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
5
5
0
Why Does it matter when and why the Fort was named. It was a war. They done something to have it named after them. I think this PC crap is going a little far. There are names from both sides. Just leave it be!
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
HELL NO!
there is too much history there, too many books written and too many Soldiers that served there.
Just Fort Bragg for instance, how many American Warriors of how many generations served on Bragg, in how many families.
I have my father's paperwork...FORT BRAGG.....My Paperwork....FORT BRAGG....My Son wants to take that last great step to becoming a man...AIRBORNE....FORT BRAGG.
Soldiers that have served on and from Bragg have so transcended Braxton Bragg that no one really knows who is is....Bragg is the Home of the AIRBORNE, not the base in North Carolina that was named after a fairly obscure Southern General.
there is too much history there, too many books written and too many Soldiers that served there.
Just Fort Bragg for instance, how many American Warriors of how many generations served on Bragg, in how many families.
I have my father's paperwork...FORT BRAGG.....My Paperwork....FORT BRAGG....My Son wants to take that last great step to becoming a man...AIRBORNE....FORT BRAGG.
Soldiers that have served on and from Bragg have so transcended Braxton Bragg that no one really knows who is is....Bragg is the Home of the AIRBORNE, not the base in North Carolina that was named after a fairly obscure Southern General.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I think it is a bit too late now as these names are historic and well known.
(5)
(0)
SGT Edward Thomas
The way things are going in the news right now, you may be right, but what is it the government is trying to get past us with this diversion?
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
By the way, if we are going to start changing names on things, we need to start in West Virginia and change EVERYTHING that has ANYTHING to do with Senator Robert Byrd, former Grand Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan. Maybe he was a "good guy" later in life, but "historically" (and isn't this the point with the base renaming issue, the history?) he was not a good guy. And while we're at it, we need to eliminate the Democrat Party. Until about 1994 when the Republicans swept the Congress for the first time in forever, the South was full on Democrat. You remember all the pictures from the sixties: Mississippi Burning, fire hoses and dogs, Wallace in the courthouse door, the first black students in Little Rock, AR... Quotes from famous Southern Democrats like "Segregation Now, Segregation Forever!" That was all the Democrat Party. "But they're not like that now," you say. Maybe, but HISTORICALLY they were. And frankly I am a little surprised that any African-American can associate themselves with an organization with such a troubled history. You can say what you want about the Republican Party today, but they've never even been ACCUSED of such things, much less actually done them.
So hey! Let's have a big re-naming party! We'll start with a big convention in West Virginia at the Sen. Robert Byrd Convention Center with the first event being the complete dissolution of the Democrat Party, followed quickly by the renaming of the Convention Center. Actually sounds like fun!
So hey! Let's have a big re-naming party! We'll start with a big convention in West Virginia at the Sen. Robert Byrd Convention Center with the first event being the complete dissolution of the Democrat Party, followed quickly by the renaming of the Convention Center. Actually sounds like fun!
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
This is a reasonable question and worthy of discussion, especially given all that is happening in our nation today. What bothers me though is that what occurred in South Carolina HAD NOTHING TO DO with a flag, a military base, a sports team name or any one of a number of other "PC" issues being debated around the country. Everything that is being discussed in the AFTERMATH of the event has absolutely NOTHING TO DO with the event. This is the mistake we make as a people, trying to understand and somehow "correct" or "fix" the evil that we have seen. No friends, the flag didn't make this kid murder those people; the military base names didn't make this kid murder those people; a memorial statue in a park didn't make this kid murder those people; nor did any other inanimate object, name, or symbol. What made this kid murder 9 people in a South Carolina church was a twisted, evil heart. How come we're not discussing his birth to a broken home? His lack of education? His lack of motivation concerning school? His use of drugs and alcohol? His father providing him with a handgun in complete violation of the law? This kid was so twisted up that he affiliated himself with aparteid-era South Africa and (the former) Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). I mean, who does that? You think renaming Ft Bragg to Ft Clinton or Ft Obama or removing the Confederate Battle flag from the capitol grounds in Montgomery, AL was going to have ANY impact on this kid? I'm not suggesting those are not issues worthy of debate, I just think we're missing a real opportunity to have a meaningful discussion about a real tragedy, not some made up social crisis that until a couple of days ago was barely a flicker on the news meter.
That 9 souls were taken from this earth is a tragedy. That their legacy has been reduced to us debating whether we should change the name of Ft Benning or not is possibly an even greater tragedy.
Friends, I'm not wagging my finger at anybody or saying "shame on you" if you're participating in this discussion (after all, I'm participating too). I just wonder, when all the flags are down, when all the names are changed, when EVERYONE in the country is happy and NO ONE is offended about ANYTHING, will families be more stable? Will kids stop drinking and taking drugs? Will people stop breaking the law? Will evil cease to exist? I just wonder...
