Primary tabs

What do you think about renaming U.S. military bases now named for Confederate leaders?



View more polls


Those same Confederate leaders were patriotic Americans until their way of life and their home states were viciously and militarily attacked. They fought back as any freedom loving American would and it would be a disgrace to erase their names and legacies at this time. No matter how hard some try to erase history, it can't be accomplished! It needs to be learned from, not forgotten.

Submitted by ronnn : Jun 11, 2020 1:26pm

Robert E. Lee discouraged monuments. They ‘keep open the sores of war,’ he wrote.

Submitted by bbctct1 : Jun 11, 2020 9:56pm

South Carolina attacked the Fort north of Charleston FIRST and later the Fort in the Bay. You sure don't know your history.

Submitted by bbctct1 : Jun 11, 2020 10:07pm

I know my history as well as and, probably better than, most others. South Carolina's attack on Fort Sumter was the final act. This followed endless debates in Congress concerning "State's Rights" and about how far the Federal government's authority allowed it to control the lives of individuals.

Submitted by ronnn : Jun 20, 2020 12:44pm

In my opinion, the Lincoln administration attempted to solve the slavery issue via diplomacy and negotiations until the Confederacy seceded from the Union. At that point, the Confederacy committed treason against the Union which fully authorized the Lincoln administration to protect the union. The slavery issue was solved due to the absenteeism of the pro-slavery representatives in Congress. Thus anti-slavery laws were able to be passed and enacted. So, these monuments glorify not only military leaders that supported slavery, but also treason against the Union.

Submitted by jj_dak : Jun 12, 2020 8:52am

Secession was a legal right under the constitution, there was no treason. What were the dates on the so called antislavery laws? 1865 n later. The Emancipation only freed slaves in the Confederacy, not in the Northern States.

Submitted by kurtjahnke : Jul 25, 2020 9:23am

Amen also they was veterans

Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:23pm

Funny how no one wants to honor any Black military leaders like General Davis. Not one base is named after anyone Black who served. Why is that? We have to keep bases named after racists, but can't have any bases named after anyone else?

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:25pm

It is a disgrace to even consider changing the names. These bases are part of our long term history
As a nation we need to be careful that we don't meet demands of those who never served our country or of those that see rioting and looting as a means to get their way.

I served in Cuba and Vietnam and had a 40 year career
Chuck A.

Submitted by CLA0520 : Jun 11, 2020 1:42pm

So very true!! And those who are rioting and looting and killing - all of this is just another excuse for them to act-out the way they love to do. The only racism is their racial hatred of the white race. The more we do for them, the less they do for themselves, the more dependent they become and the more they want. They will NEVER have enough because we can not give them what they really need; self-respect, self-reliance, self-initiative, pride of workmanship and pride of ownership. They have no desire for personal or family responsibilities and obligations and when they see how the white race and other races live who have those qualities, their hatred just grows. But their REAL hatred is for themselves because they have been groomed to hate.
OUR country needs to be restored to REAL equality - not entitlements, less we become like all other third world countries. LET'S MAKE AMERICAN GREAT AGAIN AND RESTORE HER BEAUTY!!

Submitted by lyndawylie13 : Jul 25, 2020 12:25pm

Why is it disgraceful? If the base was named Fort Bin Laden would you want to keep that, too? It's amazing how all the racists are against changing the bases names while also being against naming any bases after anyone Black.

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:26pm

Nope. Nope. Nope. We don’t have to honor our enemies to learn from our mistakes. Slavery was/is morally wrong. The Confederate States were morally wrong.

Submitted by mchlspllck : Jun 11, 2020 1:45pm

you need a history lesson .read more use the national archives.....

Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:25pm

Nope. Nope. Nope. We don’t have to honor our enemies to learn from our mistakes. Slavery was/is morally wrong. The Confederate States were morally wrong.

Submitted by mchlspllck : Jun 11, 2020 1:45pm

These Confederate Leaders have great skills in Leadership on the battlefield. We study their battle plans and Leadership Qualities. An honor to learn from them. Their names should remain on these Forts, Post, and Bases.

Submitted by Cajeco60 : Jun 11, 2020 1:56pm

We should learn from our military enemies in a classroom. These forts, posts, and bases glorify the leaders that that are named after. We should only glorify those that best represent our Constitution to encourage and promote the future of our nation. The Confederate Leaders do not represent our future.

Submitted by jj_dak : Jun 12, 2020 9:26am

yes they did you don't true history

Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:27pm

These Confederate Leaders have great skills in Leadership on the battlefield. We study their battle plans and Leadership Qualities. An honor to learn from them. Their names should remain on these Forts, Post, and Bases.

Submitted by Cajeco60 : Jun 11, 2020 1:56pm

We should learn from our military enemies in a classroom. These forts, posts, and bases glorify the leaders that that are named after. We should only glorify those that best represent our Constitution to encourage and promote the future of our nation. The Confederate Leaders do not represent our future.

