Posted on 05/24/2022 5:14:23 AM PDT by CodeJockey
FORT BRAGG, N.C. — Sources tell WRAL News a proposed new name for Fort Bragg will be announced on Tuesday. (5/24/22)
The Naming Commission is expected to make the announcement at 2 p.m. and answer questions.
Fort Bragg is named for Gen. Braxton Bragg, who served in the Confederate army and owned a plantation where people were enslaved.
Last year, Congress voted to mandate that military installations named after Confederate figures or sympathizers be renamed by 2023.
The other bases that will be renamed include:
Fort Benning, Ga.
Fort Gordon, Ga.
Fort Hood, Texas
Fort A.P. Hill, Va.
Fort Lee, Va.
Fort Pickett, Va.
Fort Polk, La.
Fort Rucker, Ala.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
>> George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were “insurrectionists.” <<
I must’ve missed something... could you point me to where in Britain Fort Washington and Fort Jefferson are? See, we won that war. And we did so in large part by convincing overseas allies that we were legally, morally and ethically correct.
It’s going to be generic stuff like “Independence” and “Liberty” and “Freedom.”
and “Courage.” You forgot “Courage.”
EASY for any of us to be a Monday Morning Quarterback-—even looking at a Civil War.
And we did so in large part by convincing overseas allies that we were legally, morally and ethically correct.
All 13 states were slave holding states. What part was "morally and ethically correct?"
How is this different from "four score and seven years" later?
Major Robert Anderson and his men were stationed at Fort Moultrie. When Anderson decided to leave, they spiked and burned the cannons at Moultrie, kidnapped a ship's captain and then forced him in the middle of the night to sail them to the unfinished fort Sumter then under construction.
This was the first aggressive act of the war.
The Confederacy attacked the North in the process of leaving, still outranking the Invasion of Kiev as the dumbest-ass thing ever done in military history!
In early April of 1861, Lincoln ordered a fleet of warships to attack the confederates around Ft. Sumter if they did not cooperate.
*THAT* was the act which started the war.
Article is saying Congress will make the final naming decision by 2023.
Brandon will push this through during his last full year.
This is what Trump said on his FB page before he was banned on that platform...
It has been suggested that we should rename as many as 10 of our Legendary Military Bases, such as Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Fort Hood in Texas, Fort Benning in Georgia, etc. These Monumental and very Powerful Bases have become part of a Great American Heritage, and a history of Winning, Victory, and Freedom.
The United States of America trained and deployed our HEROES on these Hallowed Grounds, and won two World Wars. Therefore, my Administration will not even consider the renaming of these Magnificent and Fabled Military Installations. Our history as the Greatest Nation in the World will not be tampered with. Respect our Military!
Trump is the best president of my lifetime.
Fort Marx
>> Major Robert Anderson and his men were stationed at Fort Moultrie. When Anderson decided to leave, they spiked and burned the cannons at Moultrie, kidnapped a ship’s captain and then forced him in the middle of the night to sail them to the unfinished fort Sumter then under construction.
>> This was the first aggressive act of the war.<<<
LOL! Major Anderson was a Kentucky slave owner acting on the orders of a superior (forget the name) who would join the insurrection a few months later. Oh, big act of war: moving your troops to a defensible position after insurrections publicly declare their intention to capture it and your incumbent position!
>> In early April of 1861, Lincoln ordered a fleet of warships to attack the confederates around Ft. Sumter if they did not cooperate. *THAT* was the act which started the war.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! HO HO HO HO!!! HA HA HA HA HA!!!
Lincoln wrote to Virginia, asking whether by abandoning all U.S. forts in the deep south, would prevent Virginia from seceding. Virginia said, “no.” Lincoln then sent SUPPLY SHIPS to Ft Sumter to enable the troops there while negotiations continued, notifying S.C. Governor Pickens this was their sole purpose. This is when the Confederacy attacked.
See, those Southern gentlemen were so like the Aztecs: they knew that their society was built on absolutely abominable evil, and their only hope was to export slaves to the West. The election of Lincoln didn’t mean the North was about to abolish slavery, despite Lincoln’s personal desires to see slavery abolished. It mean the Western territories would likely be admitted as Free States. And that self-determination not to participate in such evil is what the South couldn’t stand. So they attacked the North so as to secure their liberty or even continue in their own oppression of half of their people, but to impose this trap upon a further people, so when, as they believed, God’s judgment would rise up on them by the hands of their tormented subjects, it would be a more distant people that such vengeance — a vengeance that was in their own eyes holy, divine and just — would be enacted upon first.
Fort Courage
for General Sam Courage
Fictitious General from “F Troop”
“The reason behind the names was to sew the country back together after the war and get southerners to join the military.”
Exactly correct. This is why I stated earlier that the era of reconciliation is over. This is also why our recruitment levels are the lowest they have been since WWII.
