Distortion and emotion run rampant here. First, the plan is NOT to build on the battlefield, it is to build on commercially zoned land. It could have been built 'by right' had Orange not joined the 'all big boxes need to be controlled' bandwagon.

There is a contention that this 'threatens the integrity of of nearby Civil War battlefields and historic sites.' Not that the plan for the construction is ON the battlefield.

While there may be valid historic preservation arguments to be made, starting with distortion of the facts is no way to have a reasoned discussion of the issue.

If your description of what the PEC is is saying is totally accurate, they are misstating the facts, and they've lost my respect as legitimate participants in the discussion.

Worry about the green space issue, be sure appropriate environment remediation is in place. I'd also see it reasonable to mandate an archeological study to be sure the boundaries of the battlefield aren't intruded upon. But let's argue from truth not distortion.

Why in Gods name wasn't this land claimed as a national monument? People of Orange should raise up and reclaim their history!!

The retail sprawl in the general vicinity of this proposed Wal-Mart is already shockingly ugly, dysfunctional to any kind of community life and an embarrassment to Virginia. Witness Route 3 west for several miles from the I-95 interchange, and the Route 1 and I-95 interchange a couple miles further south. Even apart from the destruction of the context of the Wilderness and nearby Chancellorsville Battlefields by this Wal-Mart proposal, this proposal is objectionable and should be rejected simply because we need to stop this pattern of sprawl in Virginia. Retail needs to go in towns, like it used to and, increasingly in more enlightened places, is starting to be located again.

It is simply beyond the pall that any responsible community or business would locate a Wal-Mart at the gateway to these national treasures, which the inspiration for The Red Badge Of Courage, the site of Jackson's and Longstreet's unbelievable attack,

Sorry, hoome, the issues are the immediate context of the Wilderness Battlefield (and nearby Chancellorsville Battlefield too) -- that is almost as important as the battlegrounds themselves. And secondly, the issue of ugly, dysfunctional auto retail sprawl in rural Virginia.

On the first, these battlefields are among the most important of the Civil War and are both national treasures. Wilderness was the inspiration for Stephen Crane's The Red Badge of Courage, the scene of Grant's first battle as commander of the Army of the Potomac, the location of Longstreet's stunning attack on vastly superior Union forces (momentarily threatening the destruction of the Union Army), and the site of the touching call of Southern troops for their commander to return to safety ("Lee to the Rear"). To reduce the immediate area and the nearest major road intersection to just another auto strip of parking lots and big box stores is entirely inappropriate and indicates a lack of understanding of the significance of what happened here.

The broader vicinity of the Route 20, Route 3 intersection at issue is unfortunately already graced with some of the most ugly, dysfunctional and overbuilt retail sprawl in the nation. Route 3 extending west for several miles from the I-95 interchange, and the Route 1 and I-95 interchange a few miles to the south, are an embarrassment to Virginia in their shocking ugliness and banality. To even consider adding more of this visual mess near upon the battlefields is so over the top that it should not even be seriously considered by Orange County.

walmart and other “multi-national” corporations exploit the common perception that there is no higher good than cheap prices. If we insisted that civil rights be considered the highest good, and that prices may be as low as they can be without sacrificing social rights, then wal mart would not exist in the form it does today. currently we american shoppers accept the faustian bargain that the price of our cheap shirts must also include worker exploitation (both here and abroad in manufacturing operations) and environmental exploitation (dirty air because it “to expensive” to have clean transportation fleets, polluted water because its “too expensive” to manufacture in a way that does not pollute the water, etc) and resource wastefulness (packaging to support branding and merchandising, etc). if this sort of human rights abuse were not permitted, then our gear would cost more, but we would not be kicking the can down the road for future generations to deal with/suffer through. we would each have 4 or 5 shirts, instead of 20. we would not shop at walmart because the so called economies of scale would not exist, based as they are on the fallacy that the exploitation of the earth and its people does not “cost” anything and makes things “cheaper.” this economic collapse will only strengthen walmarts position. notice that congress was so eager to give the white collar crooks their 700 billion, but would barely give 15 billion to actually help blue collar auto workers because they are union, and therefor greedy. after all, what business do blue collar workers have to aspire to make 6 figures and have a decent quality of life? thats offensive because it makes cars cost more. ditto making cars non-polluting. However, making millions while destroying the whole economy is not offensive, because it was done in order to give us cheap credit to buy more cheap crap. thanks to TV and the modern marketing industry, we value cheap crap and access to cheap crap more than human life (or any life). our culture reflects that. (copied from cripsy's blog.)

Hoome: I took my info about the proposed Wal-Mart falling on the actual battlefield from this story, which I also link to above:

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Wal-Mart-Battlefield-Oposition-Grows-Stronger.html

The paragraph in question is this:

"The proposed site falls on a portion of the Wilderness battlefield. More than 2,773 acres make up the battlefield, which is part of Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania National Military Park, according to the paper. Although the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter is outside the congressionally authorized boundary of the park, it's still within the historical battle area."

More importantly, I think the spirit of the thing is what matters, and other commenters have noted as much: The context of a historic site is important, just as the site's heart or center.

Thanks to all for your comments.

If this spot is such an important battlefield, why isn't it in a federal park?