Submitted by jj_dak : Jun 12, 2020 9:27am

How racist can this be? These people think that this is part of slavery. It has nothing to do with that. Where they their? Get a life already.

Submitted by svoboda01 : Jun 11, 2020 2:00pm


Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:27pm

How racist can this be? These people think that this is part of slavery. It has nothing to do with that. Where they their? Get a life already.

Submitted by svoboda01 : Jun 11, 2020 2:00pm

Even though these Confederate Leaders were on the South side but we study not only their qualities but others as well.
Red Baron, and many others stratigic maneuvers that we study and learn from.

Submitted by Cajeco60 : Jun 11, 2020 2:17pm

Destroy them all, that's what Hitler, Stalen, Mao, would do! Then go to the library and destroy all books that even slightly refer to the Confederacy, but leave the Union Soldiers alone, we will simply not know who they fought. Finally, to assure that history is erased; go to every home and search for violations and execute those that did not comply. When the minority rules, a free people are lost. You would think that every person in this country would be intelligent and able to deal with all of human history. Finally, it will not stop here, Washington, Jefferson and others well eventually fall to ignorance.

Submitted by manningusmc70 : Jun 11, 2020 2:44pm


Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:28pm

Military installations are the property of the citizens. I am in no way supporting the idea of removing the names, however, one General in my opinion does not have the authority nor the right to change military installation names.
USN Retired E-8

Submitted by erobinson4570 : Jun 11, 2020 3:17pm

I like the bases names to stay the same. My problem is too many people want to destroy all history within the United States. There some statues that need to go. The only one that I think should stay is "Robert E. Lee". If the bases names are changed for political reasons and the Army has a say in that then the bases need to be named after Medal of Honor winners who are from the state that the base is in. I can live with that. Also if possible make sure that a MOH winner is from each war or conflict that we have been in, if possible.

Submitted by young.jimmy : Jun 11, 2020 3:21pm

That war was settled in 1865. We are the United States of America. Let us keep our Country and not tear us apart like our enemies want .

Submitted by Dave234 : Jun 11, 2020 3:53pm

We cannot change history. We must respect all Americans since our founding in 1776. We must re unite as a United States of America. Stop tearing us apart.

Submitted by Dave234 : Jun 11, 2020 3:38pm

I agree, they are a part of our history. Funny General Schwarzkopf in the War used the flanking movement of General Stonewall Jackson, huh? I was born in the north, however, I believe the Southerners fought because we were on their land. Politically is another story. One cannot change those facts. They fought for what they believed in, can you do the same? Leave it be. The saddest part was, they were all Americans. Erase that past and history may and probably repeat itself. This country I agree is so angry and torn apart and that DOES need to stop. Let us join as Legionaires and work to fix it. God Bless The United States of America.....Steve

Submitted by spinwme : Jun 11, 2020 9:25pm

I believe that in other countries we see where leaders that a lot of you went over there to those countries to destroy and liberate a part of those countries population ( not all, some agreed with their leaders and looked up to them) still we went there and FREED them from great intellectual leaders. We watched with delight as their people tore down the great statues throughout the country that honored these vicious leaders. They used their people as slaves, raped the woman when and how they wanted to, killed who they didn’t want or like. What makes these confederate leaders and he different? The war was over the south wanting to expand slavery into the western part of the country. The Generals where the leaders of the south at that time. They wanted and used slaves to make them selves rich by tending their corps, they raped the woman and Children (girls and boys) at their will. They killed who didn’t listen or the ones they didn’t like. Sound familiar? What makes them any different than the other leaders you fought against and swore to defend all Americans from. Black PEOPLE today were born here the same as you and me. They are Americans and don’t talk about what your grandfathers fought because their grandfathers were in all of our wars also. We study and learn war strategy from great Warriors on any side in all wars, so that’s a stupid reason. The south pulled away from the union and started the war, so their towns and states weren’t attacked. It was actually the other way around. The fact is these men even though at the time thought they were doing what was right, but they were wrong. The Lord said he come so ALL can be saved and live forever with him, not just the white. If my Black brothers and sisters feel better with the names changed great, let’s change them. We can name them after heroes that led to the freedom of the slaves or Presidents that were for everyone’s rights as Americans. Not Obama, he did absolutely nothing for his people!

Submitted by johnson.russell... : Jun 11, 2020 5:04pm

this is not a simple question with a simple answer.
i am very conflicted.
the history buff in me says leave it alone. they are historical figures why change it?
but my conscience says that these people were wrong. they fought on the wrong side of a moral war and they lost. why should they get the honor of have things named after them?
i can see all sides of this story however i feel that by keeping the names we have inadvertently perpetuated the belief that some people have that the confederate war is not over and that the south should continue to fight. The south lost we are no longer north south east west united states. We are the United States of America and as such those who fought to secede from the union and lost should not be honored the way they have been.

