New name for Fort Hood

4,077 Views | 76 Replies | Last: 25 days ago by Dawg6
Dark_Knight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.foxnews.com/us/army-scrapping-fort-hood-renamed

Sorry, it's always going to be Ft Hood to me.
Because I'm Batman!

Vepp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not just Fort Hood.

Lobster Twins
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
OldArmyCT
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cavazos was the DCG when I commanded a company at Ft Hood, ran into him later at Ft Stewart when he was a Beltway bandit. Very focused individual who did a good job and was very fair.
JABQ04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Are there any military bases in Britain honoring traitors?
You can argue who is more deserving, but I note you don't argue for Hood.
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
74OA said:

clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Are there any military bases in Britain honoring traitors?
You can argue who is more deserving, but I note you don't argue for Hood.
Ok, for the record, I would leave it as Ft Hood. Wokeness cannot be allowed to win.

What the Brits did for naming their bases is not relevant, as they are not the US. And I do believe that ALL Soldiers from the South were given the same status as northern Soldiers by President Lincoln, so were not considered traitors after the war at all. I am sure an actual historian can talk more to that, but basically all was forgiven after the war so the country could heal and move on. Whether the Brits did it or not is not relevant to this.

Public Law 85-425 gave pensions to Confederate Soldiers at the same rate as Federal Soldiers. And it was President Andrew Jackson who pardoned all Confederate Soldiers in 1868. So, it seems like all was forgiven, but obviously not forgotten.
OldArmyCT
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Benavides was not a tanker or in the Cav. How about Ft Bragg?
Lobster Twins
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Why isn't Fort Lewis being renamed? Didn't he profit from slavery? Shall we keep going with our historical figures? I can think of some artwork that needs to be burned...money nad land that needs to be returned...we can go all day.

I don't really care about changing the names but this is meant as a stick in the eye to the southern republicans by the current administration, not as a well-thought-out plan to do things a different way.

Camp Liberty for Bragg is fine...Camp (Medal of Honor Recipient) would make me a lot happier. But I certainly don't see the point of picking random Generals who simply did their job really good and fit a political narrative...though I'm sure he was a fine man.
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OldArmyCT said:

clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Benavides was not a tanker or in the Cav. How about Ft Bragg?
No, he wasnt, but he was from Texas and a certifiable badass.
Smeghead4761
How long do you want to ignore this user?
clarythedrill said:

OldArmyCT said:

clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Benavides was not a tanker or in the Cav. How about Ft Bragg?
No, he wasnt, but he was from Texas and a certifiable badass.
For Bragg they should have gone with Ridgeway. Commanded the 82nd and XVIII Airborne Corps in WWII and 8th Army and then all UN forces in Korea. No idea why they didn't, other than they already had Eisenhower and Hal Moore and didn't want another white male.

My top choices for Hood would have been:
1. Patton
2. Pershing
3. Audie Murphy

You know what name is very conspicuous by its absence in the naming of Army posts, especially considering his success on the battlefield and influence on the Army, at least during his lifetime?

Winfield Scott. General officer for almost 50 years. Probably our most consistently successful Army commander in the War of 1812. His campaign to take Mexico City was described by the Duke of Wellington as the most brilliant of its time.

But he was a Virginian, who sided with the Union, and thus became anathema in his own home state.
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Smeghead4761 said:

clarythedrill said:

OldArmyCT said:

clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Benavides was not a tanker or in the Cav. How about Ft Bragg?
No, he wasnt, but he was from Texas and a certifiable badass.
For Bragg they should have gone with Ridgeway. Commanded the 82nd and XVIII Airborne Corps in WWII and 8th Army and then all UN forces in Korea. No idea why they didn't, other than they already had Eisenhower and Hal Moore and didn't want another white male.

My top choices for Hood would have been:
1. Patton
2. Pershing
3. Audie Murphy

You know what name is very conspicuous by its absence in the naming of Army posts, especially considering his success on the battlefield and influence on the Army, at least during his lifetime?

Winfield Scott. General officer for almost 50 years. Probably our most consistently successful Army commander in the War of 1812. His campaign to take Mexico City was described by the Duke of Wellington as the most brilliant of its time.

But he was a Virginian, who sided with the Union, and thus became anathema in his own home state.
I can agree with you on Patton, but he was a hot head and was know to lay his hands on people who pissed him off. He is actually the antithesis of most general officers in the service today, so you know he would have been blackballed due to this.

Pershing is a great candidate. Was a great general and leader and was known to work well with black Soldiers which at the time were still segregated from whites, hence the nickname BlackJack. In todays climate, he would have been a really good candidate.

Not much to say about Audie Murphy, he was a Texan and a tremendous NCO and Officer.

Not choosing any of these you mentioned are true head scratchers.
Bucketrunner
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Maybe this is moot after the election? It is all "woke" politically motivated, right?
Smeghead4761
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I did forget another great Texan and war hero...James Earl Rudder.

The fact that it would royally annoy all the tsips would make it even better.
Aggie Infantry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
IMCOM (Installation Management Command) is responsible for the execution of this. To update the Police/Fire software with the new street names (yes, they are renaming streets), will cost $35M+/-

I know. I work for them in SATX
Islamophobia: A word created by Fascists, used by Cowards, to manipulate Morons.
- A. Cummins
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aggie Infantry said:

IMCOM (Installation Management Command) is responsible for the execution of this. To update the Police/Fire software with the new street names (yes, they are renaming streets), will cost $35M+/-

I know. I work for them in SATX
Its not the first time the streets have changed names.

