HISTORY -Practical History13,301 members

Member Settings

Share

Discussions Jobs About Search Manage

Manager's ChoiceOptions menuA Amin (Max) consultant3 days agoHow would you rate Abraham Lincoln as a president and his place in history ?http://csi-ops.blogspot.com/2015/11/how-would-you-rate-abraham-lincoln-as.html 

How would you rate Abraham Lincoln as a president and his place in history ? 

Agha H Amin Founder History Group

Comment (44) Like(6) Unfollow

ENRICA MALATESTA, Maria Helena Mealha, Christopher Hayward, +3 like this

Casey MachulaPoor

3 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

John FloroHe was possibly the greatest President the United States ever had... He had to preside over the most tumultuous period in U.S. History and he held the country together...

3 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Maria Helena MealhaI agree with John Floro. and despite the fact that I do not consider his character has particularly captivating I would like to stress his fight against racism in a period of history were that was not exactly the mainstream opinion. I know that some of the founding fathers had also critical opinion about slavery; when having slaves! Lincon was a puritan a bit of boring man (for me) but an honest one. I do believe he had Marfan syndrome; it’s a pity that his remaining can not be examined at the light of today’s science.

3 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Karen HockemeyerAlong with George Washington, who set many precedents, which includes stepping down after 2 terms, Abraham Lincoln is the greatest American president in this country's history. Not only did he hold the country together, he started the transcontinental railroad which bound the far west to the east, helped create a number of agricultural and mechanical colleges, ended slavery with the 13th Amendment, and in the last speech before his death, a speech John Wilkes Booth heard and drove him to perform Lincoln's assassination, had proposed that the nation give African Americans full equal status politically. If the dream of his Second Inaugural Address had been carried out Reconstruction might not have been so militarized. Questions about how U.S. history might have unfolded if he had not died are interesting to speculate.

3 days ago

o Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Jon Scott LogelLincoln is one or two, with Washington.

3 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

John RicksI would rate him second among Presidents after George Washington. Washington was the greatest because the Constitutional Convention trusted him enough to make the Presidency a strong office and almost everything he did set a precedent. John Ricks

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

John CroninMaria, Lincoln did not fight against racism. He crusaded against the beak up of the USA. He used emancipation as a card to rally the country. At the the same time the white industrial workers in the North had to endure conditions that were worse than those of the slaves in the south. What did he do for them? I am from the UK.

3 days agoo Unlike(3)o Reply privately o Delete

Lawrence Lujan, Ph.D.Silly question, which got some silly answers. Of course he fought to re-unite the Union rather than to end slavery per se, but he eventually realized that he couldn't re-unite the Union if it remained half-free and half-slave. He was the greatest president in American history and one of the greatest statesmen in world history (FDR coming in second and Washington third). Don't forget the Homestead Act and the Land Grant Act--he still would have

an important place in American history if there had been no Civil War. And don't forget his intelligence and eloquence, his goodness and his loneliness. If the Catholic church had any sense, they'd canonize him, even though he wasn't Catholic.

3 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Craig ParkinsonLawrence makes some good points. He was very progressive but also pragmatic. His use of railroads and the telegraph for war efforts essential to victory. He overcame family tragedies, battlefield setbacks, incessant criticism, all the while directing an all encompassing war. Republicans today wouldn't like his expanding powers of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Gordon FowkesThe courage of his convictions and the ability to skate around obstacles to them

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Maria Helena MealhaJohn Cronin, like John Floro mentioned "He had to preside over the most tumultuous period in U.S. History and he held the country together". You mentioned that you are from the UK. How was the working conditions for industrial labors at the UK at those days? How were men, women and children from the working classes treated at UK at those days? You can not take the men out of his historical period. Perhaps some slaves at the south had a good live ... Really? Can you imagine a mother see her son sold out has a commodity? Please do not confound poverty with slavery Was Lincon a great politician at his days? I say "yes" under my point of view, others can disagree but I am not discussing watt he was thinking I am talking about watt he did. And he did something (more than words), against slavery and held the country together!

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

John CroninMaria, I agree that the UK working conditions were no better. However, my point was that Lincoln Used the slavery issue as a political tool, in order to win. He did nothing for the disadvantaged whites. The ACW was not about slavery, the South broke away from the Union because they were loosing their power in Washington to the Northern states and did not like it. Slavery was a secondary issue.