Submitted by minijaxter : Jun 11, 2020 5:44pm

We have fought many battles against many countries so are we going to remove all those leaders since we now have citizens living in the US from those countries (Japan, Germany, VietNam, England (red coats)...). It is our countries history, we need to keep it all the good and the bad.

Submitted by gabromm : Jun 11, 2020 6:44pm

First, the Confederate's attacked a U.S. base first. Second the Confederate government illegally separated from the U.S. in violation to treason and an attempt to over-throw the U.S. Government because of the continued arguments and repeated debates about which states west of the Mississippi River would be a slave or free state. Over 700,000 Americans lost their lives fighting for the U.S. against a terrorist, but the U.S. decided not to punish the enemy. Get the facts straight or continue to lie.

Submitted by cewatsonengr : Jun 11, 2020 7:07pm

I will pray for you they had the right to secede no treason look at your founding fathers. Also read about Patons life your learn

Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:36pm

A rose by any other name is still a rose. However, I'm not sure what is established by changing names other than being an ideology of belief that by changing a name institutes a satisfactory restitution for a historic injustice. It seems more smoke and mirrors as the logistics of 'wiping the names off the face of the earth' would cost the common man tax-wise more than he is willing to pay. Some would say this is a brilliant military tactic to confuse non-Americans (and subsequently Americans). Personally, a majority of military installations I served at no longer exist and/or have changed names to something more 'up-to-date' as they merged with another.
I am very interested in history and believe that symbols of history are important in reminding people what has occurred in the past, good and bad. But I have also seen enough to know that symbols around the world, especially names, can lose importance in the public eye and be replaced by something more popular, that will in time also be replaced. It is up to the historians to ensure the records remain. I only look at the bottom line. What's this going to cost the tax payer?

Submitted by grimseyperryhol... : Jun 11, 2020 8:35pm

You nailed it cewatsonengr. The Confederates initiated the combat and yes, those famous Confederate generals were fighting for those who intended to keep their slaves. However, unless you are selling asterisks we should not rename those military installations. Can you imagine a story which includes the 82nd Airborne at Fort Newlynamed (* the former Fort Brag). We should let it be.

Submitted by jsmella : Jun 11, 2020 8:40pm

Our forefathers designed the US Constitution to be fluid. So follows the military and the names of military bases. Let the historians deal with the fluidity of our American nature.

Submitted by jj_dak : Jun 12, 2020 9:18am

Why do people think that changing a name or taking down a statue is any way is going to change history? Come on people, it's all a part of the history of the United States of America and needs to be preserved and continued to be taught in our schools. Too much of our history is already under attack by those that want it forgotten. We are all immigrants. None of us except for the American Indian is a natural born American. The first people that came ashore started to drive them from their land without mercy and in some places it still continues to this day. The Blacks think they've had it hard, walk in an American Indians shoes for a while and stop you're wining. Leave our history alone!

Submitted by litewalker : Jun 11, 2020 9:50pm

I do not think that removing the Confederate memorials and removing the names of Confederate Generals from our present situation will ever change history, but it might change the future. However, having a military base named after you is a great honor and should be exclusively reserved for those Generals/Admirals that represented our Constitution and the protected of all our citizens. The Confederate Generals failed to live up to this standard.

Submitted by jj_dak : Jun 12, 2020 9:13am

So very true, I think of the American Indian and their hardships and it makes everything else look minor. Taking down a statue does nothing to help the black situation.

Submitted by bluejackie22 : Jun 12, 2020 9:15am

I completely agree.
Gene Bennett

Submitted by mgenebennett : Jun 12, 2020 10:52am

They were traitors to the United States and killed American Soldiers. The bases were only named after them during WW1 to appease segregationists. Rename them after real American heroes who died under the US flag who were stationed at those posts.

Submitted by BillCork : Jun 12, 2020 12:22pm

I'll pray for you read they was us veterans

Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:38pm

YOU are the traitor!! You are a traitor to the veterans who have served in every war on USA soils and abroad to protect the freedoms that YOU, and every black person in America enjoys TODAY. YOU are the traitor to the families, and the decedents whose lives, limbs and minds were given as they served and fought to protect our way of life be it 200+ years ago or 2 years ago. YOU are the traitor to the very country that has afforded you the freedom of opportunities you have access to made possible ONLY because of those who gave their lives, their limbs and their sound minds so that YOU, the traitor you are, can enjoy what they gave up for YOU - the traitor. YOU are no better than those traitors who have no respect, no regard, NO CARE for the ones who deserve the be honored by having a military installation named for them, songs written about them, flags designed and flown for them, statues standing erect and proudly honoring them, days designated to pause and honor them, streets named in their honor, cities named in their honor and the list continues - but can NEVER cover the sacrifice they made for me and YOU and all the ungrateful black folks who are filled with only hatred for those who have taken care of them from the day they first set foot on American soils - hundreds of years ago. So, if YOU - the REAL TRAITOR that you are feel so strongly about how our Confederate soldiers were traitors who killed American Soldiers - then why do you continue to make America your place of residence. I won't call it "home" to you because you do not have respect for those who made this "HOME" for REAL AMERICANS.

