Posted on Jun 26, 2015
Military is OK with the Confederate Flag. How long do you think that will last?
97K
1.25K
563
20
20
0
The Confederate cause is deeply ingrained in American military history, making the country's current debate over whether to retire the "rebel flag" all the more pertinent to service members who view it as important to their heritage — important enough to display in their workplaces or even as tattoos.
After last week's racially motivated slaying of nine African Americans in a South Carolina church, the flag has become a target for those who consider it a symbol of hatred, a strident reminder of slavery and of the divisiveness that fueled America's Civil War.
Major U.S. retailers, including Wal-Mart and Amazon, have said they'll no longer sell Confederate flag merchandise. States throughout the South are under pressure to remove it from government facilities, with Alabama doing exactly that on Wednesday. And officials at South Carolina's historic military academy the Citadel voted to remove the Confederate Naval Jack from its campus chapel.
The Defense Department, which enforces strict policies prohibiting hate speech, inappropriate tattoos and the display of offensive material, is making no such gestures, a spokesman told Military Times.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/06/25/military-is-ok-with-confederate-flag--for-now/29235155/
After last week's racially motivated slaying of nine African Americans in a South Carolina church, the flag has become a target for those who consider it a symbol of hatred, a strident reminder of slavery and of the divisiveness that fueled America's Civil War.
Major U.S. retailers, including Wal-Mart and Amazon, have said they'll no longer sell Confederate flag merchandise. States throughout the South are under pressure to remove it from government facilities, with Alabama doing exactly that on Wednesday. And officials at South Carolina's historic military academy the Citadel voted to remove the Confederate Naval Jack from its campus chapel.
The Defense Department, which enforces strict policies prohibiting hate speech, inappropriate tattoos and the display of offensive material, is making no such gestures, a spokesman told Military Times.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/06/25/military-is-ok-with-confederate-flag--for-now/29235155/
Posted in these groups: 
Confederate Flag
DoD
Confederate Flag DoD
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 139
93
92
1
The Confederate Flag represented to these men their States, homes, families, and their way of life, not the 17 % or so that owned slaves. It has never been published what percent of Northerner's that owned slaves. In President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, he only freed the Southern slaves, not the Northern slaves. The Confederate Flag has become a hate symbol because the government has chosen not to educate our children, and adults for that manner, as to the real issues that led up to the civil war. One Sargent has gone so far as to call the Southern Generals traitors to our nation. I told him that was a stupid statement, and instead of everyone forming a decision from hear say, I suggest an in depth study of the real reasons for the need of the Confederate Flag , I believe that the study will change a lot of minds, and as far as creating Confederate Battle Flag Topics, I believe that the truth will put that subject to bed where it belongs.
(93)
(1)
SSG Roger Shattuck
Well, I might be inclined to agree if every state in the Confederacy hadn't primarily mentioned the preservation of slavery as a primary argument in their Articles of Secession.
(1)
(0)
SSG Roger Shattuck
MSG (Join to see) -
States' rights was rarely an issue so long as there had been a southern or southern sympathetic (Franklin Pierce) president in office.
States' rights was rarely an issue so long as there had been a southern or southern sympathetic (Franklin Pierce) president in office.
(0)
(0)
SSG Bill Mc
1SG (Join to see) - Top, you're overlooking something. In the early years of the United States, there was still a VERY STRONG loyalty to one's STATE. Robert E. Lee (yes, a graduate of West Point), laid his loyalties to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Remember, he HONORED his oath to the United States, on more than one occasion - not the least of which was routing John Brown and his abolitionists from Harper's Ferry. Brown was hung for Treason and murder.
However, with the Federal Government began TELLING states how things would be, and when Southern states began to secede, Lee declined the top job in the Federal Army, and openly declared, with great regret, that his loyalties were owed to the State (Commonwealth) of Virginia.
Times were different then ... loyalties were to the STATE, not the relatively new, "United States" that wasn't even 100 yet.
However, with the Federal Government began TELLING states how things would be, and when Southern states began to secede, Lee declined the top job in the Federal Army, and openly declared, with great regret, that his loyalties were owed to the State (Commonwealth) of Virginia.
Times were different then ... loyalties were to the STATE, not the relatively new, "United States" that wasn't even 100 yet.
(0)
(0)
SSG Edward Tilton
The Confederate Constitution does not mention states rights, it does mention slavery 13 times. That argument is bull
(0)
(0)
56
54
2
This flag is a symbol of hatred and bigotry. This is a flag that represents a nation that condoned owning people, that condoned exiling the Natives from their own land, that didn't allow women rights. There is no heritage in this to claim. This is dark history of the United States that continues to haunt millions of Americans who were not born white. What a great way to show white privillege.
(56)
(2)
CPO (Join to see)
While you’re correct that the Confederacy did support the ownership of other people, it’s a bit unreasonable to subscribe all these injustices to the south alone. In fact, the emancipation proclamation by Lincoln only freed southern slaves, not northern slaves. The nation as a whole did not embrace women's rights or the rights of Native Americans.
