Had a thought....

[Xolodno]

I'm in the minority in the view that the CSA was for a brief time a separate nation and their attack on Ft. Sumter and subsequent invasion north was a hostile act of one nation, the CSA against another nation, the USA. So with that being said....

Where are the monuments to the Mexican President Paredes? Or Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana? Valetin Gomez Farias? etc. They lost the war and their population was absorbed into the USA. So where are their monuments?

Oh and we had this thing called the Louisiana Purchase, so where are the statues of Napoleon?

Where is the Statue of Tsar Alexander II Romanov from the purchase of Alaska?

And what about the King George? Cromwell? etc.

Granted some will say this is an apples to oranges comparison. But, then you have to go with the other definition.

If the CSA was not a separate nation that attacked the USA, then the CSA was treason and a morally bankrupt rebellion. Which also means all those statues are commemorating people who were, at best, not patriotic.

[Ptah]

1. Pancho Villa, Tucson, Arizona

PANCHO VILLA STATUE UNVEILED IN ARIZONA

Special to the New York Times
Published: July 2, 1981


TUCSON, Ariz., July 1— Amid spirited controversy over Francisco (Pancho) Villa's role in history, a statue of the enigmatic Mexican revolutionary was unveiled yesterday in a downtown park here.

The statue, a gift from the Mexican Government and a national journalists' association in Mexico, was accepted by Gov. Bruce E. Babbitt. About 600 persons, mainly Mexican-American, attended the ceremony.

A number of Mexican dignitaries and Mexican reporters were also on hand. Villa's son, Trinidad, and a granddaughter, Guadalupe, were also flown in for the festivities. As the statue was unveiled, cries of ''Viva Villa!'' went up.

The statue, 14 feet tall and weighing five tons, has provoked considerable debate about Villa's exploits in Mexico's revolution of 1910-11. Villa, born into a peasant family in the state of Chihuahua in northern Mexico, rose to become a leader in the campaign against the regime of Porfirio Diaz. An Idol of the Masses

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/02/us/pancho-villa-statue-unveiled-in-arizona.html

[Xolodno]

2. Well, thats one!

But then again, that's not a monument from a ceded territory from war. But I'll take it....

[BigmanPigman]

3. I think the statues are being used as a semi-excuse to somehow validate the racist views

of people who are weak and amoral. If it weren't the statues it would be something else. Yes, there should not be statues to celebrate those who fought against our own country in order to own other people. But these idiots will use any excuse in an attempt to justify their sick, inhumane beliefs or a chance to play soldier and act macho and superior to others.

[Xolodno]

4. Of course they are.

As I pointed out earlier, it was the CSA that attacked the USA... and yet, these assholes will call the "Civil War" the war of Northern Aggression. I mean, c'mon, REALLY?! Han shot first...so did you.

The monuments were nothing more than a continuation of the war. They lost on the battlefront. But then tried to win on ideology. I have no problem with Six Flags showing the Confederate Flag...as it isn't the only one, Civil War re-enactments, monuments in museums, etc. But put a permanent statue up on government owned land, its intent is obvious.

[uponit7771]

5. Treason is one of the main reasons why NONE of those statues of traitors should be up

[Xolodno]

6. Treason, or in my view, enemies of a foreign nation.

Either way, they have no business being monuments. If they play the history card, ok, I can get behind that...then put all the monuments in a Civil War museum or park. But again, it has no business being a monument.