Not sure what the issue was with

Old Ironsides
Hell on Wheels
Spearhead
761st Tank BN (if they rename this one it will be tragically stupid)
Tank Destroyer


Are they forcing the City of Killeen to rename Ft. Hood Street? Are they going to reimburse them for the cost?
Smeghead4761
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggie Infantry said:

IMCOM (Installation Management Command) is responsible for the execution of this. To update the Police/Fire software with the new street names (yes, they are renaming streets), will cost $35M+/-

I know. I work for them in SATX
If I was a state or local government, I'd be sending a bill for all that to the DoD. Not just software - DoT will have to update things like freeway exit signs as well.

I remember back maybe 20 years or so ago, San Francisco decided to change the name of a city street to Cezar Chavez Street. Since that street had a freeway exit, CalTrans sent the city a bill for the new signs, and refused to put them up until the city paid.

Now, will Fayetteville change the naming of Bragg Boulevard? Will Columbus, GA change the name of Fort Benning Road?

Will the town of Fort Bragg (named for the fort built there in the 1850s) in California change its name?
Paul Dirac
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fort Rudder
Dark_Knight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm sure cavazos was a fine officer. But he was a tard, and he's only getting picked because he was the first Hispanic 4star or something like that.

For the record, confederate soldiers weren't traitors. Now some democrats and RINOs, that's another story.
Because I'm Batman!

sharpdressedman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The renaming bs demonstrably manifests the loss of the country to those whose goals include revising and erasing the nation's history.
OldArmyCT
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
clarythedrill said:

OldArmyCT said:

clarythedrill said:

74OA said:

Lobster Twins said:

Why don't we just not name any of them after any men since one flaw will eventually get you canceled?
Betraying their country and leading an armed insurrection that cost over 1.5M casualties isn't just "one flaw".
Isnt that the same thing that most of these peoples fathers or grandfathers did with the British? We went against the Brits when at the time we had been british citizens for hundreds of years. It is sort of hard to be so loyal to a country that had only existed for a couple dozen years when the civil war started.

As for this guy that Hood is being renamed after, he is only getting it because he is a mexican, and really did nothing other than follow his career path to reach his rank. At least Roy P. Benavidez, who it should be renamed for, fought and was awarded the MOH. He is much more deserving than this 4 star.
Benavides was not a tanker or in the Cav. How about Ft Bragg?
No, he wasnt, but he was from Texas and a certifiable badass.
So was Cavazos. Again, Bragg was a better fit.
Dark_Knight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ft Rudder would be badass, but that should saved for the Rangers somewhere.
Because I'm Batman!

Smeghead4761
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dark_Knight said:

Ft Rudder would be badass, but that should saved for the Rangers somewhere.
There actually is already a Camp Rudder. It's a sub-installation of Eglin AFB, used for Swamp Phase of Ranger School.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

And I do believe that ALL Soldiers from the South were given the same status as northern Soldiers by President Lincoln, so were not considered traitors after the war at all. I am sure an actual historian can talk more to that, but basically all was forgiven after the war so the country could heal and move on. Whether the Brits did it or not is not relevant to this.

Public Law 85-425 gave pensions to Confederate Soldiers at the same rate as Federal Soldiers. And it was President Andrew Jackson who pardoned all Confederate Soldiers in 1868. So, it seems like all was forgiven, but obviously not forgotten.


For the record, none of this is true. Pardons we're granted to former Confederates who took an oath of allegiance and applied for one. They were supposed to then follow the laws of the land, which many didn't during Reconstruction. They were never granted equal status with United States military veterans of the Civil War. Johnston's pardon in 1868 had a number of exceptions. It was not a blanket pardon. Even that was considered too lenient in the North and was another step towards his impeachment.

Confederate veterans NEVER received US pensions. The law you're referencing was passed in 1958 (during the height of "massive resistance" to the Civil Rights movement") and involved a handful of widows. The last Civil War veteran died years earlier.

Confederates were traitors to the United States. You don't have to take a loyalty oath or be granted a pardon if you are considered a full citizen.
CT'97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
sharpdressedman said:

The renaming bs demonstrably manifests the loss of the country to those whose goals include revising and erasing the nation's history.
I would suggest that the naming in the first place was done for the same reasons.
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Confederates were traitors to the United States.
Bull***t
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CanyonAg77 said:

Quote:

Confederates were traitors to the United States.
Bull***t


Truth hurts. They betrayed the Constitution and the Union. Treason.
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sapper Redux said:

CanyonAg77 said:

Quote:

Confederates were traitors to the United States.
Bull***t


Truth hurts. They betrayed the Constitution and the Union. Treason.

Point out the part of the Constitution that forbids secession.
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CanyonAg77 said:

Sapper Redux said:

CanyonAg77 said:

Quote:

Confederates were traitors to the United States.
Bull***t


Truth hurts. They betrayed the Constitution and the Union. Treason.

Point out the part of the Constitution that forbids secession.
Rebellion and insurrection are forbidden. Power rests in the federal government. States cannot "enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

Secession harms the states and renders the Constitution worthless as a document. It makes the entire government subject to a heckler's veto. The idea that the framers would approve of that is comical. You have to believe they thought the Articles of Confederation too weak, so they created a new government that was even weaker.
CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So, no such section?
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Where is secession specifically allowed?
Dark_Knight
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nonsense. States will secede if it is necessary.
Confederate soldiers were not "traitors". GTFO with bs talk.
Because I'm Batman!

CanyonAg77
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dark_Knight said:

Nonsense. States will secede if it is necessary.
Confederate soldiers were not "traitors". GTFO with bs talk.

It's his schtick
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.