“Fort Liberty”
They should be true to their ideology and call it “Fort Obedience”.
As the great-great-great-grandson of a Confederate veteran, I oppose this. But it is a) too late to stop it, and b) We the People have no power over this illegitimate government. So, it will be done. Nothing we can do about it.
I’m opposed to it also.
That "superior" would be President Buchanan who sent him a letter ordering him not to relinquish the forts under his control.
Oh, big act of war: moving your troops to a defensible position after insurrections publicly declare their intention to capture it and your incumbent position!
This is incorrect. The Secretary of war had been telling the people of South Carolina that all forts in their domain would be turned over to them. There was no "insurrection."
Lincoln then sent SUPPLY SHIPS to Ft Sumter
No, he f***ing did *NOT* send "supply ships." He sent f***ing WARSHIPS.
The Powhatan, the Pocahontas, the Pawnee, the Harriet Lane, the Yankee, and he also sent the Baltic as a troop carrier and munitions carrier. Here is a picture of one of his "supply ships."
See, those Southern gentlemen were so like the Aztecs: they knew that their society was built on absolutely abominable evil, ...
You are brainwashed. Abraham Lincoln called for the passage of the Corwin Amendment which would have made slavery permanently legal in the United States.
In other words, this great evil of which you are complaining was Lincoln's official policy before the war.
Why? The Slaves produced 72% of the total revenue for the Federal government in 1860. Lincoln knew this and wanted that slave money to continue coming in.
...and their only hope was to export slaves to the West.
More brainwashing. It was absolutely impossible to establish any large slave presence in any of the western territories. Slaves were valued at approximately $100,000 dollars in modern currency, and there was nothing in the arid west that could produce a profit sufficient to make it worthwhile to send slaves into the west.
Far more money could be made with them by keeping them in the cotton growing region of the nation and making money from cotton.
You couldn't grow cotton in the west back in the 1860s. It is now only possible to grow it in the southern most western states with huge investments in modern irrigation systems. These systems didn't exist in 1860 and would exist for at least another 40 years afterward.
It mean the Western territories would likely be admitted as Free States. And that self-determination not to participate in such evil is what the South couldn’t stand.
This is more brainwashing, but i've already given you enough to process and so I don't want to pile on more before you've had a chance to digest what you've been told so far.
You have been taught a false history. We have all been taught false history. I only learned the truth a few years ago.
Bragg was a crappy general. Let pick a good one.
Fort Patton
Fort MacArthur
>> The Secretary of war had been telling the people of South Carolina that all forts in their domain would be turned over to them. There was no “insurrection.” <<
So, a SecDef speaking out of turn is justification for the wholesale slaughter of tens of thousands of people?
>> No, he f***ing did *NOT* send “supply ships.” He sent f***ing WARSHIPS. <<
You can’t seriously be so ridiculous as to expect that supply ships aren’t defended when sailing into hostile territory?
>> You are brainwashed. Abraham Lincoln called for the passage of the Corwin Amendment which would have made slavery permanently legal in the United States. <<
Lincoln did NOT call for the Corwin amendment. He consented not to oppose it, on the grounds that it had no effect on the Constitution, which, as a conservative, he believed respected states’ rights. This, thus, provides no counter-evidence to all the other positions he took to limit the spread of slavery. You’re only pointing out the utter folly of the neoconfederate insanity about “states’ rights.” The reality is it was the Confederacy which wanted to force slavery on the new territories, and enlist every state in helping it maintain its obscene oppression.
>> Why? The Slaves produced 72% of the total revenue for the Federal government in 1860. Lincoln knew this and wanted that slave money to continue coming in. <<
Well, Lincoln didn’t oppose the tariff reductions of 1857... and soon-to-be confederate states only generated half of the customs, so nonsense.
>> More brainwashing... Slaves were valued at approximately $100,000 dollars in modern currency, and there was nothing in the arid west that could produce a profit sufficient to make it worthwhile to send slaves into the west.<<
You’re arguing that they what they plain and simply did, because you don’t believe it served their economoic interests, ignoring the simple fact that they fought like bloody Hell to force Utah, New Mexico (including Arizona), Kansas, Nebraska (including Wyoming) and California to become slave states. In fact, that was the real proximal cause of the civil war: the expectation that with the election of Lincoln, they couldn’t expand slavery into the West.
>> This is more brainwashing, but i’ve already given you enough to process and so I don’t want to pile on more before you’ve had a chance to digest what you’ve been told so far. <<
Wait... you’re leaving now, after squabbling over Anderson? (I only meant to assert he wasn’t some Northern zealot with no respect for the South. By the way, I forget the name of his superior, but I wasn’t referring to Lincoln. Instead, it was a general who ended up fighting for the Confederacy. Again... no Northern zealot.
Ft George Floyd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.