I think that Lincoln did a good job in holding the Union together. The USA would be a poorer place if he had lost. But please do not preach that the war was fought over emancipation. It was not.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Cullen BordagesIt needs to be remembered that the largest mass execution in American History happened under the direct order of Abraham Lincoln. Nearly 40 Native Americans were hanged for supporting the Confederacy. He was bound and determined to keep this country together, and it didn't matter the cost, that cost being upwards to a million dead, military and civilian.

Was he a great President, yes. Would I cross the street to shake hands with the sonofab..., no.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Cliff ScottAlways judge peopler by the srandards of the times they lived in! Lincoln was a great man!

3 days ago

o Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

James DavisI rank him either number one or number two, Washington being his rival for the top honor.. Although he held deep convictions on a number of issues, he was highly pragmatic, often working to accomplish what was possible rather than failing spectacularly in trying accomplish more. This was especially true in matters of slavery and race. His superb accomplishments are all the more impressive when when we realize that he had less than a year of formal education. Moreover, the severe conditions he encountered again and again as he and his family moved with the westward-moving frontier did not make him bitter, shallow, or petty. Somehow, he grew into a political and moral giant, and he was precisely the person we needed to preserve the country and end slavery; it is possible that no other leading politician could have accomplished both.

Despite the fact that his grandfather (Abraham) had been brutally killed by Indians in the last months of the Revolutionary War, which hurt the family's socio-economic status, and despite the fact that Republican politicians and others demanded that he execute up to 400 Indians after the Sioux War in Minnesota in 1862, he successfully resisted harsh demands for such massive executions. He did virtually everything in his power to whittle down the list of 400 Indians to be executed, finding every excuse to remove names from the list. In the end, he did approve the execution of 38, but his actions in whittling down the list provoked widespread rage and hurt him and his party politically. In evaluating A. Lincoln and others, we must guard against presentism, the tendency for us to judge people in the past by our wonderful, enlightened, and supremely humane standards (ha!).

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Raymond KetcherI would rank him in the top three easily but Washington wouldn't make the top 5. Lincoln was focused, driven and a willing to be the bad guy and make unpopular decisions. Our elected officials would do well to learn from him.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

John KelleyLincoln's main task as President was to keep the United States a united country. In the process, he gained the 13th amendment before his passing. That in itself makes him a great President.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Lawrence Lujan, Ph.D.About the Sioux uprising of 1862 in Minnesota. 425 Sioux were tried and 307 were sentenced to be hanged. Lincoln pardoned all but 38 of them. Since the official policy of the United States towards the Indians at this time was genocide, he was criticized for being too soft. Also, with the Civil War going on, he couldn't afford to let troops be drained off for a continued Indian war. A Seneca named Ely S. Parker, who eventually became a Brigadier General, was Ulysses S. Grant's military secretary; he was the one who wrote the document for the surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia at Appomattox Court House. As Robert E. Lee shook hands with Grant’s staff after signing the surrender papers, he stared a moment at Parker’s dark features and said, “I am glad to see one real American here.” Parker replied, “We are all Americans.” You've got to place stuff like this in a historical context.

3 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Brian LiebermanLincoln is to the presidency what Mozart is to music.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Rehan WalgamaHe had vision and held the country together, so that America could expand westward and put slavery to extinction to make progress in Civil Rights later in the 1960s.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Maria Helena Mealha

Fully agree James Davis. I never said that the American civil war was about of slavery end. That would be a very simplistic vision about an extremely complex situation. Watt I am saying is that Lincoln did considerable more than have nice words about a difficult problem. Others before and after him have grandiloquent affirmations about slavery; he actually did something. He was a remarkable politician, particularly when you considered his origins, his lack of formal education, and his days. And we must be considered according to his days. This said I excuse myself of the discussion also because I am no expert in USA presidents. It may look futile for the participants at this discussion, but my particular interest in A. Lincoln has to do with is medical condition and sometimes "unusual" behavior; something I would like to know more.

3 days agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Gordon FowkesHis assassination reversed his policy of malice towards none, charity for all, and set in motion Reconstruction which has scarred American politics ever since.

