Time to rename our Confederate Forts

[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

More deserving than Confederate Generals

Why. Most certainly weren't better generals.

 

[Polishprince]

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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

 

[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

Why. Most certainly weren't better generals.

You know very little about Military History

 

[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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

 

[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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

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

Why. Most certainly weren't better generals.

You know very little about Military History

I know much more than you on any non-gay topic. I promise you.

While we're at it, show me that 40% of the population in the old South were slaves.

 

[Polishprince]

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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

 

[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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

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

Why. Most certainly weren't better generals.

You know very little about Military History

I know much more than you on any non-gay topic. I promise you.

While we're at it, show me that 40% of the population in the old South were slaves.

1860 census showed 4 million slaves out of a Southern population of 9 million.

 

[JLW]

Does anyone know where Fort Benedict Arnold is?

 

[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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

 

[Silver Cat]

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

Sure, they were property, they and their children were bought and sold, but yes, in many causes they were not allowed to be bought and sold without land.

 

[Polishprince]

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

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Charlton Heston?

Actually, Judah Ben-Hur. Heston was the actor that portrayed Mr. Ben-hur on the silver screen.

Ben-Hur was a fictional character

So what are you saying? That being a galley slave was an easy gig?

 

[Silver Cat]

The Slaves in Antiquity had it a lot harder than those in America during antebellum days. Picking cotton may not have been an idyllic life, but it was a lot better than rowing in a galley.

Or fighting each other to death on arena.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Why on earth is anybody comparing 19th century race slavery with Roman antiquity ... in a discussion about renaming 21st century military forts?

Does anyone plan to name these forts after Julius Ceasar? ... Hannibal? Spartacus?

Talk about avoiding the subject!

 

[Silver Cat]

There were many free Blacks in the Confederation.
100% of Lithuanians in Livonia were serfs, all free men were German or Swedish.

 

[JLW]

Why on earth is anybody comparing 19th century race slavery with Roman antiquity ... in a discussion about renaming 21st century military forts?

Does anyone plan to name these forts after Julius Ceasar? ... Hannibal? Spartacus?

Talk about avoiding the subject!

I think Fort Vercingetorix would be cool.

 

[Silver Cat]

Why on earth is anybody comparing 19th century race slavery with Roman antiquity ... in a discussion about renaming 21st century military forts?

Do you want to destroy the US Capitol, too?
--------------------
"In reviewing L'Enfant's plan, Thomas Jefferson insisted the legislative building be called the "Capitol" rather than "Congress House".[7] The word "Capitol" comes from Latin and is associated with the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on Capitoline Hill, one of the seven hills of Rome"
-----------------
Ancient Rome (as well as the Confederation) is a part of our common history.

 

[protectionist]

We COULD rename the military forts that have Confederate names. There are 10 forts with Confederate names >> Fort Benning, Bragg, Hood, Lee, Polk, Gordon, Pickett, A.P, Hill, Rucker, Beauregard.

OK. Here's what the new names can be >> Fort Trump, Pence, Pompeo, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Cruz, Inhofe, Graham, Cotton, Cornyn.

 

[whitehall]

Obviously the post belongs in the political forum.

 

[protectionist]

Let’s honor those who earned it

Like those in Post # 217. Yeah, OK.

 

[Marion Morrison]

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

Yeah, no. Time to hang all commie traitor retards that suggest such idiocy. Starting with you>.