That 9 souls were taken from this earth is a tragedy. That their legacy has been reduced to us debating whether we should change the name of Ft Benning or not is possibly an even greater tragedy.
Friends, I'm not wagging my finger at anybody or saying "shame on you" if you're participating in this discussion (after all, I'm participating too). I just wonder, when all the flags are down, when all the names are changed, when EVERYONE in the country is happy and NO ONE is offended about ANYTHING, will families be more stable? Will kids stop drinking and taking drugs? Will people stop breaking the law? Will evil cease to exist? I just wonder...
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
I am really surprised that no one has pointed out that all posts are named after a war hero from that state. If you are going to have a post in North Carolina, of course it would be named after a Confederate general. Posts in the North are named after Union generals from that state. Even California has posts named after generals from there. The U.S. just established most Army posts in the South due to it having the most available land during mobilizations in WW I and II.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
No, no, no. That is just STUPID. Not only are many of these men apart of Civil War history; they are military legends in AMERICAN history. All of them have earned their mark to be remembered in the books have and have their names remembered.
Gen Bragg- West Pointer. Battled against the Seminoles; won 3 brevets in the Mexican War. Resigned in 1856 from the US Army. During the Civil war he took part in battles such as Shiloh and won the major battle of Chickamauga.
Gen Beauregard- was a Louisiana Creole that graduated 2nd from West Point and former Superintendent (he was removed from this position and his resigned his commission to join the South). Fought in the Mexican War. Started the Civil War at Fort Sumter. Created the Confederate Army of the Potomac that won the 1st Battle of Bull Run- Shiloh, among many others. After the War he became a politician and author. He also HATED Jefferson Davis- but believed in the South. Pretty Sure he is worth remembering!!!!
Gen A.P. Hill- Fought in Seminole and Mexican Wars. Served under Gen Stonewall Jackson, and became a reason why the 2nd Corps, Army of Northern Virginia was so successful. His role at Antietam was crucial. And was able to take over leadership once Jackson was wounded (then died) at Chancellorsville. At Gettysburg he made some stupid decisions- his 3rd Corps suffered the most losses overall. But Gen Lee trusted him, even after that battle. He was shot and killed by Union troops before the end of the War.
Gen Lee- Anyone who says they don't at least respect Gen Lee's military mind is lying. He was a military genius. His biggest fault was that once Jackson died at Chancellorsville, he no longer had anyone that understood his order giving style. Jackson could understand him and then redirect the orders so the other Generals could understand him.
Gen Bragg- West Pointer. Battled against the Seminoles; won 3 brevets in the Mexican War. Resigned in 1856 from the US Army. During the Civil war he took part in battles such as Shiloh and won the major battle of Chickamauga.
Gen Beauregard- was a Louisiana Creole that graduated 2nd from West Point and former Superintendent (he was removed from this position and his resigned his commission to join the South). Fought in the Mexican War. Started the Civil War at Fort Sumter. Created the Confederate Army of the Potomac that won the 1st Battle of Bull Run- Shiloh, among many others. After the War he became a politician and author. He also HATED Jefferson Davis- but believed in the South. Pretty Sure he is worth remembering!!!!
Gen A.P. Hill- Fought in Seminole and Mexican Wars. Served under Gen Stonewall Jackson, and became a reason why the 2nd Corps, Army of Northern Virginia was so successful. His role at Antietam was crucial. And was able to take over leadership once Jackson was wounded (then died) at Chancellorsville. At Gettysburg he made some stupid decisions- his 3rd Corps suffered the most losses overall. But Gen Lee trusted him, even after that battle. He was shot and killed by Union troops before the end of the War.
Gen Lee- Anyone who says they don't at least respect Gen Lee's military mind is lying. He was a military genius. His biggest fault was that once Jackson died at Chancellorsville, he no longer had anyone that understood his order giving style. Jackson could understand him and then redirect the orders so the other Generals could understand him.
(4)
(0)
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter
Thank You for that Historic input, That very well supports the arguments against any change in names of those posts.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Preface: I was born in the North, I have great grandfathers that fought in the Union Army. I have no issue with any race, and I don't believe owning another human is right by any stretch of the imagination.
Now with that caviet in mine I'd like to humbly point out that the Civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about states rights.
1861, April - Succession
1861 Febuary - Confederacy formed
1861 April - Suspension of habeas corpus (the right of any person under arrest to appear in person before the court, to ensure that they have not been falsely accused) blocks the succession of Maryland, which would have put Washington D.C. in Confederate territory.
1882 - Emancipation proclamation.
