US Bases Named After Confederates

Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,759
While the bases should never have been named what they are (except Fort Lee), there is much more nuance. Does their serving the CSA negate what they did as US officers? Should we extend the cancel so far as to not teach their tactics at the academies?
 






Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
18,534
While the bases should never have been named what they are (except Fort Lee), there is much more nuance. Does their serving the CSA negate what they did as US officers? Should we extend the cancel so far as to not teach their tactics at the academies?
Did they name them what they did to throw the confederates a bone and keep the United States united?
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,759
Did they name them what they did to throw the confederates a bone and keep the United States united?
No, unless they were throwing bones during WWs 1 and 2. And it's these United States. Not the.
 






Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
18,534
No, unless they were throwing bones during WWs 1 and 2. And it's these United States. Not the.
I was partially right...

Four of the bases were established at the start of World War I, and the others at the start of World War II – times when the Army was in recruitment mode and appealing to young white men in the South. This was an era when Southern states promoted the “Lost Cause” ideology: that the Confederacy’s rebellion was an honorable struggle for the Southern way of life and that the “War of Northern Aggression” was over states’ rights, not slavery. From their perspective at the time, memorializing Confederate generals seemed reasonable.
Army officials have said they named the bases in the spirit of reconciliation, not division. They viewed the Confederate generals as tragic heroes, not treasonable racists.


They should know..
About the United States
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,759
I was partially right...

Four of the bases were established at the start of World War I, and the others at the start of World War II – times when the Army was in recruitment mode and appealing to young white men in the South. This was an era when Southern states promoted the “Lost Cause” ideology: that the Confederacy’s rebellion was an honorable struggle for the Southern way of life and that the “War of Northern Aggression” was over states’ rights, not slavery. From their perspective at the time, memorializing Confederate generals seemed reasonable.
Army officials have said they named the bases in the spirit of reconciliation, not division. They viewed the Confederate generals as tragic heroes, not treasonable racists.


They should know..
About the United States
While that may be mostly true, Ft. Lee was established during the Civil war, then commandeered and retained by the US. Want to answer the larger question?
 






Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
18,534
While that may be mostly true, Ft. Lee was established during the Civil war, then commandeered and retained by the US. Want to answer the larger question?
What’s that?
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,759
What’s that?
I guess there are two, actually. I know comprehension is hard for you so I'll repeat.
Does their serving the CSA negate what they did as US officers? Should we extend the cancel so far as to not teach their tactics at the academies?
 






Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
18,534
I guess there are two, actually. I know comprehension is hard for you so I'll repeat.
Does their serving the CSA negate what they did as US officers? Should we extend the cancel so far as to not teach their tactics at the academies?
I’m not for them being renamed. I’m not for cancel culture at all. We are part of our history.
 






Lurker

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,759
I’m not for them being renamed. I’m not for cancel culture at all. We are part of our history.
Doesn't answer either question. I'll take it as a no on both, but you didn't say it.
 






Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,023
Support of a confederate flag, soldier or officer is a support of treason against America. Because the confederates were TRAITORS against the United States. Why should the US, recognize traitors that tuened against them? Logically speaking that is...
 






Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
18,534
Support of a confederate flag, soldier or officer is a support of treason against America. Because the confederates were TRAITORS against the United States. Why should the US, recognize traitors that tuened against them? Logically speaking that is...
I don’t think most people know who the forts are named after anyway..
 






polymoog

Star
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
4,352
Because the confederates were TRAITORS against the United States.
totally disagree. they had every right to secede.

im a states rights person-- if you talk to a federalist, theyll feel differently. i want the power of the people to remain in the smallest governing group possible; the more local, the better. big government leads to globalism/NWO control.

massachusetts almost seceded during the jefferson administration. it would also have been completely legal. jefferson himself said that they "were free to dissolve this Union". states should never yield their sovereign status to a federal government. the ability to secede is a check on the federal government when it exceeds its powers given to it in the constitution. even hamilton believed secession of a state against the federal government was acceptable.
 






Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,023
totally disagree. they had every right to secede.

im a states rights person-- if you talk to a federalist, theyll feel differently. i want the power of the people to remain in the smallest governing group possible; the more local, the better. big government leads to globalism/NWO control.

massachusetts almost seceded during the jefferson administration. it would also have been completely legal. jefferson himself said that they "were free to dissolve this Union". states should never yield their sovereign status to a federal government. the ability to secede is a check on the federal government when it exceeds its powers given to it in the constitution. even hamilton believed secession of a state against the federal government was acceptable.
Your or my feelings on states rights are irrelevant. At the end of the day the question remains the same. Why would the US COMMEMORATE traitors who turned against their leadership? You think China will commemorate Hong Kong resistance leaders after a failed attempt at separation? Throw up statues of the resistance leaders? Put their flag of resistance right next to their own? Name their army bases after them? You think Putin would do that with anybody turning against him? You think Trump would commemorate liberals who turned against his leadership? It doesnt matter if you agree or disagree with why they resisted. The fact is they turned their back on the United States and that is treason...
 






polymoog

Star
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
4,352
Why would the US COMMEMORATE traitors who turned against their leadership?
those who tried to secede from the union were great patriots. why? because they trusted and believed in the constitution enough to flex their rights and opt out. real patriots respect and live by the constitution and simply blindly follow the federal government.
the north shouldve let them go as it was their right to do so (and if you look into it, a lot of people in the north were ok with it. those editors in the newspapers at the time who thought it was their right to do so were silenced and JAILED for saying so by lincoln).
and you say "their leadership". indeed, who IS the leadership? certainly not the federal government! states ultimately have the power and are free to dissolve their association with a federal government which is not in their interest. thats how the constitution was written. this applies to the US only, so what china or russia/putin do has no bearing on this.


"to secure these rights [life, liberty, pursuit of happiness], governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed... whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government."

-declaration of independence

"any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. this is most valuable, a most sacred right-- a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world."

-abe lincoln, jan 1848
 






Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,023
Yet, all had citizenship restored, most received a pension, some are even buried at fucking ARLINGTON. But hey, cling to your traitor bs.
Yea, Im pointing out how backwards it is that they allowed a traitorous flag to be flown side by side with the American flag. Pretty ridiculous if you think about it.
 






Top