Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JonLP24

(29,322 posts)
Mon Jun 8, 2020, 09:15 PM Jun 2020

US Army open to considering removal of Confederate leaders' names from bases

(CNN)US Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Secretary of Defense Mark Esper are said to be open to holding a "bipartisan conversation" about renaming nearly a dozen major bases and installations that bear the names of Confederate military commanders, according to an Army official.

The official said that though McCarthy believes he has the potential authority to unilaterally rename the installations, there would need to be consultation with the White House, Congress and state and local governments.

In a statement Monday, the Army confirmed that McCarthy and Esper are "open to a bipartisan discussion on the topic" but added that "each Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a significant place in our military history."

"Accordingly, the historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies," the statement said.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/06/08/politics/us-army-considering-renaming-bases/index.html

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
US Army open to considering removal of Confederate leaders' names from bases (Original Post) JonLP24 Jun 2020 OP
How about town names? demosincebirth Jun 2020 #1
Ft. Bragg, CA was named in the 1850s Retrograde Jun 2020 #7
Regardless, he was a traitor demosincebirth Jun 2020 #11
Good, it's about time PJMcK Jun 2020 #2
How is the confederacy still a thing? Initech Jun 2020 #3
Why would a U.S. military base be named after a traitor? dflprincess Jun 2020 #4
+ struggle4progress Jun 2020 #5
Ft Bragg Captain_New_York Jun 2020 #6
Fort Hood is the most egregious. GulfCoast66 Jun 2020 #8
What if Commander in Chief rejects the idea? keithbvadu2 Jun 2020 #9
Just do it! LiberalFighter Jun 2020 #10

PJMcK

(22,048 posts)
2. Good, it's about time
Mon Jun 8, 2020, 09:32 PM
Jun 2020

To glorify the leaders of a treasonous attempt to destroy the United States makes no sense at all!

The statues, the schools and forts that are named after these traitors and any other iconography of the Confederacy is antithetical to the principles of our country. And that stupid flag is the sign of losers and traitors! Why in the world would anyone fly it?

None of that shit should ever have happened and it's another reason-- among many-- why we're still dealing with the same old racial conflicts.

dflprincess

(28,082 posts)
4. Why would a U.S. military base be named after a traitor?
Mon Jun 8, 2020, 10:04 PM
Jun 2020

I don't understand what there is to "consider".

Captain_New_York

(161 posts)
6. Ft Bragg
Mon Jun 8, 2020, 10:28 PM
Jun 2020

I never understood why one of our most important army installation is named after this guy who not only was a traitor but incompetent general. Go figure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braxton_Bragg

GulfCoast66

(11,949 posts)
8. Fort Hood is the most egregious.
Mon Jun 8, 2020, 11:13 PM
Jun 2020

Not only a traitor like the others, but the shittiest General to ever command an Army in North America. Or in the western world.

If people insist on naming forts after seditionist, at least pick on that did not send their entire army to be slaughtered.

keithbvadu2

(36,906 posts)
9. What if Commander in Chief rejects the idea?
Mon Jun 8, 2020, 11:19 PM
Jun 2020

What if Commander in Chief rejects the idea?

Haven't heard him say anything about the Marines new policy on Confederate symbols.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»US Army open to consideri...