Ulysses S. Grant

They were "welcome" in the South as slaves. Most of the efforts to have Northerners send them back came from legal pressure from the South. "Abe" didn't "wage war." Southerners seceded over slavery and then used military force to steal federal property. Sorry, but they seceded over slavery and they waged war over that secession.

 

What are you so unknowledgeable of that you require additional historical evidence for? I'll happily provide you with said evidence. Should I have not assumed that you were knowledgeable enough to already be educated regarding these facts? And "not agreeing" with objective historical fact will not stop it from being true. The facts don't care about your feelings. And if you think that facts and logic are "attacks," then you have some soul searching to do.

 

Read this book.

 

No, your tactic is to directly attack me as a person.

 

I've criticized Lincoln for plenty. Why are you so desperate to change the subject? Again, just kidding. We both know why.

 

If that's the distraction you need to evade historical fact, fine. Let us know when you are capable of discussing history. If you can't, you can't.

 

So you are totally ignorant of how Abe rounded up 75,000 troops who then invaded VA. I noticed that about you. Ignore what you do not like.

 

Fine you ignored the book about Lincoln by whining you also go against Abe. Fine you ignore history because you do not know it all. But you act like a know it all.

 

You tried to claim that's what the Civil War was about. The Civil War started before VA even seceded. Do you still not understand this?

 

The "book about Lincoln" had nothing to do with our discussion. For reasons provided, and which you ignored.

 

Now you deny Abe invaded VA and that was the invasion that took place.

 

The book has everything to do with this topic.

I believe you ignored the book by Donald as well.

 

So, how did we get from Grant to Lincoln????

 

Grant kept Lee bottled up while Sherman marched on Atlanta. William Tecumseh Sherman ate your lunch.

 

A better General would have crushed Robert E. Lee. Sherman will be known as the torch on this forum.

 

I know less about Grant than I know about Lincoln. Yes I know why he got published. I never got why he was called a drunk though.

 

By the way, as a former native Californian, I was not bottled up nor did the dead Sherman eat my lunch.

 

William Tecumseh Sherman was the man. He whupped Johnston and crushed Hood.

Sherman to Lincoln: "Atlanta is ours, and fairly won." Sherman saved the union and deserves his place right outside the White House.

 

Maybe you came from Bakersfield, maybe Fresno.

 

Close, I came from Tulare, CA. My Brother Jim came from Bakersfield.

 

I missed seeing that statue when I was in DC several times.

 

Ok, just to be crystal clear, this thread is about Grant, not Lincoln.

 

As a neutral on this topic I think what you said is fair analysis for what its worth. I personally would argue Sherman was in his day what say Patton or McArthur were in their day-hot headed and a tad narcissistic. Sherman was not easy to control. Your take on the Scott strategy I think is dead on. What I like about Grant was long after such decisions he would openly admit what he thought he did wrong. He never in hindsight talking about his decisions talked of himself and his decisions in an inflated manner. I think true leaders like him saw many sides a situation and would agonize which way to go. I think he died with the regret of knowing his orders killed people. His wars were bloody and immediate and not overseas. He saw the dead bodies close up. I just see his tactics as a lot more cla

Your comments in regards to his being criticized about his actions vis a vis his interactions with Native Americans I defer to them on. In regards to the rest of his record, its now history and it is true if we use the bias of today's moral values on past actions it may not appreciate their full context at the time these decisions were made yes. On the other hand there is a limit to that kind of argument. If we took that argument to its extreme there would be no one capable of being criticized after the fact for their judgements and Grant was the first in retrospect to be very candid in decisions he made he considered failures of judgement. He was more than willing to take the criticism if you look back at his memoirs and interviews.

I like this synopsis of the record that does not ignore why some still argyue he was one of the worst US Presidents as it does not fluff over his entire record but balances his good and bad records and deeds.

https://www.history.com/news/ulysses-s-grant-president-accomplishments-scandals-15th-amendment

 

Born and raised in Southern California, moved to Napa. Bakersfield makes some places in the South look positively liberal.

 

That's not true. Lots of actions of historical figures are routinely criticized without resorting to moral anachronisms.