Submitted by lyndawylie13 : Jul 25, 2020 12:12pm

"all the ungrateful black folks who are filled with only hatred for those who have taken care of them from the day they first set foot on American soils" ---Are you serious? You think slavery was an act of love and kindness? You think real Americans enslave, rape, and murder people who they keep in chains for hundreds of years? Your idea of America sucks. Following your logic the Japanese were loving captors of our troops in WW2.

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:43pm

Let me end the controversy right now: Confederate soldiers, sailors and marines that fought in the civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of congress in 1957. U.S. Public Law 85-425 Sec. 410, approved 23-May-1958. It also provided for payment of pensions to confederate veterans & their widows in the same amounts as U.S. veterans
This made all Confederate Army, Navy and Marine veterans equal to U.S. veterans. Additionally, under U.S. Public Law 810 approved by the congress on 26-FEB-1929, the war department was directed to erect headstones and recognize confederate grave sites as U.S. war grave sites.
Changing those names is a violation of the law!!

Submitted by karl-h : Jun 12, 2020 2:54pm

THANK YOU VERY MUCH for that great information regarding our Veterans to included BY LAW the Civil War veterans. We have lost sight of our TRUE American History because the "minorities" in our America has gotten their way with having all teachings in public schools and universities completely removed. We MUST restore those teachings. Our history and our heritage are being abolished by the likes of those who first of all do not understand and secondly, who believe they are "entitled". History and Heritage is to be cherished and passed on with respect and sentiment. Again, thank you for sharing and I will include your facts in the letters I write to oppose this issue. May God Bless America and help us restore her beauty.

Submitted by lyndawylie13 : Jul 25, 2020 11:52am

THANK YOU VERY MUCH for that great information regarding our Veterans to included BY LAW the Civil War veterans. We have lost sight of our TRUE American History because the "minorities" in our America has gotten their way with having all teachings in public schools and universities completely removed. We MUST restore those teachings. Our history and our heritage are being abolished by the likes of those who first of all do not understand and secondly, who believe they are "entitled". History and Heritage is to be cherished and passed on with respect and sentiment. Again, thank you for sharing and I will include your facts in the letters I write to oppose this issue. May God Bless America and help us restore her beauty.

Submitted by lyndawylie13 : Jul 25, 2020 11:52am

Undeniably UnAmerican! What ever happened to the land of the free? Why must we "remind" others of such a horrendous act of human behavior? It's straight up appalling & shameful of everybody's ancestors to act in this judgmental way. We need to forward & NOT backwards. We don't need statutes & names of those that were confederate retards to remind of us horrendous past time. That's NOT heroic, THAT'S tragic! Remove ALL confederate statutes & any names associated with any confederacy lineage. The constitution NEEDS to be rewritten for more modern times. Why are we abiding by rules set out over almost 230 yrs ago?? Land of the free means ALL black American people too. Let's PROVE it's the land of the free instead of land of the judgmental village idiots.

Submitted by rusticnterror : Jun 12, 2020 6:57pm

Yes, exactly.

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:41pm

If it is not broke, don't fix it. Just as the "Alamo" is there to remind all that a few withheld many should the "Latino" descendent now ask that it be torn down because it bring back memories of getting their ass kicked the second time around.
I am of Mexican descent, retired Marine and I say again, if it is not broke, don't fix it.

Submitted by semperfijoeg : Jun 12, 2020 10:53pm

How do you decide a name for a military base if a state has multiple MOH recipients?
Wake up people! Where does this insanity end? Each of these bases had 100,000's
soldiers of all races. And not once was the subject of the name of the base being racist was ever discussed. I was honored to have served at Bragg & Benning. Proud to tell people where I was stationed. Why were these alleged feelings not present during the Obama Administration? Why now?
I think the answer is obvious. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Now more than ever.

Submitted by marmac330 : Jun 13, 2020 3:07pm

Here is how we can rename Army posts. And if you don't know the names then perhaps we have not honoured these heroes enough.

