Time to rename our Confederate Forts

[Meathead]

We need to ask......What have these men done to deserve such an honor?

AP HIll, Braxton Bragg, George Pickett, John Bell Hood......why should they be honored?

Trump opposes efforts to remove Confederate commanders' names from military bases

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he opposes any effort by the US military to rename the nearly one dozen major bases and installations that bear the names of Confederate military commanders.

www.cnn.com

We have Confederate forts?! I thought that war was over 150 years ago.

 

[Correll]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

No, it is not. But thank you for not denying that this is about shaming them.


My point stands. This is an insult to Southern Americans.


THis is about marginalizing them as a group, so that their voice and interests can be ignored.


rightwinger has admitted that he sees this as the future for all white people in America, a permanent reduction to Second Class status, where we will be oppressed, and discriminated against, for all time, with no legal or political recourse.


He considers that an Utopia, that he, in his own little way, is actively working towards.

The legacy of the Confederacy is that it was a nation that was formed to ensure slavery forever

Nothing to celebrate

Generations of Americans have disagreed. As you well know.


THe point remains. This is about you attacking Southern Whites.

 

[Silver Cat]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

 

[rightwinger]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

 

[Meathead]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

bullshit!

 

[rightwinger]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

bullshit!

Show me any other nation in the History of Mankind where 40 percent of the population was in slavery.

 

[Desperado]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

Camp Mengele?

Come on Ass wipe what would you rename the 10 bases too?

 

[Silver Cat]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

 

[Meathead]

Show me any other nation in the History of Mankind where 40 percent of the population was in slavery.

First, prove your premise. You're full of shit!

 

[Polishprince]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

Auschwitz is in Poland you thick ******.

That's only partially true. The Auschwitz site is indeed in the greater Krakow Metropolitan area.

But the camp was strictly a German government installation, and had no Polish Administration.

 

[Marion Morrison]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

No, it is not. But thank you for not denying that this is about shaming them.


My point stands. This is an insult to Southern Americans.side


THis is about marginalizing them as a group, so that their voice and interests can be ignored.


rightwinger has admitted that he sees this as the future for all white people in America, a permanent reduction to Second Class status, where we will be oppressed, and discriminated against, for all time, with no legal or political recourse.


He considers that an Utopia, that he, in his own little way, is actively working towards.

Yeah, uhh..that wasn't done immediately following the Civil War for a reason.
A) The yankee North needs Southern Agriculture.

B) In the the interest of there even being a "United" States.

rightwinger: If you're trying to divide the United States, that makes you a traitor, boy.

Boycott everything produced in the South then, boy! Put your balls where your mouth is, *****!
Hope you don't like sugar, tobacco, fruit, or beef or chicken or seafood!

 

[Correll]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

But white people need to be judged by different standards based on race.


And no, you can't make them see the irony in that. They are too stupid.

 

[Correll]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

YOu don't care about that. This is about you wanting to discriminate against White Southerns NOW and in the future.

 

[Correll]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

That's different. Cause reasons. And because Rightwinger isn't driven to smear and shame the Baltics the way he hates southern whites.

 

[rightwinger]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

Camp Mengele?

Come on Ass wipe what would you rename the 10 bases too?

Fort Grant
Fort Sherman
Fort Pershing
Fort Eisenhower
Fort MacArthur
Fort Marshall
Fort Patton
Fort Bradley
Fort Ridgeway

 

[Meathead]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

Auschwitz is in Poland you thick ******.

That's only partially true. The Auschwitz site is indeed in the greater Krakow Metropolitan area.

But the camp was strictly a German government installation, and had no Polish Administration.

Auschwitz was a Polish military barracks and the preferred site for both Germans, Poles and Jews. Birkenau, a kilometre or so down the road was the killing grounds. I've been there.

 

[rightwinger]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

 

[Meathead]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

Camp Mengele?

Come on Ass wipe what would you rename the 10 bases too?

Fort Grant
Fort Sherman
Fort Pershing
Fort Eisenhower
Fort MacArthur
Fort Marshall
Fort Patton
Fort Bradley
Fort Ridgeway

Stop being so sleazy

 

[Meathead]

CremeBrulee writes:
“That's the problem with this shit. Any name you might come up with will have some sort of stigma attached to it by someone. I guess you could start naming things after inanimate objects...”

I don’t think we will ever run out of genuine patriots and heroes who fought for worthy American (and universal) values. You are right, though, that we needn’t name forts after Generals only. Sure there may always be differences concerning this or that name, but at least let us not choose the names of men who fought against the United States in a war that defended slavery.

Or ideas even. Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. I am not up to date on naming conventions for the military. Once you go down the rabbit hole of changing names though, you should be prepared to change everything named after anything or anyone to suit the whims of how people feel about something at any given time or according to their political ideology.

I love the idea of Ft. Liberty, Ft. Freedom, Ft. Independence. It would be hard to change these names once folks got used to them. Even the South during the Civil War claimed it was fighting for these ideals. Plus, maybe, hopefully, it would have a salutary subliminal influence on our military, and serve as a reminder of what we are supposed to be fighting for when we fight overseas.

This is meant as an insult to southern Americans, and it would be seen that way.
This is about insulting and marginalizing a group of people.
This is proof that Diversity and Multi-culturalism, as ideas and policy goals, were always lies.

Renaming Fort Benning — named after a diehard racist Confederate slaveholder (see comment #110) — calling it say “Fort Liberty“ — would be an “insult to Southern Americans...” ?

Not to any Americans (wherever they live) ... with their heads screwed on right!

SUre it would. It would be saying that Southern history and heritage is a shame that they bear, that they alone among all groups, are not allowed to celebrate their history.


That is an insult. YOur denial of that obvious fact is also offensive.

Slavery IS a shame they bear

Every nation has a time of slavery in its history. Englishmen were slave-owners, Turks were slave-owners, Berbers were slave-owners...
Can you accept this simple fact?

40 percent of the Confederacy was in bondage. Four million people.

No other nation ever embraced slavery to the degree the Confederacy did.

Really? What about medieval Baltic States where more than 85% of the total population were serfs who had less human rights than the slaves in the Confederacy?

Serfs were not property, they and their children were not bought and sold

No, but the land was. They were part of the land. I don't see that much difference. At least there serfs knew who their daddies were. You can't say that about black Americans then or now.

 

[rightwinger]

I believe they are part of history. Whether we like it or not, it is part of our heritage. That would like like Germany renaming Auschwitz and the other Concentration camps. It is part of their history. We may not agree to what happened there. But nonetheless...

Camp Mengele?

Come on Ass wipe what would you rename the 10 bases too?

Fort Grant
Fort Sherman
Fort Pershing
Fort Eisenhower
Fort MacArthur
Fort Marshall
Fort Patton
Fort Bradley
Fort Ridgeway

Stop being so sleazy

More deserving than Confederate Generals