[Newsbot]

Title: Senate Bill to Purge Confederate Names from U.S. Military Could Affect Two Navy Ships
Category: Military
Posted By: Scape
Date: 2020-06-15 20:47:32

[Freakinoldguy]

Rather than pissing every sailor in the Navy off by renaming the politically incorrect ships it would be far easier to leave the names in place and then going forward just stop naming their warships after anything that offends the perpetually butt hurt. Although that might be tough because the goal posts keep getting moved.

But, if they wanted to do that they'd have to appoint a permanent panel of the self righteous non Department of Defense personnel who could then approve or disapprove of the names chosen based on the current whims of the offended.

Although it might be tough having a Navy completely comprised of ships named. "Boaty McBoatface".

[CharlesAnthony]

The dream of state sovereignty will be crushed and crushed and crushed until the only survivors left will be those who thrive upon sucking federal/foreign cock or until morale improves --- whichever cums first.

Enter O'Bungole as NewWorldUnitedNations Supreme Messiah (with TrudeauJunior holding his cape) to save the faithful followers!

[BartSimpson]

This bullshit is getting crazy. The fucking Millennial shitstains in Boston are actually demanding the removal of a statue of an abolitionist.

[Tricks]

It has always struck me as odd to have named military installations/equipment after literal enemies of the United States of America. Would you want a ship called the USS Eisenhower if he resigned his position and defected to Japan or Germany? Seems odd to me.

You've got stuff named after people who only ever served against the Union. It would be like naming a base after a British General. At least Maury contributed to Oceanography.

[llama66]

Someone defaced the 54th Regiment memorial, apparently by the BLM movement.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... ston-54th/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/shaw- ... r-BB14TtDK

[llama66]

Tricks Tricks:

It has always struck me as odd to have named military installations/equipment after literal enemies of the United States of America. Would you want a ship called the USS Eisenhower if he resigned his position and defected to Japan or Germany? Seems odd to me.

You've got stuff named after people who only ever served against the Union. It would be like naming a base after a British General. At least Maury contributed to Oceanography.

USS Horatio Nelson has a nice ring to it

[Freakinoldguy]

Tricks Tricks:

It has always struck me as odd to have named military installations/equipment after literal enemies of the United States of America. Would you want a ship called the USS Eisenhower if he resigned his position and defected to Japan or Germany? Seems odd to me.

You've got stuff named after people who only ever served against the Union. It would be like naming a base after a British General. At least Maury contributed to Oceanography.

It was done in the spirit of reconciliation which is what Lincoln wanted. This isn't a foreign country we're talking about here. The war was the United States of America against the Confederate States of America. All players in the Civil War were Americans no matter what the revisionists of history want you to believe.

The Union Gov't was smart enough to allow the Confederacy some shred of dignity and a bit of pride despite the fact that they'd been bested on the field of battle. It was a family dispute which makes it different from Germany or Japan and if you're smart you don't destroy your own family members just because you had a fight even one as violent and deadly as the civil war.

Little did they know their kindness and compassion for the defeated would become an excuse by some to erase or rewrite their own countries history.

[Thanos]

I guess there's a tad of a grey area with the Chancellorsville with it being the name of a town instead of a person, even though the captain and crew should be forced to knock it off with the pro-Confederate antics. Good thing none of the ships are named after Confederate officers the way the army bases are though. Being a black person in the military and having to serve at those bases must be as uncomfortable and oppressive as if any German Jew serving in their military today was based at a German army base named Fort Heydrich or Naval Base Eichmann.

Just because the bad guys don't see themselves that way during their own lifetimes doesn't mean that history can't or shouldn't judge them harshly. The Confederacy was an obscenity, not just in trying to preserve slavery through rebellious war but afterwards, if they'd won, to also spread it across the remainder of the unsettled continent. Any glorification of it has long since gone past it's expiry date for acceptability. Keep in mind what Ulysses Grant thought at Appomattox when he accepted the Southern surrender - Robert Lee's gentlemanly bearing and dignity did not erase the reality of what that war was all about:

$1:

"I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse".

[Tricks]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

It was done in the spirit of reconciliation which is what Lincoln wanted. This isn't a foreign country we're talking about here. The war was the United States of America against the Confederate States of America. All players in the Civil War were Americans no matter what the revisionists of history want you to believe.

I never said they weren't Americans. I said that they were the enemy of the United States of America. Is that not true?

$1:

The Union Gov't was smart enough to allow the Confederacy some shred of dignity and a bit of pride despite the fact that they'd been bested on the field of battle. It was a family dispute which makes it different from Germany or Japan and if you're smart you don't destroy your own family members just because you had a fight even one as violent and deadly as the civil war.

