Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

steve2470

(37,457 posts)
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:04 AM Sep 2020

WTF... Trump Says Confederate General Robert E. Lee 'Would Have Won Except for Gettysburg'




https://www.newsweek.com/trump-says-confederate-general-robert-e-lee-would-have-won-except-gettysburg-1532765

In a campaign speech in Minnesota on Friday, President Donald Trump defended Confederate leaders including General Robert E. Lee while decrying protesters who attempted to damage Confederate monuments.

President Trump has resisted calls by protesters against racism in the U.S. to get rid of vestiges of the Confederacy. He has said that his administration would not allow military installations that bear the names of Confederate leaders to be rechristened. At a July press conference, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the bases "are not known for the generals they are named after, the bases are known for the heroes that served at them." Trump also signed an executive order which would send protestors who deface historical monuments to jail for ten years.

"Robert E. Lee, whether you like him or not, he won many battles in a row," Trump said Friday. "He would have won except for Gettysburg."

Trump said U.S. protesters "have no idea what they're ripping down. They're ripping down in many cases greatness. They're ripping down our past. They're ripping down our history. That's where these guys begin. They take away your history."


Yea, nothing like a CURRENT US President celebrating a treasonous 19th century general who deliberately gave up his opportunity to lead the Union Army to lead the Confederate one!

And he does this in MINNESOTA ... about as Union territory as it gets (admitted 1858 to the union, I checked lol )
38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WTF... Trump Says Confederate General Robert E. Lee 'Would Have Won Except for Gettysburg' (Original Post) steve2470 Sep 2020 OP
Napoleon would have won except for Waterloo. The Velveteen Ocelot Sep 2020 #1
yes, very stupid comment, but... classic Trump steve2470 Sep 2020 #4
I picked Moscow for napoleon unblock Sep 2020 #17
This! a million times THIS. n/t MFGsunny Sep 2020 #19
+++ still_one Sep 2020 #30
Yamamoto would've won except for Midway liberaltrucker Sep 2020 #37
President Pennywise knows jack shit about the Civil War. He's just pumping on the myth. Eyeball_Kid Sep 2020 #2
Good historical points PJMcK Sep 2020 #23
And Lee as a super strategic genius is also a myth Johnny2X2X Sep 2020 #24
Czarist Russia aided the North as well, they were the only major 'European' power to do so Celerity Sep 2020 #34
The very next DAY after Gettysburg - Grant took Vicksburg. Grins Sep 2020 #38
Donald would have won the popular vote in 2016 BKDem Sep 2020 #3
George Washington would have won the Battle of Brooklyn Heights if it wasn't for the British. Aristus Sep 2020 #5
Actually it was Grant TEB Sep 2020 #6
And Hitler would've won if he hadn't halted his forces at Dunkirk when they... brush Sep 2020 #7
Hitler would have won if he had brokered peace with Russia Johnny2X2X Sep 2020 #27
True. That was another of Hitler's great mistakes, the first being the thought he knew... brush Sep 2020 #33
Trenchant historical analysis. Also, Napoleon would have won except for Moscow. unblock Sep 2020 #8
Oh, wow! Now he's a military historian. LuvNewcastle Sep 2020 #9
Nope. He can't handle the ramps at West Point. BKDem Sep 2020 #32
Yeah, there are a lot of Minnesotans that are proud of their state's civil war heritage. Salviati Sep 2020 #10
Wait, a traitor to the United States admires a guy who fought against BusyBeingBest Sep 2020 #11
And the MAGATs would have won in Dumbkirk Blue Owl Sep 2020 #12
General Jack D Ripper would have won the War of Jenkins' Ear... First Speaker Sep 2020 #13
I always thought siding with the enemy was treason malaise Sep 2020 #14
I would have won the Lottery is I only had picked the right numbers. marble falls Sep 2020 #15
Hey don't forget the Bowling Green Massacre! CTyankee Sep 2020 #16
Lee is rather overrated... Wounded Bear Sep 2020 #18
Now tell us about Stalingrad, Uncle Donald! greenjar_01 Sep 2020 #20
1st Minnesota Infantry Regiment Klaralven Sep 2020 #21
This an irrelevant topic to bring up. Zing Zing Zingbah Sep 2020 #22
agreed ! nt steve2470 Sep 2020 #26
"They're ripping down our history?" Botany Sep 2020 #25
Lee should have never gotten into the Gettysburg engagement, and one of his leading ... SWBTATTReg Sep 2020 #28
I would have won the lottery except for those bastards 12 and 39. dameatball Sep 2020 #29
I'm more worried that he has rallies every single day LeftInTX Sep 2020 #31
Hitler wannabe says what? cayugafalls Sep 2020 #35
The Titanic's first voyage would have gone great NewJeffCT Sep 2020 #36

