US Military Bases named after Confederate Generals

[RDKirk]

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?

Lots of bases have been renamed over the years. Old Ft Crook near Omaha, NE, was originally named for a US Army general, then renamed Offutt Field for a WWI Army Air Corps lieutenant. No hatred involved. Military bases in the past have been named by some quite arbitrary and arcane rules in the past, and often merely by the whims of a single individual.

With regard to Ft Hood:

Camp Hood: Although a native of Kentucky, Confederate General John Bell Hood considered Texas his adopted home after lengthy service there as a U.S. Army officer. In 1861, Hood resigned his U.S. Army commission and joined the Confederate army, where he became famous for commanding the Texas Brigade. Hood’s name appeared in January 1942 for a post being acquired in Texas for the new tank destroyer command. The Historical Section also provided G–3 three other names for consideration: (1) Maj. Gen. Robert L. Howze, a native Texan who had been awarded the Medal of Honor and commanded a division during World War I; (2) Capt. James W. Fannin, an officer in the Texas Army killed in action during the Texas Revolution; and (3) Maj. Gen. William S. Graves, a native Texan who commanded the American Expeditionary Forces in Siberia during World War I. There is no record of the decision process, but War Department General Order 12, dated 6 March 1942, formalized Hood as the selection. In August 1944, Army Ground Forces attempted to get the name of Camp Hood changed to honor Lt. Gen. Lesley J. McNair, its former commander, who had been killed by friendly fire in France in July. The effort continued into 1945, with Gen. Joseph W. Stilwell, who now led Army Ground Forces, adding his voice to the campaign. The Adjutant General opposed it, citing among other reasons “undesirable popular and political repercussions in the State of Texas.”

Naming of U.S. Army Posts | U.S. Army Center of Military History

Note that there was opposition to the naming of Ft Hood after John Hood even at the time, and Hood had been the only Confederate officer under consideration.

 

[RDKirk]

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.

That was a lengthy non-answer.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I don't think the south was wrong in trying to separate from the north. I think they had the right to do so but were forced to return because they lost. Winning a war always makes the winner automatically right. Winners always write history books and text books. It's their reward. If the south had won, rightness would have looked very different.

So to be clear... You don’t think the south was wrong to try and form their own country in order to preserve an economy that relied on slave and child labor, representation without taxation while also taking a disproportionate amount of federal funds, and preservation of class-based society that eliminated the middle class and allowed the top 1% to completely and unilaterally make all rules, laws, and regulations which only saw to their interests?

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Fort King George rolls off the tongue quite nicely.

 

[section9+1]

So to be clear... You don’t think the south was wrong to try and form their own country in order to preserve an economy that relied on slave and child labor, representation without taxation while also taking a disproportionate amount of federal funds, and preservation of class-based society that eliminated the middle class and allowed the top 1% to completely and unilaterally make all rules, laws, and regulations which only saw to their interests?

So to be clear, I am not supporting the south's internal affairs, but I see no wrong in their trying to secede. And I've seen nothing here to change that. And I see nothing wrong with keeping the names these places have.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

So to be clear, I am not supporting the south's internal affairs, but I see no wrong in their trying to secede. And I've seen nothing here to change that. And I see nothing wrong with keeping the names these places have.

If you support them trying to and see nothing wrong with them trying to secede, you also support their reasons for doing so. Ignoring that you’re saying you don’t see what the problem is in fracturing the country via war, you’re saying you’re ok with facilitating appalling and shameful practices that are against the core morality of both objective and religious persons.

If you see nothing wrong with the names, you wouldn’t object to our next US base or ship or military interest being named Fort Hitler? Or the USS Sadam? Or Fort McVey? Maybe you’d me totally ok with joining our military and representing USS Mohamed Atta?

 

[section9+1]

Your problem is someone thinks differently than you do. Don't you celebrate diversity?

 

[Archivist]

Your problem is someone thinks differently than you do. Don't you celebrate diversity?

Celebrating diversity and naming US forts after men who were traitors, who led troops against the US military and who supported slavery are two different things.

 

[section9+1]

Celebrating diversity and naming US forts after men who were traitors, who led troops against the US military and who supported slavery are two different things.

A question was asked in the OP. I volunteered my answer. That's all I did. If it makes your butt hurt that's your problem. I am not here to make you happy.

 

[Archivist]

A question was asked in the OP. I volunteered my answer. That's all I did. If it makes your butt hurt that's your problem. I am not here to make you happy.

This is a discussion and debate forum. If you say something that I disagree with I will say that. If you don’t want people challenging what you say, don’t participate in a debate forum.

 

[section9+1]

Having different views is fine. But don't make people out to be evil or ignorant because they don't see things the way you see them. I fully don't require people to agree with me on religion or politics. I don't expect them to. I'm not saying agree with me. I'm saying I will not be made into something I am not because I see this differently.

 

[Archivist]

Having different views is fine. But don't make people out to be evil or ignorant because they don't see things the way you see them. I fully don't require people to agree with me on religion or politics. I don't expect them to. I'm not saying agree with me. I'm saying I will not be made into something I am not because I see this differently.

My exact words were "Celebrating diversity and naming US forts after men who were traitors, who led troops against the US military and who supported slavery are two different things." Exactly where did I say you were evil or ignorant? Those words are not in there, nor did I imply any such thing.

 

[section9+1]

I don't agree with you and I feel no reason to do so. That's how it is.

 

[Archivist]

I don't agree with you and I feel no reason to do so. That's how it is.

Not sure what your point is. I don't expect you to agree with me. A discussion and debate forum is for people to discuss different ideas. But don't say that I said or implied that you are evil or ignorant because I never did that.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

So to be clear, I am not supporting the south's internal affairs, but I see no wrong in their trying to secede. And I've seen nothing here to change that. And I see nothing wrong with keeping the names these places have.

Well then. Not sure I’d brag about any of that publicly...

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Your problem is someone thinks differently than you do. Don't you celebrate diversity?

When it comes to naming military installations after terrorists, enemies of our country, or supporting racism... No, I can’t say that I do.

 

[Archivist]

The Senate voted today to override Trump's veto of the Defense Bill. The legislation establishes a commission to study and provide recommendations, within three years, on the removal of names, symbols, displays and monuments that honor or commemorate the Confederacy.

If I were betting, I would bet against these bases retaining their existing names. Perhaps instead of arguing that the names should be retained, it would be better to identify heroes from wars and put together a list of possible new names for these bases. There are many heroes who have never had anything named after them and who, unlike some of these Confederates, were competent. After all, the Navy recently picked USS Doris Miller as the name for an upcoming aircraft carrier (although there was previously a destroyer named after him).

 

[section9+1]

When it comes to naming military installations after terrorists, enemies of our country, or supporting racism... No, I can’t say that I do.

Since we are virtually nothing to each other, it's not important if we don't agree. I'm good with disagreement.