2 days agoo Like(1)o Reply privately o Delete

A Amin (Max)Well stated

2 days agoo Like(0)o Delete

Lawrence Lujan, Ph.D.The old saying about the Civil War is that we won the war and lost the peace. Reconstruction botched everything that Lincoln would have done--one of the greatest tragedies in American history.

2 days ago

o Unlike(4)o Reply privately o Delete

Thomas MuldoonAs one who professes Christian theism, I marvel and praise God for Lincoln's 2nd inaugural address. Lincoln said that no matter how many died in the war, "God's judgments are true and righteous altogether!" Think what would happen if a President said that now! But God does not change; it's the American public who have moved away from Him. I like what another member of this club wrote: "Lincoln is to the Presidency what Mozart is to music."

2 days agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Peter AltomareThat era and the contexts of the time are complicated. Suffice it to say, the Civil war was about economic national unity, the basis for national expansion: abolition of slavery was lower on the list, it kept the UK and other powers out of the Civil War, so the Abolitionists served that purpose in the big scheme of things. Lincoln served his purpose,

1 day agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraDr. Lujan, thank you for the information on the treatment of the Sioux.

1 day agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Tom S.

Lincoln is second to "precedent" Washington. It's without a doubt that to manage a fractured nation and survive politically while being vilified by an angry opponent (McClellan...not Davis) and win an election even when many Northerners didn't want the war to continue....that makes for greatness. But second to the American Cincinnaticus.

1 day agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Lawrence Lujan, Ph.D.Washington never had an original idea in his life. His gift was listening to the smart people around him--Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, Franklin--and then making the right decision. That's an enormously valuable gift in a President, but it doesn't quite put him at the top, over people creative in themselves, like Lincoln or FDR. He wasn't much of a speaker or writer. And there's also the problem of his being a slave-owner. He freed them when he died, but that was a little late.

21 hours agoo Unlike(3)o Reply privately o Delete

Stephen E MedvecFirst of all, I am very glad to be reconnected with all of you on this History thread. I lost my connection via a change in the Homepage of my provider. E. is my middle initial.

In any event, I share the views of the brilliance of Abraham Lincoln and his Team of Rivals for input, but, ultimately, he made the calls in the Civil War. His decision to relieve George McClellan of his command in 1862 started the process to lead to the ultimate Union victory under the guidance of U.S. Grant and William Tecumsah Sherman. Yet, his assassination did indeed change the course of American, and Southern, history, as Reconstruction came to an end in 1877 under Rutherford B. Hayes, which led, among others, to Jim Crow and Southern recalcitrance,. the results of which continue to haunt the American experience to this day. However, one of the great ironies of the Southern defeat is the enormous commitment of Southerners to the military in this nation-state.

12 hours agoo Unlike(3)o Reply privately o Delete

Mindy PercivalI believe him to be one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history.He helped a nation evolve to become more humane, and he himself evolved a lot during his time served. Mr.Frederick Douglas seems to have been influential. And SLAVERY WAS the central issue of the Civil War. State rights were made an issue, so states could keep SLAVES!!!!!

11 hours agoo Like(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraAnother valuable post Dr. Lujan.

9 hours agoo Like(0)o Reply privately o Delete

Alun HughesI find evaluating Lincoln tremendously difficult. If I am asked as an individual citizen about Lincoln, I would have to applaud what he did because every moral instinct that I possess veers towards opposing Slavery as an institution and practice. Does that perhaps make me a Presentist? Moving beyond that and stripping away Slavery (wow...did I just say that). Lincoln did more single-handedly than any individual to move the Presidency several steps towards its Imperial position, and trashed the residue of States Rights in the process. The Jeffersonian in me finds him appalling the Hamiltonian in me creditworthy. Conflicted

8 hours agoo Like(2)o Reply privately o Delete

A Amin (Max)Very interesting views

8 hours ago

o Like(0)o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraLincoln was complex and Great.

8 hours agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraWhat about the rights of my city? A state is not some something absolute: things evolve.