(0)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
The confederate flag means different things to different people. To many, it’s a symbol of southern pride that has nothing to do with racism. As a descendant of a confederate soldier it’s sad to see it being used by racists. My great grand father never owned a slave. He fought for his State and the right of his state’s self determination.
(0)
(0)
LTC Robert Boswell
Your comments are very disturbing to me. Your use of white privilege is as racist as can be. My Army ingrained into me that we were all one color, Green!
When you segregate others into group, you become the very racist that you displease. Every group has images that offended them. The key to unit cohesion is discipline, morale, and many other things. Army values never mention any of this because it went unspoken. My view of confederate flag is that it is part of history and should remain outside of the military. If we banish it, when will it stop.
When you segregate others into group, you become the very racist that you displease. Every group has images that offended them. The key to unit cohesion is discipline, morale, and many other things. Army values never mention any of this because it went unspoken. My view of confederate flag is that it is part of history and should remain outside of the military. If we banish it, when will it stop.
(1)
(0)
SPC Steven Nihipali
huh? privileged much? damn... such ignorance and from an NCO... this is the shit that's "leading" our new youth in todays military?
(1)
(0)
40
40
0
Confederate soldiers are American soldiers
The Confederacy DIDN'T fight the Union in order to topple or destroy the United States. They wanted to secede. Therefore, the conflict was a war between the states, not a civil war. There was no insurgency and the Confederate soldiers were not labeled as traitors.
Confederate soldiers were considered U.S. Soldiers by the U.S. Government before, during and after the war. And as such, their military sacrifices are officially treated by our government in the same manner as any Union soldier of that period.
The Confederate battle flag of Virginia is a legitimate part of American history and has earned the right to be honored, respected and displayed.
The Confederacy DIDN'T fight the Union in order to topple or destroy the United States. They wanted to secede. Therefore, the conflict was a war between the states, not a civil war. There was no insurgency and the Confederate soldiers were not labeled as traitors.
Confederate soldiers were considered U.S. Soldiers by the U.S. Government before, during and after the war. And as such, their military sacrifices are officially treated by our government in the same manner as any Union soldier of that period.
The Confederate battle flag of Virginia is a legitimate part of American history and has earned the right to be honored, respected and displayed.
(40)
(0)
PO2 Aaren Johnson
Secession is a traitorous act to the Union of the United States of America...that's why we had the war between the states. The Battle Flag of General Robert E Lee's Army of Northern Virginia was laid down 1865. The KKK and others raised it back up as a form of intimidation to a segment of U.S. Citizens which you refuse to acknowledge. State pride...show it!
BTW African-Americans / Blacks-Americans are southern too...no pride for something that Lovers of Liberty should gaze upon with hatred and contempt...
BTW African-Americans / Blacks-Americans are southern too...no pride for something that Lovers of Liberty should gaze upon with hatred and contempt...
(4)
(0)
SSG Robert White
Insurrection is defined as:(noun) "an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government" As for confederate soldiers a more recent article contradicts the statement that Confederate soldiers were treated the same a Union soldiers after the end of the war.
The war over Confederate monuments is also being waged on social media — and some of what's being shared there evokes the old saying that in war the first casualty is truth.
One claim that's been circulating among Confederate apologists in recent weeks would have us believe that Congress passed a law in 1958 giving Confederate veterans status under law equal to U.S. veterans. It was made into this easy-to-share meme for Facebook and Twitter:
http://www.southernstudies.org/2015/07/busting-the-myth-that-congress-made-confederate-ve.html
This claim was being made even before the violence in Charleston. The Sons of Confederate Veterans cited the 1958 law to make the case that all Americans should honor Confederate veterans. An undated official history of the Department of Veterans Affairs that covers the period up to 2006 goes so far as to claim that the law "pardoned" Confederate service members. A 1997 article in VFW Magazine also referred to the "congressional pardon" of 1958.
Since the Charleston massacre, the claim has resurfaced on conservative websites. In fact, it has circulated so widely of late that a petition has been launched calling on the Obama administration to take action to repeal the law.
But in fact, the law does not do what Confederate apologists say it does. It certainly does not "pardon" Confederate veterans, nor does not generally give them status "equal to" U.S. veterans.
The original legislation was introduced to raise pensions for widows and former widows of deceased veterans of the Spanish-American War. In committee, it was amended to include widows of deceased U.S. veterans of the Civil War and Indian War, as well as widows of Confederate veterans.
"It is my understanding that the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Long] is the author of the amendment providing for pensions for the approximately 1,000 widows of Confederate veterans," Sen. Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), the Senate's majority leader and presiding officer, said during floor debate over the measure, according to the Congressional Record. "The bill was unanimously reported by the Committee on Finance. There is much interest in it, and I hope the Senate will act on it unanimously."
The "Senator from Louisiana" would be Russell B. Long, at the time a pro-segregation Democrat. The Congressional Record clearly shows there was no discussion on the Senate floor of Confederate "pardons" or any general change in the status of Confederate veterans.