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,673 posts)
1. Napoleon would have won except for Waterloo.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:07 AM
Sep 2020

Custer would have won except for Little Big Horn.
Charles VI would have won except for Agincourt.

steve2470

(37,457 posts)
4. yes, very stupid comment, but... classic Trump
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:10 AM
Sep 2020

Pandering to the racists once more via the Confederate crap.

unblock

(52,196 posts)
17. I picked Moscow for napoleon
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:26 AM
Sep 2020

He was already in retreat by Waterloo. That was merely when he got captured, but he was already lost by then.

Reaching Gettysburg was lee's high water mark. For Napoleon that was reaching Moscow.

Lee's Waterloo would be the siege of Petersburg or the surrender at Appomattox court House

Eyeball_Kid

(7,430 posts)
2. President Pennywise knows jack shit about the Civil War. He's just pumping on the myth.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:09 AM
Sep 2020

The South couldn't continue. They would have surrendered anyway. They ran out of money, out of raw materials, and were running out of soldiers. They did NOT have a manufacturing base to keep in the business of waging war. Their secession was ill-advised from the start. Lincoln drove a stake through the heart of "foreign assistance" to the South by France and England by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. That killed the South's war effort.

PJMcK

(22,031 posts)
23. Good historical points
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:33 AM
Sep 2020

The continuing celebration of the Confederacy by some, mostly Southerners, has always baffled me.

They were traitors. They were losers. The Confederacy was poorly thought-out as the could never sustain a war effort, mainly for the reasons you point out.

The idea that "the South shall rise again" is totally bogus, offensive and frankly, stupid since the Southern States cannot sustain themselves-- even today!-- without the Federal assistance provided by primarily Northern States. And if they did rise again, would they try to secede again? The phrase is meaningless.

Trump knows jack shit about everything (or is it nothing?). He is the most stupid person I've ever seen in public life and that's saying a lot, eh, Goehmert & Jordan?

Johnny2X2X

(19,038 posts)
24. And Lee as a super strategic genius is also a myth
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:35 AM
Sep 2020

He knew strategy, but made several massive blunders that should have forever sullied his name as some great general. The fact he was lionized is pure racism. Lee was too arrogant and it cost him big over and over.

Celerity

(43,308 posts)
34. Czarist Russia aided the North as well, they were the only major 'European' power to do so
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 12:07 PM
Sep 2020

They sent parts of the Imperial fleet to both coasts, and were given a heroes' welcome in NYC, etc.

THE GRAND PROCESSION OF OUR RUSSIAN VISITORS THROUGH BROADWAY, UNDER ESCORT OF THE MILITIA AND POLICE.



This original Civil War Harper's Weekly features a dramatic illustration of the Russian Fleet. The picture is captioned, "The Russian Fleet, Commanded by Admiral Lisovski, Now in New York Harbor.



https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/the-american-civil-war-the-union-told-all-the-european-countries-if-they-recognized-the-confederacys-legitimacy-it-was-equal-to-declaring-war-against-the-union.html

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1863/october/russian-ships.htm


At the time Russia was involved in the 'Great Game' with the British Empire, thus the old 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' rationale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Game

Grins

(7,212 posts)
38. The very next DAY after Gettysburg - Grant took Vicksburg.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 02:24 PM
Sep 2020

And controlled the Mississippi River. And they already controlled the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers. Confederacy was cut in half, no major seaports.

