He literally "waged war against them [the United States]. That's literally Article III, Section 3.
-
-
-
He defended his country against the United States.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Treason can be honorable; it's how the US was established. Lee's wasn't.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The kind of reputation a series of positive bios shortly after the war can net you
-
Not just that. An entire culture suffused with love/memorializing of Lee. See book "God and General Longstreet" for ca. 1980s take on this
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Lee was a traitor. That he was personally "honorable" only makes his actions worse. Slavery, you know, wasn't worth it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Also, what price did he pay? He lived out his days as a university president
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ever notice people tend to say "Union Army" versus "United States Army?" The language obscures the treasonous nature of the confederacy.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Indeed. Also: what price did he pay? He was allowed to live freely, became college president. He did lose his house, but that's quite cheap.
-
He didn't lose his house. Was awarded back to him posthumously.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.