The section of the law that Confederate apologists seem to be misconstruing is this one:
"(e) For the purpose of this section, and section 433, the term 'veteran' includes a person who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, and the term 'active, military or naval service' includes active service in such forces."
"For the purpose of this section" is referring to Section 432 of the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1957, which set pensions for widows of U.S. veterans of the Civil War; Section 433 of that act pertains to pensions of Civil War veterans' children. There is nothing in U.S. Public Law 85-425 or the law it amends that says anything about making Confederate veterans U.S. veterans or "pardoning" them.
As Confederate history researcher, author and blogger Andy Hall of Texas noted recently in a discussion at another blog when someone claimed that "Congress passed a law making any and all confederate soldier [sic] a US veteran" (emphasis Hall's):
If you're referring to the 1958 legislation, all it did was make Confederate veterans eligible for the same VA benefits as Union soldiers were. It did not make them U.S. veterans, make any other official change in their status, or extend any particular protections to graves or monuments.
It's really amusing how the same heritage folks who, generally speaking, have nothing but disdain and mockery for the federal government, cling desperately to this particular bit of legislation as an endorsement of their ancestors' integrity. Is your faith in them and their cause genuinely so weak that you have to have the official imprimatur of the U.S. government to justify their cause? Apparently so
The war over Confederate monuments is also being waged on social media — and some of what's being shared there evokes the old saying that in war the first casualty is truth.
One claim that's been circulating among Confederate apologists in recent weeks would have us believe that Congress passed a law in 1958 giving Confederate veterans status under law equal to U.S. veterans. It was made into this easy-to-share meme for Facebook and Twitter:
http://www.southernstudies.org/2015/07/busting-the-myth-that-congress-made-confederate-ve.html
This claim was being made even before the violence in Charleston. The Sons of Confederate Veterans cited the 1958 law to make the case that all Americans should honor Confederate veterans. An undated official history of the Department of Veterans Affairs that covers the period up to 2006 goes so far as to claim that the law "pardoned" Confederate service members. A 1997 article in VFW Magazine also referred to the "congressional pardon" of 1958.
Since the Charleston massacre, the claim has resurfaced on conservative websites. In fact, it has circulated so widely of late that a petition has been launched calling on the Obama administration to take action to repeal the law.
But in fact, the law does not do what Confederate apologists say it does. It certainly does not "pardon" Confederate veterans, nor does not generally give them status "equal to" U.S. veterans.
The original legislation was introduced to raise pensions for widows and former widows of deceased veterans of the Spanish-American War. In committee, it was amended to include widows of deceased U.S. veterans of the Civil War and Indian War, as well as widows of Confederate veterans.
"It is my understanding that the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Long] is the author of the amendment providing for pensions for the approximately 1,000 widows of Confederate veterans," Sen. Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), the Senate's majority leader and presiding officer, said during floor debate over the measure, according to the Congressional Record. "The bill was unanimously reported by the Committee on Finance. There is much interest in it, and I hope the Senate will act on it unanimously."
The "Senator from Louisiana" would be Russell B. Long, at the time a pro-segregation Democrat. The Congressional Record clearly shows there was no discussion on the Senate floor of Confederate "pardons" or any general change in the status of Confederate veterans.
The section of the law that Confederate apologists seem to be misconstruing is this one:
"(e) For the purpose of this section, and section 433, the term 'veteran' includes a person who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, and the term 'active, military or naval service' includes active service in such forces."
"For the purpose of this section" is referring to Section 432 of the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1957, which set pensions for widows of U.S. veterans of the Civil War; Section 433 of that act pertains to pensions of Civil War veterans' children. There is nothing in U.S. Public Law 85-425 or the law it amends that says anything about making Confederate veterans U.S. veterans or "pardoning" them.
As Confederate history researcher, author and blogger Andy Hall of Texas noted recently in a discussion at another blog when someone claimed that "Congress passed a law making any and all confederate soldier [sic] a US veteran" (emphasis Hall's):
If you're referring to the 1958 legislation, all it did was make Confederate veterans eligible for the same VA benefits as Union soldiers were. It did not make them U.S. veterans, make any other official change in their status, or extend any particular protections to graves or monuments.
It's really amusing how the same heritage folks who, generally speaking, have nothing but disdain and mockery for the federal government, cling desperately to this particular bit of legislation as an endorsement of their ancestors' integrity. Is your faith in them and their cause genuinely so weak that you have to have the official imprimatur of the U.S. government to justify their cause? Apparently so
Busting the myth that Congress made Confederate vets into U.S. vets
Since a white supremacist who waved the Confederate flag gunned down nine African Americans in a Charleston church last month, battles have raged across the South over the future of Confederate monume
(0)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
You are correct in your assessment of the status of Confederate veterans. That said, it was Lincolns desire after the Civil War to pardon the South and all those who fought for it. Lincoln saw that the most productive action was to heal the great division.
(1)
(0)
SSG Edward Tilton
If they had taken an oath to the United States they betrayed it when they took up arms. They should have gotten the same retribution handed to John Brown or the San Patricio. They were traitors
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google