So where are the ships and bases named after British Generals? Just as much a "family dispute" as the civil war was. Where is Fort Cornwallis? The USS Carleton? Better yet, Camp Benedict. At the time of the American Revolution it was British subjects fighting British subjects. Don't they get any reconciliation? Or is it only slave owners that get that?

Additionally, I find it very hard to believe it had anything to do with reconciliation, considering the time at which many of these places were established. Lets look at the top 10.
Fort A.P Hill - 1941
Fort Lee - (previously Camp Lee) Built 1917
Fort Pickett - 1942
Fort Gordon - 1941 <- That one was literally the head of the Georgia Ku Klux Klan.
Fort Benning - 1909 <- He ONLY served in the Confederate army, and did so because of his promotion of Slavery.
Fort Rucker - 1942 <- Another Klan member
Camp Beauregard - 1917
Fort Polk - 1941
Fort Hood - 1942
Fort Bragg - 1918

So the earliest was over 40 years after the end of the civil war. The majority were just shy of 80 years later. Are you telling me that the south was still upset about being told they couldn't own people 80 years later?

No, it was done because when drafts happened, bases were built largely in the South, and they had to appease racist politicians and locals. It's a by-product of Jim Crow laws. Anyone claiming it had anything to do with reconciliation is just as much apart of revising history as they claim people tearing down statues are.

I also find it odd that reconciliation to the south was more important than any sort of reconciliation to the black community writ large. The fact that naming Fort after a slave owner (and shitty general) was far more important than allowing black people the right to vote. So much so it took almost another 50 years,

Tell me, who do you think was more deserving of "reconciliation"?

$1:

Little did they know their kindness and compassion for the defeated would become an excuse by some to erase or rewrite their own countries history.

I'm sorry, who is rewriting history here? Taking their name off a ship or a base doesn't change history. Infact I'd argue that calling attention to the fact that, for example, Bragg owned over 100 slaves and was largely considered to be a shitty General by historians is more re-enforcing history, rather than re-writing it. That calling attention to the fact that Benning never actually served under a United States of America flag and was instrumental in bringing several other states into the war specifically because of the abolition of slavery. Sorry, that's not re-writing history. That's fucking teaching it to a country who no longer remembers it.

And, to be quite frank, the USA can't make any sort of claim to standing by their history when it seems like Americans needed to learn about Tulsa from a Watchmen TV show. How many Americans under the age of 40 know who Ruby Bridges is? Do you think it's acceptable that Bragg or Benning are closer to household names than Ruby Bridges?

[Scape]

USS Adolph Hitler or USS Osma Bin Laden

Has a nice ring to it right?

I have zero tolerance to the revisionist south. Fuck them and the Jim Crow Stars and bars along with it.

[CharlesAnthony]

Tricks Tricks:

It has always struck me as odd to have named military installations/equipment after literal enemies of the United States of America.

You think that is odd?
What do you think about Canuckletards telling Ameritards what to do????

[Freakinoldguy]

Tricks Tricks:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

It was done in the spirit of reconciliation which is what Lincoln wanted. This isn't a foreign country we're talking about here. The war was the United States of America against the Confederate States of America. All players in the Civil War were Americans no matter what the revisionists of history want you to believe.

I never said they weren't Americans. I said that they were the enemy of the United States of America. Is that not true?

$1:

The Union Gov't was smart enough to allow the Confederacy some shred of dignity and a bit of pride despite the fact that they'd been bested on the field of battle. It was a family dispute which makes it different from Germany or Japan and if you're smart you don't destroy your own family members just because you had a fight even one as violent and deadly as the civil war.

So where are the ships and bases named after British Generals? Just as much a "family dispute" as the civil war was. Where is Fort Cornwallis? The USS Carleton? Better yet, Camp Benedict. At the time of the American Revolution it was British subjects fighting British subjects. Don't they get any reconciliation? Or is it only slave owners that get that?

Additionally, I find it very hard to believe it had anything to do with reconciliation, considering the time at which many of these places were established. Lets look at the top 10.
Fort A.P Hill - 1941
Fort Lee - (previously Camp Lee) Built 1917
Fort Pickett - 1942
Fort Gordon - 1941 <- That one was literally the head of the Georgia Ku Klux Klan.
Fort Benning - 1909 <- He ONLY served in the Confederate army, and did so because of his promotion of Slavery.
Fort Rucker - 1942 <- Another Klan member
Camp Beauregard - 1917
Fort Polk - 1941
Fort Hood - 1942
Fort Bragg - 1918

So the earliest was over 40 years after the end of the civil war. The majority were just shy of 80 years later. Are you telling me that the south was still upset about being told they couldn't own people 80 years later?

