Was Robert E Lee fighting to defend slavery? He led the Confederate army, so that logic would dictate a resounding "yes". There is no denial of how slavery was viewed as an institution in the southern states. However, it was nested in a broader view of other states imposing their will through nefarious channels. Hence, the animus that gained root until it was enough to cause the split.
I answered the way I did to explain why I didn't regard being a Confederate soldier as "treason" as the war was not originally fought to "end slavery" but to "preserve the Union". When taken in context of how our Constitution was set up, the Union did not hold the right to deny sovereign states to secede. If Lincoln had begun the war from its inception on the basis that slaves were being denied rights as citizens, then there would have been Constitutional standing. As it was, the grand notion that slavery was the driving force for the Union's involvement is intellectual hilarity. The union needed the raw materials provided in the southern states to feed their industrial machine at a cheap price. If a tariff was tacked on all of a sudden, then their base prices skyrocket. I am not stating this as support for slavery as a moral institution. I don't know anyone on this board that would. What I am pointing out is that this re-writing of history to paint this virtuous and glorious banner is fine if you like living in a fantasy world. It doesn't exactly cut to an honest representation of history as many on this board would have anyone believe. I wanted to see how critically you had absorbed this information, and I now have my answer.
I am certainly not the biggest Shula fan. Lord knows I have not been kind over the past couple of years. However, the last couple of games has given me hope for him as an OC in spite of the rage on this board. Two things stand out to me:
1) When Anderson steps into the game, the offense moves the ball more effectively immediately. He gets the ball out much quicker to the WRs for them to make the plays. This has been the source of my concern for Cam's maturation as this is the closest comparison of apples-to-apples that we can get. 2) Cam's passes were much improved this past game against NE. Both Olsen and Brown had outright bad drops that would have had kept drives alive (or even put points on the board) rather than stalling out. I don't see that pattern continuing with Olsen, and I am hopeful that Brown can return to a more sure-handed version of himself from last year. We don't have a dominant O-line, but I think we finally have enough to make a difference. If Shula can continue to do what he did the past couple of weeks where the players execute, I think the offense can be a pleasant surprise to many on this board.
Time and again this argument plays out in this forum and elsewhere Those typically aligning on the left open with this:
And those typically aligning on the right respond with this:
Which is correct? I would suggest looking over the economic landscape for the past century to see how things have played out. I get flack from purported intellectual giants on this board for "not understanding what you're talking about". I endorse the scientific method to the nth degree when it comes to truth. There's tons of theories for how reality"should be" in spite of reality is. Look in the horse's mouth if you wan't to know the truth and stop speculating/arguing about why it isn't turning out the way it "should".