1. Fort Benning – Henry Benning. ... Home of the Infantry Rename for US Grant

2. Fort Bragg – Braxton Bragg. ... XVIII ABN rename for Ridgway (obvious really)

3. Fort A.P. Hill – Ambrose Powell Hill Jr. ... Small Arms training Rename Audi Murphy [1]

4. Camp Beauregard – P.G.T. ..Louisiana National Guard training & mobilization Rename for Mabry [12]

5. Fort Gordon – John Brown Gordon. ...Signal Corps, Cyber Command, Intelligence and Ordinance Rename Eisenhower rename for Eisenhower

6. Fort Hood – John Bell Hood. ... III Corps, Calvary Rename for Patton

7. Fort Lee – Robert E. Lee. ... Quartermaster, Transportation rename (Black Jack) Pershing

8. Fort Pickett – George Pickett. VA Army National Guard Training Center; Rename Lloyd L. Burke [34] (Treadwell [17])

9. Fort Polk, LA JROTC & Vietnam basic tng. Rename Viet/Vet Joe R. Hooper [22] (Melvin Morris [38])

10. Fort Rucker; Aviation Center of Excellence; Rename Patrick H. Brady

Submitted by Abramdavid : Jun 13, 2020 4:57pm

This sounds reasonable. Just like Ships are named after Americans

Submitted by Dave234 : Jun 14, 2020 12:39pm

I didn't see this list when I made my suggestions. These are better than mine! Thanks.

Submitted by alj : Jun 14, 2020 2:41pm

What would MLK think? What would he say about the way that "his people" are representing his views? Particularly about non violence? Would he say that we need to erase history or learn from it?

I don't think slavery is a good thing but we have to look at this in a clear manner. Slavery wasn't invented in the south, it's been here since the dawn of time and in places around the world it's still going strong. European people didn't go into the jungle, bush, desert or anywhere else and enslave the blacks in Africa. They merely purchased a commodity from the leaders of the dominate tribes of those places who were "ridding" themselves of their conquered enemies who had been enslaved by the prominent tribes at the time. They took this commodity to where, at that time, there was a need for cheap labor, and took their profits. Many were brought to this country at a time when it was perfectly acceptable and standard practice amongst the entire country to own slaves or indentured servants. When the folks up in the north disagreed with the south wanting to export their goods to Europe to get a better price, they decided rather than address the discrepancy of prices and economics to fall to tactics that threatened an entire way of life in the hopes of cowing the south. Well, the south decided against this and did the only thing they saw as an alternative, they exercised their right to self determination and seceded from the union that was attempting to oppress them. They were patriots to their country, fought and died for it. How much more American can you get that that?

Folks talk about what was lost and what was gained, my family history was that of southern planters back in the prewar era. They were prominent people in their community, comfortable in their finances and their futures. After the war they were reduced to poor sharecroppers barely able to eek out a living in a post war hell. Their "property" and way of life, striped from them, demonized for earning a living in a way that had been the norm for 150 years. Is my history any less worthy than the mewling masses that proclaim they are "oppressed" by slavery today? If they were or are oppressed, how so? There are more black colleges, groups, organizations, programs, subsidies, than you can shake a stick at. If white folks decide they want a group that's for white folks only we're called racists and vilified.

Perhaps the reason for a lot of the disparity between the races is the way we are taught to act toward authority. I can't believe that every black man killed was a saint. The man killed in Atlanta this week end was PASSED OUT in the drivers seat of a car in a drive through. When officers responded to the call, found him to be intoxicated and tried to take him into custody, he resisted with obvious violence, took a weapon from an officer, tried to use it against him, and was shot in the interest of not allowing an obvious criminal from escaping. I watched the footage on the news and find no fault in the actions of the police.

Had the man not resisted he'd most likely have bonded out and would be home now, unless he had other things to worry about, this I don't know but I have to wonder why he would resist with such violence and determination. Perhaps had he been told at some time, AND HAD LISTENED, that police are there to serve and protect the greater public, not be feared and demonized, he would have complied with the officers and lived. Making him the next martyr would be a travesty and an embarrassment to everything that folks are trying to achieve with their protest, but watch them do it anyway.

Remember the quote, "Those who forget history are bound to repeat it."

The African Americans don't want us to forget that many of them, but not all, are descended from former slaves, and may have had a proud heritage in Africa. I'm of predominantly Irish decent, I don't mind the farce of St.Patricks Day, and don't seek to hold the rest of the country responsible for the many injustices heaped on the Irish throughout history, including the practice of conscripting new immigrants into the union army as they disembarked from their ships and told to go fight for their new country during the War of Northern Aggression, that's the civil war for most of you.

As a country we need to stop and think before we act, Martin Luther King Jr., I'm sure would be appalled and embarrassed at the actions of the people who he once led in NON VIOLENT protest that led to an array of change in this country that was unprecedented. Violence will always be met with greater violence in the name of keeping the peace.

Consider the consequence before engaging in action.

In other words, engage the mind first and your mouth and body afterward.