8 hours agoo Like(0)o Reply privately o Delete

Alun HughesAdding some politics to the mix Dr Hira. Power and the rights of the individual/precinct/state and nation were all crucial matters in Lincoln's time. Had they not been, there would be no Maine, no Vermont and no West Virginia. Questions of the respective rights of each and all lay at the heart of the political equation in Lincoln's time and he was a great one for placing the theme of "Rights" before the American people. It was no coincidence that he was embroiled with the "Spot" Resolutions and he wrestled with the Slavery question that is for sure. That said he was aware of the "rights" of states and the need to defer to such rights in 1861. As to your question about the "rights of my city". I'm not sure where this fits into the equation precisely or how to answer you 

7 hours agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Lawrence Lujan, Ph.D.It's "We the People," not "We the States." The states gave up their sovereignty when they ratified the Constitution--look at the Webster-Hayne Debate. The Southern states clung to the idea of "states' rights" simply as a way to maintain slavery and the rotten old plantation economy. Like the nuts now who proclaim themselves "sovereign citizens"--a contradiction in terms.

5 hours agoo Unlike(3)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraGreat posts Alun and Lawrence.

4 hours agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraWasn't Maryland the private property of Lord Baltimore of Britain? Should we be infringing on private property?

4 hours agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Alun HughesWhilst I appreciate that the "states" gave up their absolute sovereignty when they ratified the federal Constitution, the latter was itself a formulaic construct that was premised upon apportioning the functions of a sovereign state across the apparatus that was outlined within the Constitution. At no time in the Webster-Hayne debate did the notion that the states have no rights hold sway and whilst the principal interest of the South in pressing the concept of states rights was to perpetuate Slavery, this was not the only reason. We must be careful here or we are endowing the federal state (and ergo the officers of such) with powers that it was never endowed with. The so called nuts who proclaim themselves "sovereign citizens" do have some case to make because the Bill of Rights (and other facets) do guarantee the citizen certain powers. Ultimately, it is the "we the people" that hold sway because "we the people" could decide by an array of Constitutional methods to transform the nation in every which way if they so chose.

4 hours agoo Unlike(2)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraI agree Alun.

4 hours agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Dr. Ajit HiraAlso, I think it was the actions of some of the individuals in the rebel states that pushed Lincoln into a position where he found he could wield so much power. I don't he sat down in advance and plotted to seize all that power. Some of his critics even say was too inward-looking and was not decisive enough.

4 hours agoo Unlike(1)o Reply privately o Delete

Lawrence Lujan, Ph.D.Dr.Hira, you're absolutely right. Lincoln did not plan to have a war, did not plan to end slavery, did not plan to wield as much power as he did. He changed his positions because conditions changed--the attack on Fort Sumter forced him into war. That's not indecisiveness, it's growth. Lord Baltimore and King George lost their rights to the colonies in the Revolutionary War. Mr. Hughes, of course states and citizens have rights--but they're not SOVEREIGN rights.

3 hours agoo Like(0)o Reply privately o Delete

Atlas of Mysore Wars 1767-1799 -Volume Two-Second Mysore WarOct 29, 2015

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$49.99Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

Pakistan Military Review-Kaimkhanis of Chirawa -Unorthodox Military Historian (How Pakistani Military History...Sep 13, 2015

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$19.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

Pakistan Military Review- Military History of Pakistan Armoured Corps-Volume 28Sep 19, 2015

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$19.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

History (Volume 3)Nov 21, 2014

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$23.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$18.96 used & new (11 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

History (Volume 4)Nov 23, 2014

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$39.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$32.97 used & new (11 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

History (Volume 5)Dec 7, 2014

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$23.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$18.88 used & new (10 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

History (Volume 6)Dec 22, 2014

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$29.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$23.74 used & new (9 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

History (Volume 7)Jan 7, 2015

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$29.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$24.58 used & new (9 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

History (Volume 1)Nov 9, 2013

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$17.22$19.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$5.18 used & new (13 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

Atlas of Mysore Wars -1767-1799-Reality, Myths and Fantasies of Indian history (First Mysore War) (Volume 1)Sep 3, 2015

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$39.99Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

Intelligence ReviewJun 1, 2014

by Agha Humayun Amin

Paperback

$33.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$26.75 used & new (11 offers)

Paperback

$18.00Prime

Get it by Wednesday, Nov 11

More Buying Choices

$12.75 used & new (11 offers)

FREE Shipping on orders over $35

ExcerptFront Matter : ... Intelligence Operations Agha Humayun Amin Centre for Study of ...See a random page in this book.