1865 - Surrender
The war wasn't about slavery until two years after it started.
So to all the people who link the confederacy to racial prejudice, you're barking up the wrong tree... you're falling into a trap set by hate filled idiots, namely the KKK, who's only constant seems to be hate (they started out primarily hating Catholics).
Renaming bases because they were named after confederate generals is like hating Clydesdale's because there's some inbred redneck with no teeth and a big mouth loves drinking Budweiser.
Now with that caviet in mine I'd like to humbly point out that the Civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about states rights.
1861, April - Succession
1861 Febuary - Confederacy formed
1861 April - Suspension of habeas corpus (the right of any person under arrest to appear in person before the court, to ensure that they have not been falsely accused) blocks the succession of Maryland, which would have put Washington D.C. in Confederate territory.
1882 - Emancipation proclamation.
1865 - Surrender
The war wasn't about slavery until two years after it started.
So to all the people who link the confederacy to racial prejudice, you're barking up the wrong tree... you're falling into a trap set by hate filled idiots, namely the KKK, who's only constant seems to be hate (they started out primarily hating Catholics).
Renaming bases because they were named after confederate generals is like hating Clydesdale's because there's some inbred redneck with no teeth and a big mouth loves drinking Budweiser.
(4)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
State's Rights to do WHAT??? It is intellectually dishonest to simply stop at saying "state's rights" in the context of the Civil War without answering the question about what "state's rights" the South wanted to maintain.....which in a large part, was their right to determine if they wanted to maintain slavery (which they did).
And to say it only became about slavery 2 years after the start of the war displays a lacxk of understanding of American history. What started the whole road to war happened well before 1861 going all the way back to at least the Missouri Compromise of 1820 (if not to the founding of the country). And slavery WAS the main issue of contention because admitting free or slave states would shift the balance of votes in Congress. The South, which was heavily agricultural (and particularly dependent upon cotton), absolutely needed slavery at the time to maintain their economy as cotton is heavily manpower intensive to grow as a cash crop. If free, non-slave states were admitted to the Union, the fear was that Congress would have enough votes to pass anti-slavery laws, effectively destroying the Southern economy and "Southern way of life". Granted this would only really affect the minority patrician planter class (as others pointed out less than 6% of the Southern population). But they were essentially Southern aristocracy, and as the ruling class in the South, their opinions and beliefs set policy in the South.
What drove the South to finally Secede was that they saw the writing on the wall with the election of Lincoln, which would sway the balance of power and setting of policy to the North's favor. Lincoln may not have been a rabid abolitionist, but he was not against it either. Slavery was a main issue that the Founding Fathers chose to defer on. For them maintaining the status quo was essential for getting the nation started....but neither did they provide any further guidance on how to resolve the issue as they themselves were split on the issue. The nation going to war over the issues surrounding slavery was pretty much inevitable.
And to say it only became about slavery 2 years after the start of the war displays a lacxk of understanding of American history. What started the whole road to war happened well before 1861 going all the way back to at least the Missouri Compromise of 1820 (if not to the founding of the country). And slavery WAS the main issue of contention because admitting free or slave states would shift the balance of votes in Congress. The South, which was heavily agricultural (and particularly dependent upon cotton), absolutely needed slavery at the time to maintain their economy as cotton is heavily manpower intensive to grow as a cash crop. If free, non-slave states were admitted to the Union, the fear was that Congress would have enough votes to pass anti-slavery laws, effectively destroying the Southern economy and "Southern way of life". Granted this would only really affect the minority patrician planter class (as others pointed out less than 6% of the Southern population). But they were essentially Southern aristocracy, and as the ruling class in the South, their opinions and beliefs set policy in the South.
What drove the South to finally Secede was that they saw the writing on the wall with the election of Lincoln, which would sway the balance of power and setting of policy to the North's favor. Lincoln may not have been a rabid abolitionist, but he was not against it either. Slavery was a main issue that the Founding Fathers chose to defer on. For them maintaining the status quo was essential for getting the nation started....but neither did they provide any further guidance on how to resolve the issue as they themselves were split on the issue. The nation going to war over the issues surrounding slavery was pretty much inevitable.
(0)
(0)
SPC David Hannaman
Yes, the divisive issue of slavery was a main contributor, here's a pretty decent article about other contributing factors.
http://www.aboutnorthgeorgia.com/ang/Causes_of_the_Civil_War
It seems the more things change the more they stay the same.
http://www.aboutnorthgeorgia.com/ang/Causes_of_the_Civil_War
It seems the more things change the more they stay the same.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
No, leave the names they are a part of our history as both an Army and a nation.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
No people need to read more history. Something is always going to offend somebody.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google