Submitted by MarkAMitchell : Jun 14, 2020 11:02am

thanks you

Submitted by rwwracing70 : Jul 24, 2020 5:41pm

Your excuse for slavery is other people did it? That's like the guys who find the passed out girl at the party and take advantage of her saying she never said no, so it's not rape. Following your logic if Americans abroad get kidnapped and sold into slavery it's okay because those people didn't invent slavery. And your drifting off to blame all Blacks for a crime one man committed as an excuse for slavery or racist names pretty much proves you're a racist. Or are you saying all Whites are to blame for Timothy McVeigh?

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:40pm


1. Names should be picked for winners in the US Army. Bragg (Braxton Bragg), Polk (Leonidas Polk) were named for Generals who were terrible. Why name bases for failures. Race/slavery is not part of that equation. They simply couldn't do their job as generals so why name places where excellence is forged by picking failures as namesakes?

2. Names should be picked for AMERICAN Military leaders. Bragg, Polk, Benning were all chosen for non-US Army generals. None of them after declaring by serving their renunciation of US Citizenship ever went back into the US military. Benning was NEVER even a US officer before the war!
If they, after the war, went into the US Army and achieved distinction, then that would be different. But they still need to have been a winner during their combat service time.

Some suggestions for change:

Fort Bragg = Fort Grant. Ulysses S Grant was arguably the most effective general in US history. The first to focus on empowering black Americans by focusing on emphasizing US Army training as a pathway to equality in America. His postwar record is even more impressive, as a Republican president, he led the continuation of his equal under the law philosophy and supported three amendments to the Constitution proving equal protection for blacks. His campaign against the KKK in the Democratic South that targeted newly enfranchised black communities and Republicans is a model of Federal support in domestic operations to uphold the Constitution and law.

Fort Polk: Fort Sheridan. The best cavalry officer in the Civil War AND supported then Secretary of War Grant's southern occupation policy of enfranchising black Americans by providing equal opportunity and protection under the law. Sheridan was in charge of Louisiana and when he was removed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson to weaken the reconstruction efforts there, KKK and other riots intensified. Sheridan had been an effective leader both during the war and during reconstruction.

Fort Benning: Either name it after Teddy Roosevelt Junior, OR Benjamin Oliver Davis Sr.

Fort Hood: Fort Valenzuela after General Alfred Valenzuela.

Using the simple criteria of 1. Generals that were successful. 2. AMERICAN (US ARMY) Generals.

Further, by emphasizing through Grant and Sheridan the LEADING EFFORT of the US Army and military in not only freeing the slaves during the Civil War but actively pursuing their equal integration into society (Grant) and protection under the Constitution against domestic terror groups like the KKK (Grant, Sheridan), allowing all races to excel in the US military (Davis, Valenzuela).

Submitted by alj : Jun 14, 2020 2:37pm

Why did it take so long for this come about? Did we finally get around to Google searching these individuals and reading about their more than checkered past? It's no secret these individuals were US citizens that turned their back and fought against this country. Their actions are classified as treason. In today's military the charges would be UCMJ title 94. In the gaze of our own organization, what these men did against this country goes against what we stand for. Just take one look at our Officers Manual under Insulation of Officers and New Members. Take a moment to read what we ask our new members and our officers as they assume new rolls. Welcome to American hypocrisy.
So if we don't want to change the names or paint a true picture of history. How about we as an organization write a welcome aboard letter to every sailor, airman, soldier and Marine to these bases. Something like this, Dear sailor, soldier, airman and Marine welcome aboard,

Part of the great American experiment is American hypocrisy. So if you were to turn your back on this country you would have engaged in treason. You will not be glorified, you will not have a base named after you, will be charged to the fullest extent of military law. While at the same time, if that news story catches our members attention. Our members, while they're sipping their cheap swill and pulling their pull tabs at their Posts will blast you with every negative word in the book. While at the time, you can face death, or imprisonment.
Good Luck,

Submitted by Localsportsfan1... : Jun 14, 2020 6:27pm

Whether to keep these names or not should be based on the individual honored. For instance:
(1) Lee was an outstanding leader, an honorable man, and sought to heal the wounds after the war.
(2) Forrest (in case anything is named after him) murdered black POWs and started the KKK.
(3) Bragg, from my limited understanding, was a poor leader whose mistakes gave away Chattanooga.
(4) Hood could have written a book on how to massacre your own soldiers.
(5) Jackson was a brilliant soldier who did all he could to help the slaves that he had contact with, going so far as to buy one or two (with his limited funds in the 1850s) solely to protect them from falling into the hands of bad masters. Those were the only slaves he ever owned.

Of those four, I think only Lee and Jackson EVER should have had anything significant named after them, and people like that should keep the recognition. Those like the other three, as well as Union and other leaders like them, should lose the recognition to better men.

Submitted by tim : Jun 20, 2020 2:18pm

As to accusations of treason: I don't believe that these men were ever considered as traitors by the majority of their wartime enemies. Indeed, until the Emancipation Proclamation made slavery the focus of the war, sympathy with the legality of secession caused a large minority of northerners to oppose the war against the South.