Then it was good-bye Chattanooga, and hello Atlanta!

BKDem

(1,733 posts)
3. Donald would have won the popular vote in 2016
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:10 AM
Sep 2020

if you don't count all the people who voted against him.

[And...we didn't.}

TEB

(12,841 posts)
6. Actually it was Grant
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:10 AM
Sep 2020

Who kept up the pressure after lee bagged Richmond in trying to hook up with Johnston army of Tennessee. Shitler is a moron remember we rammed the ramparts and took the airfields in revolutionary war.

brush

(53,764 posts)
7. And Hitler would've won if he hadn't halted his forces at Dunkirk when they...
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:17 AM
Sep 2020

Last edited Mon Sep 21, 2020, 12:20 PM - Edit history (2)

could've captured the trapped British army.

If this, if that, fuck trump and his idolatry of a failed traitor and cruel slave owner.

And Lee lost when Lincoln finally called in Grant from the west where he had prevailed by blocking the Mississippi, a confederate supply route. Grant, no cautious scrub or political appointee, kicked Lee's ass.

Johnny2X2X

(19,038 posts)
27. Hitler would have won if he had brokered peace with Russia
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:37 AM
Sep 2020

He was a fool for not making a deal with Russia for a path to resources thru the caucuses. He could have made a temporary deal, defeated the West and then set his sights on Russia. Russia wanted a deal.

brush

(53,764 posts)
33. True. That was another of Hitler's great mistakes, the first being the thought he knew...
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 12:05 PM
Sep 2020

more than the generals (where have I heard that before?). But didn't he and Stalin sign the non-aggression pact, which was smart until Hitler outsmarted himself and invaded Russia anyway before defeating the British. It was really a comedy of errors—holding back from capturing the British army at Dunkirk and invading Russia when he had the pact with them.

Just dump mistakes of an earlier "stable genius", another prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. And from what I understand although they invaded Russia later than the generals wanted to originally, which would come back to bite them later, they advanced far into Russia and were poised to captured Stalingrad. Hitler intervened though, splitting the force in two and sending half south to the capture oil fields in the south and the other half to continue on to Stalingrad, another huge mistake by the stable genius as the Russian winter helped Russian forces outlast the Germans who surrendered after several months of the siege of Stalingrad.

Good thing we're not in a war, trump would probably try to overrule his generals as his idol did.

unblock

(52,196 posts)
8. Trenchant historical analysis. Also, Napoleon would have won except for Moscow.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:18 AM
Sep 2020

And hitler would have won except for Stalingrad.

Anyone who ever tried to conquer the world would have won except for the battle they lost at their high water mark.

Duh.

LuvNewcastle

(16,844 posts)
9. Oh, wow! Now he's a military historian.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:19 AM
Sep 2020

At least when he loses the election he'll have a teaching job at West Point to fall back on.

Salviati

(6,008 posts)
10. Yeah, there are a lot of Minnesotans that are proud of their state's civil war heritage.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:19 AM
Sep 2020

Minnesota was the first state to send volunteers to the Union army. Granted the confederate cancer has metastasized everywhere in this country, but for the folks in Minnesota who do care about the civil war, praising the confederates is not going to go over well.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Minnesota_Infantry_Regiment

First Speaker

(4,858 posts)
13. General Jack D Ripper would have won the War of Jenkins' Ear...
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:22 AM
Sep 2020

...if not for the Battle of Bowling Green, and its unfortunate massacre...

Wounded Bear

(58,645 posts)
18. Lee is rather overrated...
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:27 AM
Sep 2020

He was a great counter puncher, and a good tactician, but with one exception any time he tried to take the strategic initiative, it bombed on him. He gets credit for being audacious, but he inevitably won more often because of ineptitude and indecision from the Union generals, who were usually picked for political reasons, not for their abilities.

