Name changes
- Thread starter GMB951
- Start date
- Status
I have previously submitted a request for the database change for the name of POPE, as for Ft Bragg, knowing the speed our government works, I would be surprised if it was changed in the "near" future, future yes near no.
Fort Bragg to be renamed Fort Liberty among Army bases losing Confederate names: Exclusive
A blue-ribbon commission has recommended new names for nine bases named after Confederate leaders with Fort Bragg to be renamed Fort Liberty.
abcnews.go.com
GMB951
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 212
Was informed Fort Bragg name change will be anytime now.I have previously submitted a request for the database change for the name of POPE, as for Ft Bragg, knowing the speed our government works, I would be surprised if it was changed in the "near" future, future yes near no.
Ft. Benning in Georgia will change to Ft. Moore on May 11th. I'm waiting for historians to omit the Civil War (or, as Southerners call it, "The War of Northern Aggression") from the history books. Yes, it's a dark time in American history but it still happened, like it or not.
The point is to not honor people who were traitors to the country. (Hence no Army post named after Benedict Arnold, etc.)
GMB951
Member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 212
I will call Fort Bragg by the name of (Fort Bragg) for the rest of my time.
The whole of naming and renaming has frankly become ridiculous.
Rename everything to fit the following standard:
Air Force example - Luke AFB becomes - Air Base number 17.
Army example - Fort Carson becomes - Fort number 08.
Coast Guard example - Station Sheboygan becomes - Station number 31.
Marine Corps example - MCB 29 Palms becomes - Camp number 29.
Navy example - Navy Base Kings Bay becomes - Ocean Base number 04.
Space Force - Vandenburg Space Force Base becomes - Space Pad 01.
That way, no one gets offended and signage, letterhead, and the nicknames all get shorter.
Rename everything to fit the following standard:
Air Force example - Luke AFB becomes - Air Base number 17.
Army example - Fort Carson becomes - Fort number 08.
Coast Guard example - Station Sheboygan becomes - Station number 31.
Marine Corps example - MCB 29 Palms becomes - Camp number 29.
Navy example - Navy Base Kings Bay becomes - Ocean Base number 04.
Space Force - Vandenburg Space Force Base becomes - Space Pad 01.
That way, no one gets offended and signage, letterhead, and the nicknames all get shorter.
When in the Richmond area for work they already renamed Ft. Lee to Ft. Gregg-Adams.
Ft A.P. Hill is also being renamed. My Father soent a lot time at Ft. A.P. Hill when in Maryland National Guard in the 60's when I was just a baby.
This craziness needs to stop.
Ft A.P. Hill is also being renamed. My Father soent a lot time at Ft. A.P. Hill when in Maryland National Guard in the 60's when I was just a baby.
This craziness needs to stop.
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2004
- Messages
- 398
- Reaction score
- 213
It seems to many folks the unrestrained continual kow-tow to PC demands will just keep coming. Washington and Jefferson, Slaveowners, like many of the educated "political class" of that era, may well be in the crosshairs next. What will they want to name our Capital?
Just wait until the Revisionists read Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, where he calls for States to comply with their Constitutional Mandate to comply with the Fugitive Slave Act, among other things.
(Quote from A. Lincoln):
There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions:
No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.
It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution--to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause "shall be delivered up" their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath?
There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by national or by State authority, but surely that difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others by which authority it is done. And should anyone in any case be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it shall be kept?
Just wait until the Revisionists read Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, where he calls for States to comply with their Constitutional Mandate to comply with the Fugitive Slave Act, among other things.
(Quote from A. Lincoln):
There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions:
No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.
It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution--to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause "shall be delivered up" their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath?
There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by national or by State authority, but surely that difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others by which authority it is done. And should anyone in any case be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it shall be kept?
That was done away by the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution.
On topic, The two army bases close to me are having their names changed, Ft. Jackson and Ft. Gordon. Fort Jackson is named for President Andrew Jackson NOT General Stonewall Jackson as the revisionists say, We'll see how that plays out. Fort Gordon, however, was named after a Confederate General, John Brown Gordon. It will be changed to Fort Eisenhower, which I can agree with (even though I don't like any of the name changes - tradition - you know...). Now, lets see how McEntire SCANG, Shaw AFB and Charleston AFB play out. McEntire, Shaw may be OK, but Charleston at Fort Sumter is where the War of Northern Aggression began. Parris Island and Beaufort MCAS, I think, will be safe.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Solved