Secession was NOT generally considered to be treason before the Civil War. Indeed, several Northern states considered Secession to be a legal and viable option for themselves more than once during the early years of the 19th century. Lincoln considered it to be illegal, but the last (and maybe the only) President before him who likely agreed was Andrew Jackson. (He threatened military action when South Carolina threatened secession in the 1830s.)

Submitted by tim : Jun 20, 2020 2:35pm

As a veteran and historian familiar with nearly all U.S. Army posts, I strongly support Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri in opposing renamings. This veteran and the vast majority of veterans I suspect, both white and African American, didn't know and likely didn't care who these bases were named for. What we cared about were the life experiences we had there, the leadershp skills gained there, and the proud history of soldiers and units who trained there! Ft. Bragg, home of the storied 82nd Airborne Div., is still the ready spear of America's might in an emergency. I shed some tears when an 82nd. Airborne Div. honor guard from Ft. Bragg traveled several hundred miles to Florida to conduct military rites at my Korean War Veteran brother's funeral. He would have been so proud. And so was I! Ft. Benning, GA, home of the Army's Infantry School, created by General George C. Marshall. Skills learned there by hundreds of thousands of troops, all later directed by General Marshall Army Chief of Staff, helped win WWII. Wiping the names of these posts from our history would dishonor the veterans who trained there and are proud of it! Many gave their lives while fighting with comrades and friends from those posts. Stop this nonsense! Most of the people supporting this, including U.S. Senators have never served.

Submitted by garcialloyd1895... : Jul 2, 2020 11:20pm

First and foremost in any debate about the Southern states seceding from the Union is that it WAS legal. The U.S. was formed on the principal of secession! Read the Declaration of Independence if you don't believe me. I could post MANY quotes from our founders that said that EXACT thing. I WILL post them if it will influence you and make you think. So, if secession WAS legal, which it was, the members of those states did NOT commit treason against the U.S. Likewise, the Southern officers such as Lee, Jackson and Stuart didn't commit treason because the LEGALLY resigned their commissions in the U.S. military BEFORE donning the uniform of the Confederacy. They did NOTHING while U.S. Army officers that would place them in the position of a TRAITOR. People today don't seem to understand that at THAT time in our history your STATE was your FIRST allegiance. These United States were a compact created BY those states. It was, in essence, an experiment in government and political bonds. We today MUST think outside the political box we have been put into to understand America in the mid 19th century. If, as I assert, secession was legal, then the ensuing war was ILLEGAL. South Carolina did, in fact, own the island Ft. Sumter was on. A Confederate Peace Commission was in Washington weeks before the firing on the fort attempting to negotiate with Lincoln concerning the disposition of ALL federal holdings in Southern states. Lincoln directed his Secretary of State Seward to delegate an intermediary, Judge Campbell, to tell the Peace Commission that there would be NO reinforcement of Ft. Sumter when all the while he was outfitting three ships with men and supplies for one year to send to the fort! Lincoln NEEDED the Confederacy to fire the first shot so the U.S. government would look like the victim. When his flotilla of reinforcement ships were just a few miles from Charleston the Confederates were given knowledge of their mission. Naturally, upon being deceived, they fired on the fort, (as they had previously said they would if reinforcements were sent by Lincoln). There is so much more to all of this BUT just know that the Confederate Generals these ten posts are named after were protecting their states/countries as they knew them. AND, they were NOT fighting for slavery! They were defending their homes when Lincoln, just AFTER the firing on Sumter, illegally called for 75,000 troops to push the seceded states back into the Union. PLEASE, leave the names of these Army posts as they are!

Submitted by lesbranscum : Jul 24, 2020 9:59pm

Although it is currently popular to cast the war as a morality play over the issue of slavery, be reminded that chattel slavery was protected by the United States Constitution until December 6, 1865. Is it logical to presume the United States was fighting a war in direct contravention of its own Constitution?
As to the specious claim that the Confederates were Traitors and violated the military oaths they swore, this too is dispelled by facts. The United States at the time referred to a collection of sovereign States united by compact. The military oath sworn upon commissioning stated: "I, _____, appointed a _____ in the Army of the United States, do solemnly swear that I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America and that I will serve THEM honestly and faithfully against all THEIR enemies or opposers whatsoever and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States, and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the rules and articles for the government of the ARMIES of the United States." The use of "Them, Their and Armies" makes it clear the United States was not understood at the time to be a singular consolidated federal government.

Submitted by terryklima1 : Jul 24, 2020 11:19pm

Those bases were named for Confederates as an act of reconciliation between north and South, between the union and Confederates.

Removing the names is an act of rejecting reconciliation and inflaming hostility between Southerners and the U.S. government.

