Posted on Jun 22, 2015
Should US military bases named after Confederates be renamed?
190K
1.73K
755
66
66
0
What do these US military bases have in common?
Fort Bragg
Fort Rucker
Fort Hood
Fort Lee
Fort Benning
Fort Gordon
Fort A.P. Hill
Fort Polk
Fort Pickett
Camp Beauregard (Operated by the Louisiana National Guard)
They are all named for Confederate generals. There’s been talk for years about whether this is appropriate, and now in wake of Charleston and the South Carolina Confederate flag, it’s coming up again.
Do you think these posts should be renamed to honor people who fought in the U.S. Army exclusively? Vote, and share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Take the Poll:
http://www.stripes.com/military-life/military-history/poll-should-us-military-bases-named-after-confederates-be-renamed-1.353890#
Fort Bragg
Fort Rucker
Fort Hood
Fort Lee
Fort Benning
Fort Gordon
Fort A.P. Hill
Fort Polk
Fort Pickett
Camp Beauregard (Operated by the Louisiana National Guard)
They are all named for Confederate generals. There’s been talk for years about whether this is appropriate, and now in wake of Charleston and the South Carolina Confederate flag, it’s coming up again.
Do you think these posts should be renamed to honor people who fought in the U.S. Army exclusively? Vote, and share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Take the Poll:
http://www.stripes.com/military-life/military-history/poll-should-us-military-bases-named-after-confederates-be-renamed-1.353890#
Posted in these groups: 
Confederate Flag
Confederate Flag
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 282
7
7
0
No. History is history. There is nothing you, I or anyone can do to change it. Our American history is not something to be afraid or ashamed of. We should tell our young and educate them with the history of America, so we don't make the same mistakes again. And, as a great example of what happens when we as Americans work toward something greater than self. An individual does make America.
(7)
(0)
7
7
0
I finally remembered the SECOND military base named after a US President. The first was Ft. Jackson. The SECOND is Ft Benjamin Harrison, which (coincidentially) is the second of two Army bases with first and last name, the other being Ft. Leonard Wood. I tell you, I am going to amaze at the next cocktail party I'm invited to -- if ever.
(7)
(0)
CSM William Payne
From the Fort Jackson web site;
"July 18, 1917
The War Department issued General Order Number 95, re-designating the cantonment as Camp Jackson in honor of President Andrew Jackson, a South Carolina native."
Andrew Jackson was born in the Waxhaws, just south of the North Carolina / South Carolina border outside of Charlotte, NC.
Fort Monroe was closed as a result of the last BRAC and TRADOC was relocated to Fort Eutis. Parts of it to include the Casemate Fort are being converted into a national park.
"July 18, 1917
The War Department issued General Order Number 95, re-designating the cantonment as Camp Jackson in honor of President Andrew Jackson, a South Carolina native."
Andrew Jackson was born in the Waxhaws, just south of the North Carolina / South Carolina border outside of Charlotte, NC.
Fort Monroe was closed as a result of the last BRAC and TRADOC was relocated to Fort Eutis. Parts of it to include the Casemate Fort are being converted into a national park.
(1)
(0)
1SG Michael Blount
CDR Michael Goldschmidt - ummm...no two'fer in this case. Funny enough about these bases is there was no base named after Gen James Longstreet. In my estimation, the best general the Confederacy had, not named Lee or Jackson.
(0)
(0)
1SG Michael Blount
SGM (Join to see) - yah, McClellan was definitely the best non-Confederate general they had. Sorta like the kid on your little league team who boots every ball hit his way, then strikes out.
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
1SG Michael Blount, during the Reconstruction era, Longstreet's professional reputation a casualty of efforts to blame him for the loss at Gettysburg, adding luster to Lee's military reputation by shifting blame for his greatest strategic loss.
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
*YES! And while we're at it let's rename any and all states derived from native Indian languages since that represents the siezure of native lands by force. Also all place names of hispanic origin for the same reason. French names are okay since we bought the Louisiana Purchase fair and square. All military weapons systems with Indian names like Apache, Kiowa, etc should also be renamed immediately, as well as any place named after any general since that is a symbol of American aggression and oppression. In fact, in order to avoid upsetting anyone all proper names should be reassigned a number and barcode.
*Sarcasm font
edited for spelling. Hope I didn't miss any.
*Sarcasm font
edited for spelling. Hope I didn't miss any.
