Jump to content

President Trump: Confederate-named bases not to be tampered with


pipedreams
 Share

Recommended Posts

"President Trump recently announced he will not rename the military bases named after confederate generals. In a series of tweets, he rejected the latest calls to rename bases such as Fort Lee, Fort Hood and others.

The president emphasized he’s not even considering renaming those bases. He stressed America’s history of victory and freedom has inspired generations of servicemen and women, who went on to win two world wars."

https://www.oann.com/president-trump-confederate-named-bases-not-to-be-tampered-with/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I don't consider this to be any big deal for these reasons:

1. I have many Army friends, and none that I know have anything emotionally invested in the name of the base where they are stationed.

2. I suspect that when these bases were originally named, it was at a time when the Senate and House Armed Services Committees were chaired by southern Democrats, who first leveraged their political power to get the base placed in their state, and then approved naming it for a Confederate general to please their local voter base. I can assure you, the United States Army saw little upside in naming bases for Confederate generals.

3. Most, if not all of these Confederate generals were unsuccessful commanders. Hood, Bragg, Polk... all losers. Lee? Invaded the North twice, and returned home both times without a win. He made his name fighting against truly inept Union generals in 1862 and 1863. Stonewall Jackson? Lost situation awareness at Chancellorsville, wandered out in front of his own advancing troops, and was shot by them.

Rename the bases for famous U.S. Army generals or Medal of Honor recipients. There are many great candidates. President Trump is reading this one all wrong.

Edited by TXUSMC
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if you want to take issue with naming things/places with no sense of racial sensitivity, consider the aircraft carriers Carl Vinson and John C. Stennis. Both are named for past powerful Armed Services Committee legislators (Vinson was a Congressman from Georgia, and Stennis was a Senator from Mississippi) who were strong proponents of military spending; however, they were both ardent segregationists with strong Dixiecrat credentials in the latter half of the 20th century... not some long dead Confederate generals. Go figure...

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't believe that the name of the base/facility is the actual problem.

I do believe that if public opinion, or opinions of select groups, can determine the acceptability of a base name on the whim of the moment,  that there is no end to the claims that today one name is acceptable, yet tomorrow another group will insist that name, or another, be changed also.

The real problem of re-naming bases probably is due to the complex difficulty of changing that name throughout the military establishment, and then re-printing all the base letterheads and official documentations, orders and forms.

You can see that if changing the names of military bases is based on the acceptability of that name to a specific group today, this could be a constant turmoil over time.  When one base name is changed, then these same individuals/groups will want other base names changed ad infinitum.  Not to mention that other groups and organizations would want the same right to change facility names also.

The cost and confusion could be an ongoing problem over many base name changes and the confusion involved could severely hamper timely correspondence and official orders.

This is stupidity at it's highest level.  When selective public opinion determines names, public opinion could vary from day to day and nothing would be static long enough for everyone to know who is where.

Edited by janice6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are good points, Janice6. And when you rename anything -- facility, base, building, whatever -- there are automatically administrative costs associated with the action. 

FWIW, I strongly disapprove of the vandalism done to statues of Christopher Columbus around the country. He was an explorer, and if he had not "found" the New World, then someone else would have. The clash of civilizations result in those whose culture prevails and those who are forced to bend to the power of the prevailing culture. And most of the time it ain't pretty. My $.02

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Please Donate To TBS

    Please donate to TBS.
    Your support is needed and it is greatly appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...