In Defense of General Lee

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Post Reply
User avatar
HokieDan95
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:35 pm
Contact:

In Defense of General Lee

Post by HokieDan95 »

"What's best in life?","To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women."
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You really do just go with whatever it was that you last looked at, don't you?

HokieDan95 just posted an article chock full of things you have in the past breathlessly (dare I say giddily?) taken great exception to, and disagreed with. Like when you last posted a Lee article, and said later in thread commentary something akin to "no one would think that way" and thinking a certain way was the very premise of the article you had just posted. When confronted with that fact, you simply ran away. Again.

Your posting here is encouraged, and welcomed. I just wish you would think sometimes. I know you can do it. Try it out.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
then you totally refute everything you posted on race and the confederacy since Cville riot, right?
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

RiverguyVT wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You really do just go with whatever it was that you last looked at, don't you?

HokieDan95 just posted an article chock full of things you have in the past breathlessly (dare I say giddily?) taken great exception to, and disagreed with. Like when you last posted a Lee article, and said later in thread commentary something akin to "no one would think that way" and thinking a certain way was the very premise of the article you had just posted. When confronted with that fact, you simply ran away. Again.

Your posting here is encouraged, and welcomed. I just wish you would think sometimes. I know you can do it. Try it out.
Should I not agree with parts of an opinion piece that I agree with? I'm sorry that hurts your feelings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You really do just go with whatever it was that you last looked at, don't you?

HokieDan95 just posted an article chock full of things you have in the past breathlessly (dare I say giddily?) taken great exception to, and disagreed with. Like when you last posted a Lee article, and said later in thread commentary something akin to "no one would think that way" and thinking a certain way was the very premise of the article you had just posted. When confronted with that fact, you simply ran away. Again.

Your posting here is encouraged, and welcomed. I just wish you would think sometimes. I know you can do it. Try it out.
Should I not agree with parts of an opinion piece that I agree with? I'm sorry that hurts your feelings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
hypocrisy is what drives people nuts, and you are loaded with it, take a stand and stick to it

unless it is about bakeries
CFB Apologist
Posts: 3192
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by CFB Apologist »

nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But, but, but, but, but..Mom.. he "fought against the United States", mom..period.. he's a "traitor".. never mind ANY historical context..
WestEndHokie39
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:42 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by WestEndHokie39 »

nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
then you totally refute everything you posted on race and the confederacy since Cville riot, right?
Huh?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But, but, but, but, but..Mom.. he "fought against the United States", mom..period.. he's a "traitor".. never mind ANY historical context..
It's accurate to state he fought against the US.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

nolanvt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You really do just go with whatever it was that you last looked at, don't you?

HokieDan95 just posted an article chock full of things you have in the past breathlessly (dare I say giddily?) taken great exception to, and disagreed with. Like when you last posted a Lee article, and said later in thread commentary something akin to "no one would think that way" and thinking a certain way was the very premise of the article you had just posted. When confronted with that fact, you simply ran away. Again.

Your posting here is encouraged, and welcomed. I just wish you would think sometimes. I know you can do it. Try it out.
Should I not agree with parts of an opinion piece that I agree with? I'm sorry that hurts your feelings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My feelings aren't hurt. I note once again you go straight to "feelings". Facts don't give an eff about anyone's feelings.

Think, Nolan. Think. Seriously, I'm trying to help here.
In this thread, you nearly undermine your entire posting history, because dan's posted link made you feel something when you read it.

Should thinking matter here on UWS?
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

nolanvt wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But, but, but, but, but..Mom.. he "fought against the United States", mom..period.. he's a "traitor".. never mind ANY historical context..
It's accurate to state he fought against the US.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is more accurate to say he defended his state from invading armies of other states.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You really do just go with whatever it was that you last looked at, don't you?

HokieDan95 just posted an article chock full of things you have in the past breathlessly (dare I say giddily?) taken great exception to, and disagreed with. Like when you last posted a Lee article, and said later in thread commentary something akin to "no one would think that way" and thinking a certain way was the very premise of the article you had just posted. When confronted with that fact, you simply ran away. Again.

Your posting here is encouraged, and welcomed. I just wish you would think sometimes. I know you can do it. Try it out.
Should I not agree with parts of an opinion piece that I agree with? I'm sorry that hurts your feelings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
hypocrisy is what drives people nuts, and you are loaded with it, take a stand and stick to it

unless it is about bakeries
The kid needs principles that can be broadly applied; instead, he bathes in fleeting "feeeelinnngs" which are of no service in a variety of contexts.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
CFB Apologist
Posts: 3192
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by CFB Apologist »

nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But of course in Lib Land the reverse is NOT true.. nope, it's 100% fine to re-write history through the modern lens- like removing statues and grinding down Stone Mountain.. because of - Racism of course. long dead people are racist according to today's standards.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
Blacks hold black slaves today, 2017.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But of course in Lib Land the reverse is NOT true.. nope, it's 100% fine to re-write history through the modern lens- like removing statues and grinding down Stone Mountain.. because of - Racism of course. long dead people are racist according to today's standards.
In English, please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
..................................


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

Atta boy!
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by cwtcr hokie »

nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
..................................


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you seem to be using the Eye Pee method of conversation... hint.. its not very productive but make sure you add the emojis he uses
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
..................................


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you seem to be using the Eye Pee method of conversation... hint.. its not very productive but make sure you add the emojis he uses
You're making up arguments and want me to defend arguments I haven't made. I answered WestEnd's question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by cwtcr hokie »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote:
nolanvt wrote:I agree with a lot of that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
..................................


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you seem to be using the Eye Pee method of conversation... hint.. its not very productive but make sure you add the emojis he uses
You're making up arguments and want me to defend arguments I haven't made. I answered WestEnd's question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]

this is what you wrote "It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies", my post was in response to your words. The FACT is at that time in world history slave labor is how the agriculture was done. So it had nothing to do with racism, it was how agriculture was done
nolanvt
Posts: 13116
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:01 pm
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by nolanvt »

cwtcr hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
WestEndHokie39 wrote: What do you disagree with?
The most striking one was the insinuation that Lee wasn't a racist because he abhorred slavery. It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies, but I would also caution not to apply modern standards unconditionally in judging people of that time period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
try and figure out this occurred in the 1800's. not today. AT THAT TIME slavery was used all over the planet and in the USA, racism had nothing to do with it, it was just how things were done BACK THEN. Keep in mind that opposing tribes THAT WERE BLACK PEOPLE sold other black people into slavery, so I guess the black sellers were the first racists, right?
..................................


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you seem to be using the Eye Pee method of conversation... hint.. its not very productive but make sure you add the emojis he uses
You're making up arguments and want me to defend arguments I haven't made. I answered WestEnd's question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
this is what you wrote "It strikes me as an attempt to re-write history in order to position one's side for modern political arguments. It's FAKE NEWS! to suggest that Lee and most people of that time weren't racist in some fashion. It's okay to acknowledge he had racist tendencies", my post was in response to your words. The FACT is at that time in world history slave labor is how the agriculture was done. So it had nothing to do with racism, it was how agriculture was done[/quote]

You didn't read my response to WestEnd then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fully vaccinated, still not dead
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: In Defense of General Lee

Post by RiverguyVT »

Sigh
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
Post Reply