"The Alamo Should Never Have Happened" Topic

"On the march of human folly, soldiers haven't exactly owned the road, but they've often commanded the right of way. No soldier dies in vain, if only because when soldiers fall, their surviving superiors, kin, and compatriots proclaim them heroes and celebrate their sacrifice, regardless of whether the sacrifice accomplished anything more positive than providing an occasion for the patriotic postmortems. Patriotic sentiment is not to be dismissed. It warms the collective heart and often converts into the colder currency of resolve: The charge of the Light Brigade did nothing for Britain in the Crimean War but, as remembered and retold, added years to the life of the British Empire.

What Tennyson was to Lord Raglan's lancers, William Barret Travis was to the defenders of the Alamo, besides being their leader and the hero of their tale. The South Carolina native and Alabama émigré earned the rare distinction of memorializing in words the role he then immortalized in the flesh. Travis' letters from the Alamo must stir the soul of the most jaded cynic.

To the People of Texas and all Americans in the world . . . I am besieged by a thousand or more of the Mexicans under Santa Anna. I have sustained a continual bombardment and cannonade for 24 hours and have not lost a man. The enemy has demanded surrender at discretion; otherwise, the garrison are to be put to the sword, if the fort is taken. I have answered the demand with a cannon shot, and our flag still waves proudly from the walls. I shall never surrender or retreat…"
Main page
link

Armand

Defending their right not to be governed by a ruthless dictator.

+1 for doc mcb!

Hear ! Hear!

Jim (a descendant in the Campbell line from three soldiers in Sam Houston's army)

Slavery was common almost everywhere in the world at one time or another. It is not right, but it was a fact.

Just because the Texicans did not choose to free everyone does not mean we can't celebrate their sacrifice to liberate some. They did not stand for women's rights or reducing their carbon footprint either, but that does not make them any less heroes.

The Americans and British liberated Western Europe from fascism but did not liberate Eastern Europe from communism. Looks like we need to stop celebrating VE Day too.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

Actions of the past must be judged by the common moral standards of their own time.

Read 'Forget The Alamo' by Burrough, Tomlinson & Stanford.

A well researched appraisal of the situation and its effect to the present.

Juan Seguin and Lorenzo de Zavala were not fighting for slavery, period. The Alabama Red Rovers and the New Orleans Grey came to Texas from slave states, so they were scarcely fighting FOR any right to own slaves -- which they had back home. They were fighting, maybe, for land, or a fresh start.

I was able to visit the Alamo, just for an hour, last week. There is now an excellent reconstruction of the sw artillery position, the 18 pounder. It was the rubble-filled house of José Toribio Losoya, who was born at the Alamo in 1808 and died defending it in 1836. There is a larger-than-life and excellent sculpture of Losoya. HE was not defending slavery.
link

There are far better books on the Alamo than 'FORGET . . ."

Get BLOOD OF NOBLE MEN on Kindle for $10. USD Amazon

Why is that, when slavery is mentioned -- it is as if the United States--- and its people are the only ones who ever engaged in the horrible practice-- when it was practiced by virtually every culture in history -- and still being done in places around the world?

As far as the defense of the Alamo, this is all material I learned in elementary school in the early 50s in rural Iowa.

Russ Dunaway

I read the whole article; I wonder if some who have commented adversely upon it have.

It seems to me to be a reasoned argument that defending the Alamo was not militarily necessary, whilst admitting its subsequent significance in the popular imagination.

Once again, all pretty much common knowledge.
They were told to destroy it and move East.

Russ Dunaway

First, remember that SA was not expected until the grass grew; his arrival in February was a shock. Bexar was a pretty critical point, the only city plus the political and economic center, plus the tons of gunpowder and the artillery in the Alamo. IF, IF, IF the Texans had concentrated there, with Fannin's command, then MAYBE it was defensible. As opposed to letting SA do an ethnic cleansing across Texas and retreating all the way to the border before fighting. Which turned out well, but Houston could have easily lost at San Jacinto.

Those of us so inclined can see the hand of God in events.

arthur1815 + 1

Armand

Once again, I believe most did read and just saw the concept of the battle being a folly or not as old news.
Same with Crockett fighting to the very end or surrendering = old news.
Different opinions (is that still allowed?) but still old news that has floated around for decades.

Russ Dunaway

I agree with Russ. Also, if the Texans had abandoned San Antonio, and Santa Anna had chased all the Anglos out, what if he had stopped short of the east Texas piney woods? He was certainly a sufficiently able commander to have realized that he was getting further and further from his base while Houston was closer and closer to his sources of support and re-enforcements from the US. His cavalry was much less effective in the woods, and he had fulfilled most of his goals. Had he stopped, Houston would have been in control only of a rump of Texas. Unless Houston boldly advanced out to fight Santa Anna on his own ground.

Lots of might-have-beens.

Lots of Monday morning quarterbacking in the article, too. Santa Ana was the Hitler of his time, in the eyes of many Texcians, so resisting him was right and moral. And Travis was pulling at those strings. Hard to deny the power of his words. But then, I'm an expatriate Texan.

The U.S. version of what happened in the Alamo is a fairy tale worthy of Disney's imagination.

Ha!….

Armand