(7)
(0)
(1)
(0)
1SG Michael Blount
SFC Jeff L. - what about the land we took from Mexico in the war(s) with them? Just kidding
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
1SG Michael Blount, that was just a temporary loan of sovereignty. The original owners are working slowly but effectively towards reintegrating Californio and the rest of Mexico d'el Norte back into the homeland...
(0)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
We bought it. YEs with a sword to Santa Anna's throat, but we have the receipts and the deeds....
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
I am confused. There "has been talk of renaming" these posts "for years"?
Where and by whom, exactly. I have been in the Army for 24 years, and I have never heard this uttered by anyone.
Frankly, since we have stopped teaching our history in public schools, I think you would be hard-pressed to find one person under 30 who could tell you who Braxton Bragg and A.P Hill were. Hard to be offended if you don't have a clue.
Leave sleeping dogs lie. These men fought valiantly for what they believed in. Wrongheaded as it may have been.
Where and by whom, exactly. I have been in the Army for 24 years, and I have never heard this uttered by anyone.
Frankly, since we have stopped teaching our history in public schools, I think you would be hard-pressed to find one person under 30 who could tell you who Braxton Bragg and A.P Hill were. Hard to be offended if you don't have a clue.
Leave sleeping dogs lie. These men fought valiantly for what they believed in. Wrongheaded as it may have been.
(7)
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
Wrongheaded? I can't agree, Top. Please see my answer to this question on this thread.
(0)
(0)
1SG Michael Blount
1SG (Join to see) - sounds like some folks want to kick that sleeping dog until it wakes, Top
(1)
(0)
SSG Steven Borders
Well stated Top. Just leave the fort names alone. It is apart of our history whether people like it or not.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
So, the confederate flag was removed in Charleston. I don't feel that changing the names of military installations will change the attitude of those out there that hate me for the color of my skin. I mean to say the least...it's hard being an African-American in this man's Army when I'm treated like a second rate citizen. It shouldn't matter the color of my skin, instead it should be about the character and the fact we all bleed the same red blood. If it's not going to change the hearts and minds of all of 'us' as people then leave it as is.
(7)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
I have to disagree SFC Mario WilliamsReynolds that different races in the Army are treated as second-rate citizens. Being an Infantryman, all we ever care about is how you do your job. I would wager that if a demographic was done by ranks and MOS specialties across both enlisted and officer, it would prove that performance is the main way we look at people and not the color of the skin.
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
SFC Douglas Duckett and SGT (Join to see), the facts don't support your contentions that today's Army is color-blind. If you look at the demographics, there are clear patterns of uneven ethnic distribution across career fields. If you want a brief peek, look at page 32 et seq of this GAO study:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05952.pdf
That said, I think that claims of any ethnic group being treated as second-class citizens tend to hinge on the race/ethnicity (and level of racism) of who's in charge and who's not. The racism, although not officially tolerated, is there, but it is very uneven and it is just as likely to be coloring the perception of the subordinate as it is to be affecting the decisions of the leadership.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05952.pdf
That said, I think that claims of any ethnic group being treated as second-class citizens tend to hinge on the race/ethnicity (and level of racism) of who's in charge and who's not. The racism, although not officially tolerated, is there, but it is very uneven and it is just as likely to be coloring the perception of the subordinate as it is to be affecting the decisions of the leadership.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
1LT William Clardy Thank you for showing me that study, but all it shows is the propensity for certain races to go into certain career fields. I believe that if they would have divided it all down by each rank, say E-1 all the way up to O-10 for the infantry branch and then divide it up by race, they could show whether potential racism was involved. They talk about it somewhat with generals but it doesn't take into account the high number of combat leaders that make these ranks that are dominated by whites.
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
SGT (Join to see), I was not attempting to prove that racism still exists within the military -- that is a self-evident truth unless you believe that people with racist views self-select themselves out of the joining the military. Also, by my definition, racism is not restricted to being a majority attitude -- there are plenty of blacks, latinos, and Koreans who prejudge based on skin pigmentation.
That study was merely offered to provide some validation to the fact that some ethnic groups tend to be over-represented within some career fields. I have seen other studies which went into greater detail about which ethnicities are drawn to which fields (e.g., effectively negating the previously unchallenged stereotype that blacks are overrepresented in the combat arms), but that was a while back and not only do I not remember where I saw those results, I really don't feel like kicking up the arguments that would get started.
