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.
All the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of soldiers that have passed through these installations and I'd wager that the fort's name was probably the last thing on their minds. 99.99999% couldn't have cared less.
If you were interested at all in the issue beyond having an uninformed kneejerk reaction, you’d know that there have been many black soldiers who have given statements or been interviewed and stated their feelings and opinions on training and working at installations named for people who fought to keep their ancestors enslaved.
Hint: they usually don’t feel too proud or good about it.
I had never heard of Dyess before today, so maybe you can enlighten us. Did he ever wage war against the United States after accepting a commission in our military and swearing to defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic? Did he ever fight to preserve slavery and extend it across new territories in the United States?
I think he's pretty safe.
If anyone is trying to "erase our history" I would say it is the people who want to ignore and obscure the fact that the Confederate traitors started the war because they wanted to preserve and expand slavery in perpetuity.
Nobody is safe. It might take them awhile to get to people like Dyess, but it will happen. That’s my honest opinion about this whole thing.
They are starting with the low hanging fruit, the Confederates. Once those are all purged, you really think that will appease the mob? Of course not,
If Lincoln isn’t pure enough, who is?
Seriously though, you can pick just about anyone out of history. Since this is a military board, let’s just pick someone at random:
General Patton. He has hundreds of streets, buildings, weapons systems, museums, etc. all named after him.
Anyway, there’s a 2004 article from NBC News called “The Forgotten Heroes of WWII”. This article lays out in detail that Patton was nothing more than a racist POS. I don’t know enough about Patton to know how true the article is or not. But that’s irrelevant to the woke left. They will come for most people in history, just give it time.
Nobody is safe. It might take them awhile to get to people like Dyess, but it will happen. That’s my honest opinion about this whole thing.
They are starting with the low hanging fruit, the Confederates. Once those are all purged, you really think that will appease the mob? Of course not,
If Lincoln isn’t pure enough, who is?
Seriously though, you can pick just about anyone out of history. Since this is a military board, let’s just pick someone at random:
General Patton. He has hundreds of streets, buildings, weapons systems, museums, etc. all named after him.
Anyway, there’s a 2004 article from NBC News called “The Forgotten Heroes of WWII”. This article lays out in detail that Patton was nothing more than a racist POS. I don’t know enough about Patton to know how true the article is or not. But that’s irrelevant to the woke left. They will come for most people in history, just give it time.
You know this helps me put your recent posting on the History Forum about the JFK assassination in better perspective.
I think you believe there conspiracies everywhere attempting to change the course of history.
I don't think most of us do believe that.
Can you even make room for the idea that maybe some people, not just African American people, have never liked all these confederate statues and other attempts to glorify the South's attempt to secede from the Union? I never understood why the likes of Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, or Nathan Bedford Forrest would be honored. Rather, than thinking this is just the camel's nose under the tent or such we just think this glorification was misplaced.
Yes, George Washington was a slaveholder. He was also father of this country and our first president.. No one who counts for anything is seriously talking about removing him from the $1 bill. Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner too, but he also wrote the Declaration of Independence. He will stay on Mount Rushmore.
I think its very paranoid to see this as an attempt to remove all our national heroes.
You know this helps me put your recent posting on the History Forum about the JFK assassination in better perspective.
I think you believe there conspiracies everywhere attempting to change the course of history.
I don't think most of us do believe that.
Can you even make room for the idea that maybe some people, not just African American people, have never liked all these confederate statues and other attempts to glorify the South's attempt to secede from the Union? I never understood why the likes of Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, or Nathan Bedford Forrest would be honored. Rather, than thinking this is just the camel's nose under the tent or such we just think this glorification was misplaced.
Yes, George Washington was a slaveholder. He was also father of this country and our first president.. No one who counts for anything is seriously talking about removing him from the $1 bill. Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner too, but he also wrote the Declaration of Independence. He will stay on Mount Rushmore.
I think its very paranoid to see this as an attempt to remove all our national heroes.
If I believed that the purging would stop with Confederates, I’d be perfectly fine with that happening. As I stated before, it has served its purpose.
But since I feel this is just the beginning, I don’t support it at all.
Seriously though, are you pretending that you don’t know about the dozens of other historical figures that are under fire right now?
Name me one nation is the history of the world, where the loser of a civil war had statues put up in their honor. I’ll wait over here
That’s irrelevant. Bottom line is that it was a successful tactic when it was used over 100 years ago.
How could we have ever came together to fight WWI and WWII if we were still divided?
Fast forward to today, and it appears that renaming everything is actually designed to do the same thing, bring everyone together. Whether it works or not, that remains to be seen.
But for me, that’s not the real issue. I’m concerned that Confederate cancelling is just a start. I think they will come for everyone, including the founding fathers.
That’s irrelevant. Bottom line is that it was a successful tactic when it was used over 100 years ago.
How could we have ever came together to fight WWI and WWII if we were still divided?
Fast forward to today, and it appears that renaming everything is actually designed to do the same thing, bring everyone together. Whether it works or not, that remains to be seen.
But for me, that’s not the real issue. I’m concerned that Confederate cancelling is just a start. I think they will come for everyone, including the founding fathers.
" I think they will come for everyone, including the founding fathers."
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldsoldier1976
Of that they will find a lot more resistance.
I don't know, half of them are already wrong. But then we seem to be evolving to thinking that along with the other half for compromising and allowing slavery to continue for a few more generations. Hence the use of the 3/5th compromise against both sides.
One of you two think that we will escalate while the other thinks a victory will be declared and the next generation will relax for a while
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.
