britain stitches a new one, until they finally took him down.

We secretly negotiated our peace with Great Britain following Yorktown. This hampered French and Spanish negotiations, since we had won the major victory.

Yes you did, and won the respect of the world, but Britain wasn't going to end the war on the losing end against France, Spain and the Netherlands. They had to fight until France was no longer willing to carry on the struggle, and then they bargained you folks to end the war.

Washington doesn't have his own day anymore. It's President's Day now, for all the Presidents. In any event, Washington is considered the father of the country, and Lincoln (who also had a day) was the savior of the country. Who did he save it from? Lee and Jackson and their traitorous ilk!

The same ilk he offered command of his forces? Lincoln had much respect for Lee, much more the McLellan or most of his generals. The only other one he had as much respect for was Grant.

He kept telling them to fight and defeat Lee, because he knew if Lee quit then the war was over. He told them not to damage the south, and that it was US territory not Southern territory. Grant was the only one who finally wore Lee down.

So it would be acceptable for Germany to have an Erwin Rommel Day or Japan to have a Yamamoto Day? I think not. Acting honorably and recognizing reality do not make you not a traitor.

You don't seem to get this. Neither of those were civil wars. A simillar case would be statues of Lord Protector Cromwell.

Cuz he wasn't a traitor at the time, you dumbass! He became a traitor after Lincoln offered him command.

Which is why he opposed secession and fought against the secessionists in Virginia?

It seems to me that had he truly betrayed the US that he would have supported the secession of the US as had Jefferson Davis, and led the charge. He did not. He had the confidence of Lincoln to such a high degree that he offered him command of all the union armies after Virginia left.

After the war was over he campaigned hard for the reintegration of the South and the restoration of the South as an integral part of the union.

He's not a traitor Che.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Starchild


Well...technically speaking the Queen of Great Britain isn't the Head of State of Canada. The Queen of Canada is. It just happens to be the same person who is simultaneously but independently both. Being in personal union with the Crown is different from having a foreign monarch as your ruler.

[LordShiva]

If Britain can have a Guy Fawkes day, teh US should have a Lee-Jackson day

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

In any event, it is highly distasteful to celebrate the leaders of a treasonous rebellion which existed solely for the purpose of maintaining white supremacy. In fact, given when the holiday was created, it likely has more to do with celebrating white supremacy itself than remembering Lee and Jackson.

right on

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by LordShiva
If Britain can have a Guy Fawkes day, teh US should have a Lee-Jackson day

Consider the motives. Why did Guy Fawkes rebel? Why did the Confederacy say they were rebelling?

Guy Fawkes isn't so bad really.

[Ben Kenobi]

Guy Fawkes?

Interesting question. I was doing some reading into that.

He's a Catholic revolutionary in England who wanted to take England back to Catholicism.

He was from York, and was married into the family of the Earl of Northumberland, in the Percy Family (yes the same family as Harry Hotspur back in Shakespeare's plays) one of the few Catholic families that still kept their land after Elizabeth. Thomas Percy, the uncle of the earl in his time was executed by Elizabeth after leading the Rising in the North.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Guy Fawkes?

Interesting question. I was doing some reading into that.

He's a Catholic revolutionary in England who wanted to take England back to Catholicism.

He was from York, and was married into the family of the Duke of Northumberland, in the Percy Family (yes the same family as Harry Hotspur back in Shakespeare's plays) one of the few Catholic families that still kept their land after Elizabeth. Thomas Percy, his uncle was executed by Elizabeth after leading the Rising in the North.

changing from forced protestantism to forced catholicism seems rather morally neutral to me.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Lee wasn't a traitor.

Oy, I can't believe I have to do this. You are so dense, Ben.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/traitor

trai·tor /ˈtreɪtər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[trey-ter] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust.
2. a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/treason

trea·son /ˈtrizən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[tree-zuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

EVERYONE who fought for the Confederacy was involved in treason. They violated their allegiance to their sovereign, the government of the United States of America. Hence, they were traitors.

Yes, including Robert E. Lee; however reluctantly he betrayed his country, he was still a traitor.

To argue otherwise is the height of stupidity. Or you are simply redefining words because you can't face facts.

He told them not to damage the south, and that it was US territory not Southern territory.

What, did he forget to tell Sherman? Or Grant, since Grant instructed Sherman to wage total war?

It seems to me that had he truly betrayed the US that he would have supported the secession of the US as had Jefferson Davis, and led the charge. He did not.

HE ****ING LED THE ARMY OF THE SECEDING STATES! How much more "betrayed the US" can you get?

[Ben Kenobi]

EVERYONE who fought for the Confederacy was involved in treason. They violated their allegiance to their sovereign, the government of the United States of America. Hence, they were traitors.

Had Virginia gone to the Union, the Union would have had him as their General, and the war would have been over in a few months. We wouldn't be talking about it much today.

Yes, including Robert E. Lee; however reluctantly he betrayed his country, he was still a traitor.

Was his loyalty to the government of the United States, or to the state of Virginia? He has two oaths. How can he break one and be a faithful to the other. By your demand, he would have been a traitor either way in that he went back on his oath.

His choice was to keep his loyalty to Virginia, and to fight for them regardless of which side of the line they stood. In the end he did far more to keep the US together then many others in the North, simply because of his constant insistance that the war was over, that insurrection was not desired, that the south was better off without slavery, that they were better off a part of the US then they were separate.

His 'plans' at Gettysburg, if they can be said was to end the war. McLellan realised that but couldn't defeat him.

HE ****ING LED THE ARMY OF THE SECEDING STATES! How much more "betrayed the US" can you get?

For 63 years he lived. For 4 of them he served Virginia in the confederacy. He refused to wear the stars and the bars, but wore his stars that he earned in the US army.

If you are to call him a traitor for his 4 years of service after being drafted into the Army of Northern Virginia, then you ought also call him a patriot for his 5 years of service after the war to end the war at Appottomatox, and assist in the reconstruction of the US.

At the worst he died a reformed traitor. At best, he never abandoned his ideals and was dragged along by the events of the time.