Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
some of the forts, like fort hood and other, have a better representation than the original name. most dont even know who the original is. but what the fort with that name has done the last 100 years have out shine the original name
I'm glad the time is finally rolling around where it'll be finalized and over with. They never should have gotten named after Confederates anyway, but the mistake is being rectified. I got to learn about some stellar troops that I had never heard of before; I was initially irked that they didn't go with Fort Benavidez for Fort Hood, which seemed like the front-runner, but then I read up on Richard Cavazos and was mighty impressed.
The only name that I don't care for is Bragg being renamed to Fort Liberty, which is just lame. It wasn't even a choice on the initial shortlist of potential names and just seems like them wanting to stand out, while also striking me as the 82nd and other important units there not being able to come to an agreement.
Luckily for all of the Confederate-sympathizers in this thread though: no one is erasing any history. No one is going to come into your house and tear down your shrine to Braxton Bragg. The renaming of the bases are now part of those bases histories: they were named after some traitorous scumbags, some of them horribly inept and incompetent. People wised up decades later and changed the names so that black service members would not have to work and train at bases that were named in honor of people who would not have considered those service members to be human beings and fought to keep their forefathers in chains.
And who knows? Maybe when some of the old signs and stuff gets DRMOd, some of you can buy them up on the cheap for your memorabilia walls!
Quote:
Originally Posted by b29510
some of the forts, like fort hood and other, have a better representation than the original name. most dont even know who the original is. but what the fort with that name has done the last 100 years have out shine the original name
With all of the precious “history” that people talk about needing to preserve, that base didn’t even exist 100 years ago.
It’s probably a good thing that the old dudes most-triggered by the name changes are no longer in the military though. Being in the military requires good teamwork, something that the people who think ‘Well I don’t care about this issue, so that means no one else must either. After all, the only important thing to me is me’ probably don’t excel in.
It’s probably a good thing that the old dudes most-triggered by the name changes are no longer in the military though. Being in the military requires good teamwork, something that the people who think ‘Well I don’t care about this issue, so that means no one else must either. After all, the only important thing to me is me’ probably don’t excel in.
Did you finish all your thoughts? The earlier, longer post, seemed to surmise the whole picture from your perspective. And then we see another post with even more insight. “History” (in quotes as you indicated) is actually reviewed often in “team military”.
The thread started with, what’s next to name change?
.......The only name that I don't care for is Bragg being renamed to Fort Liberty, which is just lame. It wasn't even a choice on the initial shortlist of potential names and just seems like them wanting to stand out, while also striking me as the 82nd and other important units there not being able to come to an agreement.
........
It could just be a place holder until the "more deserving person" comes about.
I'm glad the time is finally rolling around where it'll be finalized and over with. They never should have gotten named after Confederates anyway, but the mistake is being rectified. I got to learn about some stellar troops that I had never heard of before; I was initially irked that they didn't go with Fort Benavidez for Fort Hood, which seemed like the front-runner, but then I read up on Richard Cavazos and was mighty impressed.
The only name that I don't care for is Bragg being renamed to Fort Liberty, which is just lame. It wasn't even a choice on the initial shortlist of potential names and just seems like them wanting to stand out, while also striking me as the 82nd and other important units there not being able to come to an agreement.
Luckily for all of the Confederate-sympathizers in this thread though: no one is erasing any history. No one is going to come into your house and tear down your shrine to Braxton Bragg. The renaming of the bases are now part of those bases histories: they were named after some traitorous scumbags, some of them horribly inept and incompetent. People wised up decades later and changed the names so that black service members would not have to work and train at bases that were named in honor of people who would not have considered those service members to be human beings and fought to keep their forefathers in chains.
And who knows? Maybe when some of the old signs and stuff gets DRMOd, some of you can buy them up on the cheap for your memorabilia walls!
With all of the precious “history” that people talk about needing to preserve, that base didn’t even exist 100 years ago.
Haven’t seen anyone expressing any Confederate sympathies. The issue we have is with all the vital issues going on with the military today, the time and expense of changing base names seems a huge waste of time. If you truly studied history of these bases then you would have understood the reasoning, at the time, for renaming the bases for Confederates. It was part of a reunification effort. Confederate generals were initially USA generals. The generals they faced on the opposite side of the battlefield were former classmates at the academy and associates in the US Army. In that era many people held a stronger allegiance to their home state than their country. It was a different era with a different mentality. This explanation isn’t a show of support for the current names. In those days changing the name of a base was fairly easy and cheap. Today it cost a fortune. This while we have issues recruiting, retention, poor base housing, and questionable drinking water safety on bases.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
