English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

I think Washington's greatness lies with the fact that he could have become king of the new nation, but he didn't. He showed restraint in not trying to take too much power and established invaluable precedents through unchartered territory in terms of building a new nation.

I think Lincoln's greatness lies with the fact that he was willing to learn and to adapt his thinking over time. He was a Henry Clay-Whig who felt that abolition of slavery was not politically feasible and that it should be contained and allowed to die away, but as the Civil War went on he adapted his thinking when he realized that the country could not remain united with the institution of slavery in place. Plus, he really had little or no military training (other than a little militia experience). When the war broke out he went down to the Library of Congress, checked out a bunch of military strategy books, and read up on it...and he managed to lead us through one of the worst events in our country's history.

2006-12-21 23:57:06 · answer #1 · answered by DGS 6 · 0 0

Dismissing Washington because he owned slaves is a pretty scary thought to me. Are we any better? Many social issues facing us today can be looked at in 200 years the way we look at slavery. Washington was amazing in the Revolutionary war. He and the American army lacked everything an army needs to be successful. It was Washington who somehow kept the Army going until the British didn't want to fight anymore. Then when he could have been made a king he helped create the three part government we have today by desiring to be president, not king.

Lincoln was also an incredible person. I've been studying his political life before his becoming president. He was a consistent voice against slavery his whole political life. His opposition to slavery and the Mexican war limited his term to congress to one term. Two ideas I liked from the Lincoln-Douglas debates are 1)If slavery isn't wrong, then nothing is wrong. and 2)It is wrong for a man to not enjoy the fruit of his own labor, (a definition of slavery).

It is hard to calculate what America would look like had the south been successful. After the civil war it was the whole country working as one that made us a world power. Would we have been able to assist the allies in WWI? Would the world have defeated the Axis in WWII without America? Who knows. But pinning the civil war on Lincoln is naive, since the conflict had been bubbling since the middle of the 18th century and had had many factors.

2006-12-22 02:59:48 · answer #2 · answered by rymd80 1 · 1 0

Lincoln was a better President, but Washington was a better soldier.

Even though Washington lost more battles than he won as General of the Continental Army, his overall strategy and determination allowed the Americans to defeat a much better British army. Lincoln, by contrast, had limited military experience.

Although he is popularly credited with being the father of our country, Washington as President really had little do with how the nation was formed. President Washington had no individual agenda, nor did he face any real challenges. His principal contribution as President was to place the right people in the right positions in order to get things started right (Alexander Hamilton in the Treasury, for example).

By contrast, President Lincoln had to steer the nation through the worst crisis it would ever face -- the Civil War. Although he had little actual military experience, he made critical military decisions during the war that made Union victory possible. He also had to make very difficult social decisions during the conflict -- such as whether or not to free to slaves -- any one of which could have turned popular opinion against him and the war effort.

Having said all this, however, I would personally put Washington and Lincoln in a virtual tie as far as overall greatness, since both made very significant contributions to the nation.

2006-12-22 02:36:00 · answer #3 · answered by oldironclub 4 · 0 0

Great question, but hard to decide but I'll try. First Washington's contributions: General of the American army that defeated the strongest country with the most professional army in the world, helped draft the Constitution, and became our first president. His presidency could have resulted in him being King if he wanted, but he set the standard for a democratically elected president.

Lincoln who came from much humbler beginnings than Washington (he had less than a year of schooling), faced political defeat, fought severe depression, and kept a country together when it easily could have been forcibly divided.

In my opinion Washington is an almost mystical figure and difficult to relate to. Lincoln is the Horatio Alger story we love as Americans. He started with nothing and rose to greatness yet he was at heart a common man with incredible insight into humanity and extraordinary common sense.

In my opinion Lincoln was almost divine and we will never see anyone remotely reaching his stature again. My vote is Lincoln is the greater man (although Lincoln himself would certainly disagree).

2006-12-22 02:57:53 · answer #4 · answered by mk_matson 4 · 1 1

Well, let's see, Washington fought to free a nation from a oppressive government and gain independence,,, Lincoln invaded a peace full neighbor nation for the sole purpose of imperial expansionism. (If as Lincoln said the south did not succeed to begin with, then he unleashed a war machine upon his fellow American citizens, Clearly against the constitution,, there for he would be a traitor to our nation, Your choice) Washington's leadership would be responsible for about 2,000 dead soldiers,,, Lincoln responsible for a war that killed 500,000 American soldiers.
Washington, tried to set up a system to feed the hungry, show some sort of respect for a American citizen and have the national treasury take care of some of the people who could not take care of themselves. Lincoln, Ordered a burnt earth policy against people who he said was still Americans. Knew and condoned the mass rape of the female population, The killing of children and old people. And even went so far as to reward some of his officers for such acts of cruelty directed at the general population.
Like someone said above you be the judge.... Lincoln is no hero....... Washington was.

2006-12-22 03:48:43 · answer #5 · answered by Cleve T 3 · 0 1

Washington owned slaves and Lincoln freed them...you be the judge...

2006-12-22 02:21:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers