US Military Bases named after Confederate Generals

[Archivist]

Trump vetoed the defense policy bill, something that rarely happens. One reason given for the veto was that it would have changed the names of bases named after Confederate military leaders. There are ten major bases named after Confederate generals: Camp Beauregard, Fort Benning, Fort Bragg, Fort Gordon, Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Hood, Fort Lee, Fort Pickett, Fort Polk and Fort Rucker.

Ironically several of these bases are named after men who were incompetent commanders.

The Army has not been the only service that has done this; several US Navy warships were also named after Confederate leaders. All of them have been decommissioned and are now out of service.

So, should US military bases be named after men who fought against the United States? Is Trump wrong to oppose renaming them?

BTW, the House has voted to override Trump's veto. The bill is now before the Senate.

Trump Lashes Out at GOP as Defense Bill Sets Up Rebuke in Senate

Why are Army bases named after Confederates? - The Washington Post

 

[Strathos]

He really seems to have a soft spot for sedition and those who attempt it...

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Well, you can see his viewpoint.

How could the US navy ever name some garbage barge after Trump if seditious and/or incompetent leaders weren’t a consideration ?

 

[sparow]

Trump vetoed the defense policy bill, something that rarely happens. One reason given for the veto was that it would have changed the names of bases named after Confederate military leaders. There are ten major bases named after Confederate generals: Camp Beauregard, Fort Benning, Fort Bragg, Fort Gordon, Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Hood, Fort Lee, Fort Pickett, Fort Polk and Fort Rucker.

Ironically several of these bases are named after men who were incompetent commanders.

The Army has not been the only service that has done this; several US Navy warships were also named after Confederate leaders. All of them have been decommissioned and are now out of service.

So, should US military bases be named after men who fought against the United States? Is Trump wrong to oppose renaming them?

BTW, the House has voted to override Trump's veto. The bill is now before the Senate.

Trump Lashes Out at GOP as Defense Bill Sets Up Rebuke in Senate

Why are Army bases named after Confederates? - The Washington Post

Is this an anti-trump thread; if so it intrigues why the ooze of emotive hatred and lack of reasoning.

Other wise a rose by any other name is still a rose. I would imagine those confederate names were used in reconciliation and to change them would offend half of America and the only motivation for doing so is social engineering or Marxism.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Is this an anti-trump thread; if so it intrigues why the ooze of emotive hatred and lack of reasoning.

What lack of reasoning?

Other wise a rose by any other name is still a rose. I would imagine those confederate names were used in reconciliation and to change them would offend half of America and the only motivation for doing so is social engineering or Marxism.

Yes, afaik, these bases were named after confederate generals as a gesture of reconciliation. That's fine. The civil war ended 155 years ago - any possible reconciliation has already been achieved. If changing those names now, a century-and-a-half later still offends half the population, then that half of the population has some pretty lousy ideals that ought not be coddled.

Re: social engineering. What do you think a federalized attempt at reconciliation was if not social engineering. What do you think a federalized coddling of nostalgia for racism and sedition is if not a form of social engineering? Your position is self-servingly hypocritical.

Re: marxism. What the heck are you talking about? What does this have to do with marxism?

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

marxism. What the heck are you talking about? What does this have to do with marxism?

When you run out of ideas time to draw out the commies, globalists and marxists even if you only have some vague idea what the terms even mean.

Then top it off with something about birds and thx Obama and the argument is set.

 

[Archivist]

Is this an anti-trump thread

No, it is a thread about the naming of military bases.

if so it intrigues why the ooze of emotive hatred and lack of reasoning.

Hatred? Hardly. Lack of reasoning? Only in your response.

Other wise a rose by any other name is still a rose. I would imagine those confederate names were used in reconciliation and to change them would offend half of America and the only motivation for doing so is social engineering or Marxism.

We were allies with the UK in two world wars. What US bases are named after Howe or Clinton? Wouldn’t that have been good reconciliation to name bases after them?

Marxism? That’s what people raise when they have nothing to say. At least explain why several of these bases are named after men who were incompetent on the field of battle. It’s bad enough to name bases after the leaders of those who fought against the US, even worse to name them for men who didn’t know how to lead troops. Maybe we were thanking them for being losers.

 

[sparow]

What lack of reasoning?



Yes, afaik, these bases were named after confederate generals as a gesture of reconciliation. That's fine. The civil war ended 155 years ago - any possible reconciliation has already been achieved. If changing those names now, a century-and-a-half later still offends half the population, then that half of the population has some pretty lousy ideals that ought not be coddled.

Re: social engineering. What do you think a federalized attempt at reconciliation was if not social engineering. What do you think a federalized coddling of nostalgia for racism and sedition is if not a form of social engineering? Your position is self-servingly hypocritical.

Re: marxism. What the heck are you talking about? What does this have to do with marxism?

Hatred is evil, it has harmed Trump, it has harmed America more than it has harmed Trump, it is self destructive for those who engage in it; in short the US is under attack; Marxism is not the enemy, it is the weapon used and most of the people who carry this weapon are called useful idiots (by Marx) because they do not know what they are doing. Trump did seem to fail politically regarding the pandemic, but up until then he made America great again. I am sure the could be useful criticism of any politician but hatred is not the way to go.

The American Civil War is buried and at rest. what could possibly be gained from disturbing it's grave, except harm.

Social engineering is natural, governments use it, religions use it, but the social engineering proposed by Marx and exercised by Lenin, and Mao tse tong, is diabolical and not natural.

""What do you think a federalized coddling of nostalgia for racism and sedition is if not a form of social engineering? Your position is self-servingly hypocritical."" This is amazing rhetoric; do you posses a buzz sentence generator?

By sedition, are are you referring to the Civil War or the names of forts? The US constitution does not say a State may secede, but then it does not say a State may not secede either and when one looks at the Supreme Court's consideration makes it look iffy.

Racism, racist is usually a slur that is usually used to attack an innocent person.

I believe Marx was commissioned to write the "Communist Manifesto", and his book is a foundation for more modern books

 

[Archivist]

Hatred is evil, it has harmed Trump, it has harmed America more than it has harmed Trump, it is self destructive for those who engage in it; in short the US is under attack; Marxism is not the enemy, it is the weapon used and most of the people who carry this weapon are called useful idiots (by Marx) because they do not know what they are doing. Trump did seem to fail politically regarding the pandemic, but up until then he made America great again. I am sure the could be useful criticism of any politician but hatred is not the way to go.

The American Civil War is buried and at rest. what could possibly be gained from disturbing it's grave, except harm.

Social engineering is natural, governments use it, religions use it, but the social engineering proposed by Marx and exercised by Lenin, and Mao tse tong, is diabolical and not natural.

""What do you think a federalized coddling of nostalgia for racism and sedition is if not a form of social engineering? Your position is self-servingly hypocritical."" This is amazing rhetoric; do you posses a buzz sentence generator?

By sedition, are are you referring to the Civil War or the names of forts? The US constitution does not say a State may secede, but then it does not say a State may not secede either and when one looks at the Supreme Court's consideration makes it look iffy.

Racism, racist is usually a slur that is usually used to attack an innocent person.

I believe Marx was commissioned to write the "Communist Manifesto", and his book is a foundation for more modern books

How is renaming bases hatred?

 

[grasping the after wind]

How is renaming bases hatred?

How could it be otherwise. What other reason would one have for renaming anything if it was not motivated by some form of hatred of the name?

 

[iluvatar5150]

Hatred is evil, it has harmed Trump, it has harmed America more than it has harmed Trump, it is self destructive for those who engage in it; in short the US is under attack; Marxism is not the enemy, it is the weapon used and most of the people who carry this weapon are called useful idiots (by Marx) because they do not know what they are doing. Trump did seem to fail politically regarding the pandemic, but up until then he made America great again. I am sure the could be useful criticism of any politician but hatred is not the way to go.

mmm k

The American Civil War is buried and at rest. what could possibly be gained from disturbing it's grave, except harm.

I don't know, maybe you should ask some of the black people who see those names as a continual, federally-backed stick in the eye, reminding them that they're still not quite as equal as the rest of us.

You seem more concerned with coddling the racist, seditionist sentiment that lies not-quite-so-dormant among the population than you do with respecting and assuaging some of the pain wrought by that racist, seditionist sentiment.

Social engineering is natural, governments use it, religions use it, but the social engineering proposed by Marx and exercised by Lenin, and Mao tse tong, is diabolical and not natural.

k. And that has what to do with anything?

""What do you think a federalized coddling of nostalgia for racism and sedition is if not a form of social engineering? Your position is self-servingly hypocritical."" This is amazing rhetoric; do you posses a buzz sentence generator?

No, I'm just that good.

By sedition, are are you referring to the Civil War or the names of forts?

By sedition, I'm referring to the rebellion against the federal government by the southern slave states.

The US constitution does not say a State may secede, but then it does not say a State may not secede either and when one looks at the Supreme Court's consideration makes it look iffy.

That's nice. The south took up arms against the federal government. That's sedition.

Racism, racist is usually a slur that is usually used to attack an innocent person.

No, it isn't. But either way, we're talking about the civil war, which was quite clearly racist in its motivations. So unless you want to argue that the confederacy wasn't built on racism, you probably want to leave that argument behind.

I believe Marx was commissioned to write the "Communist Manifesto", and his book is a foundation for more modern books

Again, so what?

How could it be otherwise. What other reason would one have for renaming anything if it was not motivated by some form of hatred of the name?

I'll pose the same question to you: why don't you go ask a black person who sees those names as a continual reminder that they don't matter?

 

[grasping the after wind]

mmm k



I don't know, maybe you should ask some of the black people who see those names as a continual, federally-backed stick in the eye, reminding them that they're still not quite as equal as the rest of us.

You seem more concerned with coddling the racist, seditionist sentiment that lies not-quite-so-dormant among the population than you do with respecting and assuaging some of the pain wrought by that racist, seditionist sentiment.



k. And that has what to do with anything?


No, I'm just that good.



By sedition, I'm referring to the rebellion against the federal government by the southern slave states.