No, it was done because when drafts happened, bases were built largely in the South, and they had to appease racist politicians and locals. It's a by-product of Jim Crow laws. Anyone claiming it had anything to do with reconciliation is just as much apart of revising history as they claim people tearing down statues are.

I also find it odd that reconciliation to the south was more important than any sort of reconciliation to the black community writ large. The fact that naming Fort after a slave owner (and shitty general) was far more important than allowing black people the right to vote. So much so it took almost another 50 years,

Tell me, who do you think was more deserving of "reconciliation"?

$1:

Little did they know their kindness and compassion for the defeated would become an excuse by some to erase or rewrite their own countries history.

I'm sorry, who is rewriting history here? Taking their name off a ship or a base doesn't change history. Infact I'd argue that calling attention to the fact that, for example, Bragg owned over 100 slaves and was largely considered to be a shitty General by historians is more re-enforcing history, rather than re-writing it. That calling attention to the fact that Benning neverA actually served under a United States of America flag and was instrumental in bringing several other states into the war specifically because of the abolition of slavery. Sorry, that's not re-writing history. That's fucking teaching it to a country who no longer remembers it.

And, to be quite frank, the USA can't make any sort of claim to standing by their history when it seems like Americans needed to learn about Tulsa from a Watchmen TV show. How many Americans under the age of 40 know who Ruby Bridges is? Do you think it's acceptable that Bragg or Benning are closer to household names than Ruby Bridges?

It's not just the taking of the names off ships and bases, it's the systematic destruction of everything the south did prior to and during the Civil War that's the problem. And removing statues in the name of appeasement because someone is now offended isn't going to change history or make reparations to the blacks.

The naming of these ships was done by the politicians of the day to honour the courage and sacrifice of a defeated enemy. Was it right? At the time yes, now apparently since the goal posts have been moved, no.

But an interesting note is that there were likely thousands and thousands of black sailors soldiers and airmen who served in ships and bases that were named after Confederate icons with no ill effects and for the record I've met some of them and they seemed not to be bothered by the fact that their unit was named after a Confederate General, Battle or some other Southern location.

The Union allowed the south to keep it's autonomy long before the draft for a reason. It was done to ensure that the South had a vested interest in the Union which would never have happened if the North had destroyed the culture, heritage and history of the South. That methodology even worked with the other two countries you mentioned in your first post. A silk glove works alot better than a mailed fist.

Now that legacy of forgiveness and honour among a family torn apart by war is being ridiculed and taken away by people who mostly have no understanding of why it was done in the first place. So, it's like I originally said. Fuck the PC crowd and their continual insanity. Why not just let the two ships maintain their names, change the names of the Army Bases and not name any more ships or bases after Confederate icons. Then, when these vessels are decommissioned stop the practice if a majority of Americans find it offensive. That way they can change the convention for how any future ships are named and everyone should be happy.

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... nfederacy/

And for the record the Army is willing to rename the bases to appease the offended but my guess is the US Gov't could change the names of every ship, every base, every town and every other thing offends these people and it still wouldn't be enough to placate the lynch mob who's now trying to change history.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/maga ... names.html

[Tricks]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

It's not just the taking of the names off ships and bases, it's the systematic destruction of everything the south did prior to and during the Civil War that's the problem.

Bullshit. Taking a name off a base doesn't destroy jack shit. That's hyperbolic at best. Anyone who wants to know what a piece of shit General Benning was can look it up at any time. Though I'm sure they teach how great of a person he was in history class in the south. Erasing history, don't make me laugh.

$1:

And removing statues in the name of appeasement because someone is now offended isn't going to change history or make reparations to the blacks.

Where are you getting this tripe that they're trying to change history? The only people who are trying to change history are the ones who are trying to convince everyone that leaving a Klan Grand Master's name on a base is a good thing.

Why is it that when the exceedingly fucked up things someone did is brought forward, it's changing history, but when it's swept under the rug it's not?

$1:

But, if appeasement is fine for blacks who have no longer have ties to the south why isn't honouring one of your own acceptable for whites who still have ties and feelings for the south? I didn't realise there was a time limit that mandated white people to stop having feeling for their own history?

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think we should be supporting people connecting to their racist slave owning past. I feel like that's a part of their history that they would want to NOT draw a line to.