We know the U.S. Congress does not like Southerners, but the USA needs us. It is not a good ideal to insult and alienate us.

Submitted by c_l_chastain : Jul 25, 2020 11:43am

Why not, the South might rise again and get beaten a second time?

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:37pm

I am a Southun boy, born and bred, raised on Jesus and G.R.I.T.S., who was taught to sing "Dixie" as the second verse of "The Star Spangled Banner" and to reverence George Washington and Robert E. Lee as fathers of our country, noblemen whose character was worthy of emulation second only to that of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Yet compassion, kindness, and consideration for the needs and feelings of others (Php 2:3-11) were also part and parcel of the Christian upbringing and good manners that were as much part of the Southun atmosphere as the heat and the humidity.

So despite the pride in my heritage that goes with being a good ol' boy, I lower the flag and store it away because it causes offense and a stumbling block to my black and brown brothers in Christ. I refrain from flaunting the history that I so respect if it hurts or enrages my brother or causes him to stumble. That's called, "R-E-S-P-E-C-T".

"Even as I have loved you, so love you one another."

Submitted by gospelmidi : Aug 1, 2020 1:37pm

I commend your kind, Christian heart, and agree we should be respectful to all. However, I think it much more loving to our neighbor not to cave to bullying, slander, and outrage that is based in ignorance. How much better would it be to have a dialogue and educate others on our feelings towards the flag, our veterans, our region, our history, and our culture, which has a strong Christian background? Would you also hide your Bible if it caused offense to your neighbor? Speaking the truth in respect and love is, I believe, what we are really called to do.

Submitted by genieprincess : Aug 3, 2020 10:17am

So if your neighbor supported ISIS you'd be cool with them flying the flag of ISIS in their yard without regard for how you feel about it?

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:36pm

Your poll is skewed with disrespectful anti-South bias from the start with the "fighting for slavery" National Victor Myth soundbite. No one was fighting *against* slavery - the U.S. federal "Union" government was perfectly willing to buy cotton and make slavery permanent, and the war was repeatedly declared to be for the "preservation of the Union" (ponder why that was so important instead of letting the South go in peace). With many men in all branches of the current U.S. military coming from the Southern United States, I would think much more cultural & regional respect could and should be shown by an entity such as the American Legion.

Submitted by genieprincess : Aug 3, 2020 10:13am

No one was fighting to keep slavery? Yeah, okay. Except that's exactly what the South wanted and have you read what the guy who made the Confederate flag wrote about the deign? He said: "Our idea is simply to combine the present battle flag with a pure white standard sheet; our Southern cross, blue on a red field, to take the place on the white flag that is occupied by the blue union in the old United States flag or the St. George’s cross in the British flag. As a people, we are fighting to maintain the heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematic of our cause"

That sounds like the South wasn't fighting to keep slaves?

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:34pm

You can always tell the racists by the way they go out of their way to defend Confederates. The Confederate army went to war AGAINST America. And they LOST. You're honoring traitors who came in second place. The same people saying we're just honoring history refuse to allow any bases be named after anyone Black like General Davis, the first Black General. Same people are the ones fighting to make sure no one Black ever winds up on our currency with all sorts of excuses like currency is only for Presidents, not true, and even if it were then we could put President Obama on a bill. Trump successfully killed Harriet Tubman on our currency. And even talks about a new denomination for those other people get squashed by the right who simply do not want anyone who isn't White represented in any meaningful way. It's simply racism. If there were a base named Fort Bin Laden I bet you'd want that changed. Or one named Fort McVeigh. I doubt you'd say we need to keep the names to learn from history like you do with the Confederate names. I think the worst part is the people defending everything Confederate over everything American are CLEARLY racist, but not brave enough to admit it.

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:31pm

Considering how most White Christians feel about this I think for thee betterment of the military everyone else should quit. White Christians want to honor racists and say slavery was an act of kindness and love like some of you are saying, or that they weren't slaves, or that they were unpaid workers who volunteered, maybe those other people should just stop wasting their time serving a nation that only seems to care about far right White Christians. You're literally saying the sacrifices everyone else made in the military doesn't matter. You're saying how other people think does not matter. You're actually saying America does not matter. This far right idea of a Fourth Reich is never going to happen. You need to get over it. How many people died fighting Hitler and the Nazis? And now a lot of you want to embrace the Nazi ideals. It's truly pathetic. Do you see any bases in Germany named Fort Himmler? Do you see the Swastika flying proudly there? No, they had enough common sense to know that was a stain on their history and removed all of that. You can still see it in museums, but they're not flying them proudly or naming forts after Nazis. But you guys want to do that here with Confederates and other racists, and at the same time make sure no one who isn't White ever gets anything named after them, with the exception of things like the worst street in any city which you always name after MLK.

Submitted by acsmith1972 : Aug 9, 2020 4:48pm