That's nice. The south took up arms against the federal government. That's sedition.



No, it isn't. But either way, we're talking about the civil war, which was quite clearly racist in its motivations. So unless you want to argue that the confederacy wasn't built on racism, you probably want to leave that argument behind.



Again, so what?

I'll pose the same question to you: why don't you go ask a black person who sees those names as a continual reminder that they don't matter?

Don't you understand what it means to pose the same question?

Here is how it works

"What are you going to do?'

Let me pose the same question to you

"What are you going to do? "

That would be using the phrase 'let me pose the same question to you" in a reasonable and logical manner

Unlike the opposite way that is is used in the following example

"How could it be otherwise. What other reason would one have for renaming anything if it was not motivated by some form of hatred of the name?"



Let me pose the same question to you?

"why don't you go ask a black person who sees those names as a continual reminder that they don't matter?"

It seems a simple enough concept I don't know why I has to explain it.

As for asking a "black person who sees those names as a continual reminder that they( I suppose this particular black person i am to ask must identify as they ) don't matter" . I haven't ever known a black person that believes he/she doesn't matter. My guess is that any black person, feeling the way you seem to assume a black person ought to feel about names on an army base, would want the names changed because that feeling would make the person hate the name. Which is exactly what I was pointing out . Some people seem incapable of connecting the dots.

 

[sparow]

No, it is a thread about the naming of military bases.



Hatred? Hardly. Lack of reasoning? Only in your response.



We were allies with the UK in two world wars. What US bases are named after Howe or Clinton? Wouldn’t that have been good reconciliation to name bases after them?

Marxism? That’s what people raise when they have nothing to say. At least explain why several of these bases are named after men who were incompetent on the field of battle. It’s bad enough to name bases after the leaders of those who fought against the US, even worse to name them for men who didn’t know how to lead troops. Maybe we were thanking them for being losers.

I thought Trump was the Christian's man, what did Trump do (reasons, Lutheran specific) to upset a Lutheran?

Can you tell me when were these confederate named forts named, were they named by confederates and are they in confederate states?

""We were allies with the UK in two world wars. What US bases are named after Howe or Clinton? Wouldn’t that have been good reconciliation to name bases after them?"" This is called "Denying the Antecedent", implying that because one thing is right, something else totally unrelated is also right.

 

[Lg2000]

Change all the names. No need to honor traders and people who fought for slavery to still be a thing/ treated minorities as less than human. Should of never been named after those people to begin with

 

[Redwingfan9]

Trump vetoed the defense policy bill, something that rarely happens. One reason given for the veto was that it would have changed the names of bases named after Confederate military leaders. There are ten major bases named after Confederate generals: Camp Beauregard, Fort Benning, Fort Bragg, Fort Gordon, Fort A.P. Hill, Fort Hood, Fort Lee, Fort Pickett, Fort Polk and Fort Rucker.

Ironically several of these bases are named after men who were incompetent commanders.

The Army has not been the only service that has done this; several US Navy warships were also named after Confederate leaders. All of them have been decommissioned and are now out of service.

So, should US military bases be named after men who fought against the United States? Is Trump wrong to oppose renaming them?

BTW, the House has voted to override Trump's veto. The bill is now before the Senate.

Trump Lashes Out at GOP as Defense Bill Sets Up Rebuke in Senate

Why are Army bases named after Confederates? - The Washington Post

I'm so glad that there aren't important issues facing this country so we can debate whether people dead over a century should have their names removed from history.

 

[Archivist]

How could it be otherwise. What other reason would one have for renaming anything if it was not motivated by some form of hatred of the name?

What is now USS Yorktown, CV 10, was supposed to have been named USS Bonhomme Richard. She was renamed USS Yorktown while she was building. Nobody hated the original name, they later gave that name to another carrier.

West Point was originally Fort Clinton. Using your reasoning we should go back to that.

Please explain why the US should have forts named after men who fought against the US?

 

[Archivist]

I'm so glad that there aren't important issues facing this country so we can debate whether people dead over a century should have their names removed from history.

These names will still be very much a part of history. No one is suggesting that we edit them out of history books. But explain to me why their names should be on US forts when they were traitors.

 

[Redwingfan9]

These names will still be very much a part of history. No one is suggesting that we edit them out of history books. But explain to me why their names should be on US forts when they were traitors.

When more important matters have been figured out, then we should focus on changing names if we must. Until then this is a matter so trivial it is utterly ridiculous that it was even in this bill.

 

[Archivist]

When more important matters have been figured out, then we should focus on changing names if we must. Until then this is a matter so trivial it is utterly ridiculous that it was even in this bill.

That may be the case, but we aren't discussing whether changing the names is or is not important here. We are discussing whether they should be changed. If this is "utterly ridiculous" why are you participating in the conversation?

 

[Redwingfan9]

That may be the case, but we aren't discussing whether changing the names is or is not important here. We are discussing whether they should be changed. If this is "utterly ridiculous" why are you participating in the conversation?

Because we're too the point where apparently the House believes all other problems are fixed and the President disagrees. This is an unnecessary and trivial issue. The cost of renaming these places alone is enough to oppose these efforts.