That study was merely offered to provide some validation to the fact that some ethnic groups tend to be over-represented within some career fields. I have seen other studies which went into greater detail about which ethnicities are drawn to which fields (e.g., effectively negating the previously unchallenged stereotype that blacks are overrepresented in the combat arms), but that was a while back and not only do I not remember where I saw those results, I really don't feel like kicking up the arguments that would get started.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
Once they realize that they are named after them it will be next on their to do list. If I recall, back in the day, they named them after Confederate Generals to sooth over hurt feelings and a shaky reunified nation. To me, that is just absolutely smart thinking for the day and good politics. To build up Fort 'We kicked your butt' is going to create a lot of hurt feelings, whining, contempt,.......what we have going on today. Sherman tanks will now be known as 'Lincolns." As a nation that has done the most dispicable, heinous acts against the Native Americans, I would rename Fort Carson, but alas, there aren't enough Native American voices to be heard anymore. If we are going to turn the focus of this great nation on sins from our past, we better start there or I don't want to hear another blessed thing about it.
(7)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
SFC Mark Merino, I don't have any holy water or priests available, so can I make you listen to every *unblessed* utterance?
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
It seems like most of these outcries are a knee jerk reaction, SFC Mark Merino you brought up a great point on the indigenous Americans. They have been mistreated much worse than any other people in the USA.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
Of course not. Those that want to rewrite history are doomed to repeat it. This or that group can decide that they don't like a particular part of our country's history and, over time, completely revise history and erase all of those pesky uncomfortable references. Well, sure, that works well when we all agree about something - but what happens when the next generation gets in place and decides to erase something opposing & different? (I'm really really trying hard not to reference any particular moron politician - but sort of failing...).
Net/net, we'll always have changing views. That's not necessarily bad - rewriting history is bad. And I'd really have some heartache if they renamed Fort Benning. Maybe they could call it Fort Wonderful? lol
Net/net, we'll always have changing views. That's not necessarily bad - rewriting history is bad. And I'd really have some heartache if they renamed Fort Benning. Maybe they could call it Fort Wonderful? lol
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
They should stay as is, yes they might of been confederates but they were amazing military people, a whos who of generals of their time.
Though I do think its funny ft. McClellan is in Alabama.
Though I do think its funny ft. McClellan is in Alabama.
(6)
(0)
LTC Stephen C.
Also interesting, LCpl Mark Lefler, is that the adjacent Pelham Range (across Highway 21 from old Fort McClellan) is named for Lieutenant Colonel (posthumously promoted) "Gallant" John Pelham, CSA! It's maintained by the Alabama Army National Guard, and is used extensively.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
LCpl Mark Lefler
I kind of liked Jackson and Longstreet more then Lee. I felt Lee acted to quickly in a few occasions. Though Jackson put himself in harms way more then he needed to, though doing so helped the confeds win the 1st battle of manassas, it got him killed at wilderness.
(0)
(0)
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
LCpl Mark Lefler - Perhaps Jackson did put Himself in harms way but He led from the front, He also it seems, understood what that did for the moral of His soldiers
(0)
(0)
Pentagon says 'no'
No plans to rename US bases named after Confederate officers
A Pentagon spokesman said naming is up to individual services.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
Let me ask this? Should we re-write our Constitution because many of the Founding Fathers were slave owners? Do we just ‘start over’? DO WE CHANGE EVERTHING? Here is a list of Founding Fathers who owned slaves:
Charles Carroll, John Adams, Samuel Chase, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Oliver Ellsworth, Button Gwinnett Georgia Alexander Hamilton, John Hancock, Robert Treat Paine, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, John Jay, Roger Sherman, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, James Madison, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Benjamin Rush, Edward Rutledge, George Washington,
When will this stupidity end? This may have been who we WERE, but it is not who we are NOW!!! Our history is to be remembered so that we do not go down the same paths as before.
Charles Carroll, John Adams, Samuel Chase, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Oliver Ellsworth, Button Gwinnett Georgia Alexander Hamilton, John Hancock, Robert Treat Paine, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, John Jay, Roger Sherman, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, James Madison, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Benjamin Rush, Edward Rutledge, George Washington,
When will this stupidity end? This may have been who we WERE, but it is not who we are NOW!!! Our history is to be remembered so that we do not go down the same paths as before.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google