$1:

The naming of these ships was done by the politicians of the day to honour the courage and sacrifice of a defeated enemy. Was it right? At the time yes, now apparently since the goal posts have been moved no.

No, they weren't. They were named that way appease racists in the south during Jim Crow. Any one who says differently is peddling revisionist bullshit.

$1:

But an interesting note is that there were likely thousands and thousands of black sailors soldiers and airmen who served in ships and bases that were named after Confederates with no ill effects and for the record I've met some of them and they seemed not to be bothered by the fact that their unit was named after a Confederate General, Battle or some other Southern location.

And I'm sure there are just as many, if not more, black soldiers and sailors that feel like shit every time they have to pass by a sign of some guy who actively considered them to be less than human. I wonder how Jews would feel serving at a base called Fort Himmler. Perhaps Camp Goering?

$1:

The Union allowed the south to keep it's autonomy long before the draft for a reason. It was also done to ensure that the South had a vested interest in the Union which would never have happened if the North had destroyed the culture, heritage and history of the South. That methodology even worked with the other two countries you mentioned in your first post. A silk glove works alot better than a mailed fist.

Are you actually attempting to compare the fact that we helped Germany and Japan rebuild to actively honouring despicable pieces of shit? Tell you what, go advocate for a ship named after Eichmann and let me know how that goes. You can't honestly see that as a comparison, right?

$1:

But now that legacy of forgiveness and honour among a family torn apart by war is being ridiculed and taken away by people who mostly have no understanding of why it was done in the first place.

Spare me the sanctimony. If you honestly believe that these bases were named this way as reconciliation for the civil war, and not just to pander to the south to get more troops to sign up, I have a bridge to sell you.

I see you conveniently ignored the fact that no such honour was paid to the British after the American revolution though.

$1:

So, it's like I originally said. Fuck the PC crowd and their insanity.

And fuck people who think it's legitimate to defend Bases being named after Klansman. Or someone who said this horseshit:

$1:

What was the reason that induced Georgia to take the step of secession? This reason may be summed up in one single proposition. It was a conviction, a deep conviction on the part of Georgia, that a separation from the North was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery.... If things are allowed to go on as they are, it is certain that slavery is to be abolished. By the time the North shall have attained the power, the black race will be in a large majority, and then we will have black governors, black legislatures, black juries, black everything. Is it to be supposed that the white race will stand for that? It is not a supposable case.... War will break out everywhere like hidden fire from the earth, and it is probable that the white race, being superior in every respect, may push the other back.... We will be overpowered and our men will be compelled to wander like vagabonds all over the earth; and as for our women, the horrors of their state we cannot contemplate in imagination. That is the fate which abolition will bring upon the white race.... We will be completely exterminated, and the land will be left in the possession of the blacks, and then it will go back to a wilderness and become another Africa.... Suppose they elevated Charles Sumner to the presidency? Suppose they elevated Fred Douglass, your escaped slave, to the presidency? What would be your position in such an event? I say give me pestilence and famine sooner than that.

— Henry Lewis Benning, Speech of Henry Benning to the Virginia Convention, February 18, 1861.

That's white supremacy. And you're celebrating it.

$1:

Why not just let the two ships maintain their names, not name any more ships or bases after Confederate icons and then, when these vessels are decommissioned stop the practice if a majority of Americans find is so offensive. Then, they can change the convention for how any future ships are named and everyone should be happy.

You really think Fort Bragg or Fort Benning are going anywhere? That those bases are going to be decommissioned? So while the suggestion works for ships, it does nothing for the bases.

$1:

And for the record the Army is willing to rename the bases to appease the offended but my guess is the US Gov't could change the names of every ship, every base, every town and every other thing offends these people and it still wouldn't be enough to placate the lynch mob who's now trying to erase history.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/maga ... names.html

Explain to me what history is being erased. Clearly spell this out. I don't think you know what that phrase means and your just parroting nonsense from stupid right wing asstards. So lets see how history is being erased by removing a name from a base.

[rickc]

Scape Scape:

USS Adolph Hitler or USS Osma Bin Laden

Has a nice ring to it right?

I have zero tolerance to the revisionist south. Fuck them and the Jim Crow Stars and bars along with it.

How is the south revising anything? Those military bases are federal installations. The federal government decides what the name of the installation will be. The locals have absolutely no say in anything involving a federal military installation. Eminent domain was used to take property away from citizens to build those installations in many cases. The fact that land in the southeast was much cheaper than land in the northeast speaks to the reason that so many more military installations were built in the south, than the northeast. It was much cheaper for the federal government to take the land at prevailing cost. No locals were consulted about the names for the federal military installations as far as I can see.