Most of Lee's "brilliant" moves were made out of desperation, from being outmaneuvered strategically and having to make desperate decisions to rectify situations. His best offensive campaign, in the Seven Days Battles, was capped by a disastrous and costly frontal assault at Malvern Hill, which wouldn't have been quite so damning if he hadn't repeated the mistake at Gettysburg with Pickett's Charge, that glorious excercise in futility that is marked for some reason as the high water mark of the Confederacy. What it marked was the final death knell of Napoleonic tactics in an era of rifled muskets and massed artillery.

Lee? Character issues aside, he is rather overrated IMHO.

 

Klaralven

(7,510 posts)
21. 1st Minnesota Infantry Regiment
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:31 AM
Sep 2020

The 1st Minnesota Infantry Regiment was the very first group of volunteers the Union received in response to the Souths assault of Fort Sumter at the beginning of the United States Civil War. Minnesota's Governor Ramsey offered 1000 men to Lincoln immediately upon learning of the attack on the fort. He just happened to be in Washington when the news broke. Those men volunteered for a three-year commitment (1861-64) which was much longer than other states. During combat actions, the 1st Minnesota sustained substantial casualties at the battles of First Bull Run 20%[1] and Antietam (28%)[1] and a staggering 82%[1]at the Battle of Gettysburg. It is most noted for its actions on the second day there.

At a dire moment, Major General Winfield Scott Hancock, commander of II Corps ordered the First Minnesota to charge into a Southern brigade. They were outnumbered by at least 5 to 1, but it was Gen. Hancock's only option to buy time for reinforcements to arrive. One survivor stated afterward that he expected the advance to result in "death or wounds to us all..."[2] The regiment immediately obeyed the order. Gen. Hancock was amazed at the unit discipline, valor, and the tremendous casualties taken in carrying out his order. This action preserved the Union's position on the Ridge exactly as he had hoped.

Post war, both General Hancock and U.S. President Calvin Coolidge were unrestrained in their praise for the actions of the 1st Minnesota. Gen. Hancock, who witnessed the action firsthand, placed its heroism highest in the annals of war:[3] "No soldiers on any field, in this or any other country ever displayed grander heroism". Gen. Hancock ascribed unsurpassed gallantry to the famed assault stating: "There is no more gallant deed recorded in history".[4] Emphasizing the critical nature of the circumstances on July 2 at Gettysburg, President Coolidge considered: "Colonel Colvill and those eight companies of the First Minnesota are entitled to rank as the saviors of their country".[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Minnesota_Infantry_Regiment

Zing Zing Zingbah

(6,496 posts)
22. This an irrelevant topic to bring up.
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:32 AM
Sep 2020

He might as well be talking about his favorite color or how he likes his morning coffee. He is not talking about issues important to Americans right now.

Botany

(70,490 posts)
25. "They're ripping down our history?"
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:35 AM
Sep 2020

Such as the great history of the C.S.A. fighting a war of treason in order to violently destroy
the United States so that human beings can be kept as slaves because God made them less
human as white people.

This is just Trump reaching out to his klan/racist dumb fuck base.


BTW Trump knows nothing about the Civil War does he even know about Antietam and if McCellan
had followed Lee after that battle the war could have been over or that Grant had won control
of the Mississippi River all the way to New Orleans and with that and a naval blockade the south
was doomed.

SWBTATTReg

(22,112 posts)
28. Lee should have never gotten into the Gettysburg engagement, and one of his leading ...
Mon Sep 21, 2020, 11:39 AM
Sep 2020

generals, Longstreet was against the entire engagement to begin with, not to get caught in a meat grinder as they were w/ Gettysburg, which was kind of the South's last gasps in trying to bring the war to an early and quick end, by winning Gettysburg and then threatening Wash. DC or the like to force an early end to the war.

Lee got greedy and cocky, with the first successful minor engagements of Gettysburg and thus, decided to stay in position and fight the Union (despite the poor positioning of his forces). By then, the North by then finally got rid of the political generals (worthless) and finally replaced their generals w/ actual soldiers who knew how to fight. The North was actually in a good position and Lee walked right into it, despite Longstreet's misgivings.

trump should leave his stupid comments to himself and leave the civil war questions to Newt G. who's actually wrote some books on the engagement(s).

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»WTF... Trump Says Confede...