zak-striper

Renaming a fort named after one of the worse confederate generals

Rate this topic

79 posts in this topic

I have to admit I didn't know much about general Bragg so I did a quick read up on him.

 

Here's an interesting line about him - "Bragg is generally considered among the worst generals of the Civil War. Most of the battles in which he engaged ended in defeat. Bragg was extremely unpopular with both the men and the officers of his command, who criticized him for numerous perceived faults, including poor battlefield strategy, a quick temper, and overzealous discipline. Bragg has a generally poor reputation with historians...The losses which Bragg suffered are cited as principal factors in the ultimate defeat of the Confederacy."

 

So now my question is why did we name an important military base after one of the worse generals of the Civil War? Why is a base named after a significant failure?

 

Does anyone actually think we should keep calling it Ft. Bragg? The only legitimate reason for naming the fort after him is because he's from that state. There must be other military standouts from NC that we can name the fort after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 mins ago, zak-striper said:

I have to admit I didn't know much about general Bragg so I did a quick read up on him.

 

Here's an interesting line about him - "Bragg is generally considered among the worst generals of the Civil War. Most of the battles in which he engaged ended in defeat. Bragg was extremely unpopular with both the men and the officers of his command, who criticized him for numerous perceived faults, including poor battlefield strategy, a quick temper, and overzealous discipline. Bragg has a generally poor reputation with historians...The losses which Bragg suffered are cited as principal factors in the ultimate defeat of the Confederacy."

 

So now my question is why did we name an important military base after one of the worse generals of the Civil War? Why is a base named after a significant failure?

 

Does anyone actually think we should keep calling it Ft. Bragg? The only legitimate reason for naming the fort after him is because he's from that state. There must be other military standouts from NC that we can name the fort after.

the Gettysburg address said 

 

"with malice toward none...".

 

Marxism profits by digging up wounds and creating resentment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to laugh at all the people who want to rename things. What a bunch of thin skin limp diks.   History will not be changed because of name changes or statues being removed.   

 

Maybe the progressive morons are hoping it will be forgotten as time goes by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't have a problem with changing U.S. military post names.  But then, change ALL MILITARY POST NAMES, confederate and non-confederate.  Take the names of all the soldiers and sailors who have won the CMH.  Divide them by racial percentage of population (I.E. 70% white, 13% black, 20% latino, 2% other), put them in a tumbler and draw them out and name whatever base is up alphabetically.  It's fair and goes to people who showed great courage in horrible situations.  

 

Spent about 8 months at Ft. Bragg.  Great post and a neat area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Knight771 said:

Don't have a problem with changing U.S. military post names.  But then, change ALL MILITARY POST NAMES, confederate and non-confederate.  Take the names of all the soldiers and sailors who have won the CMH.  Divide them by racial percentage of population (I.E. 70% white, 13% black, 20% latino, 2% other), put them in a tumbler and draw them out and name whatever base is up alphabetically.  It's fair and goes to people who showed great courage in horrible situations.  

 

Spent about 8 months at Ft. Bragg.  Great post and a neat area.

Best solution I've heard!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fish'nmagician said:

It’s not about changing history

its about removing honors from people who don’t deserve it. 

And changing history. Especially Dem history, the party of slavery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fish'nmagician said:

It’s not about changing history

its about removing honors from people who don’t deserve it. 

Malice toward none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, zak-striper said:

I have to admit I didn't know much about general Bragg so I did a quick read up on him.

 

Here's an interesting line about him - "Bragg is generally considered among the worst generals of the Civil War. Most of the battles in which he engaged ended in defeat. Bragg was extremely unpopular with both the men and the officers of his command, who criticized him for numerous perceived faults, including poor battlefield strategy, a quick temper, and overzealous discipline. Bragg has a generally poor reputation with historians...The losses which Bragg suffered are cited as principal factors in the ultimate defeat of the Confederacy."

 

So now my question is why did we name an important military base after one of the worse generals of the Civil War? Why is a base named after a significant failure?

 

Does anyone actually think we should keep calling it Ft. Bragg? The only legitimate reason for naming the fort after him is because he's from that state. There must be other military standouts from NC that we can name the fort after.

It was named for Bragg due to his performance in the Mexican- American War.

Bragg had mixed success during the CW but as late as Oct 1864 Lee recommended he be given increased responsibility for a defensive command.

So he couldn't have been thought of too poorly.

 

Do the vets who trained there in large numbers from WWII onward take that into consideration when they reminisce about their time at the base or has the name and base moved beyond any attachment to a MW CW general?  I know my father spoke of Ft Bragg with admiration of his days there but didn't give a crap about a CW general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Knight771 said:

Don't have a problem with changing U.S. military post names.  But then, change ALL MILITARY POST NAMES, confederate and non-confederate.  Take the names of all the soldiers and sailors who have won the CMH.  Divide them by racial percentage of population (I.E. 70% white, 13% black, 20% latino, 2% other), put them in a tumbler and draw them out and name whatever base is up alphabetically.  It's fair and goes to people who showed great courage in horrible situations.  

 

Spent about 8 months at Ft. Bragg.  Great post and a neat area.

Concur.  

 

"...The Congressional Research Service took up the question of whether it was appropriate to keep Bragg’s and other former Confederate generals’ names on modern-day Army installations in 2017, 10 days after a woman was killed in Charlottesville, Va., during a protest over a monument to Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee.

The CRS’s four-page report reiterated a quote from Brig. Gen. Malcolm Frost, who was chief of Army Public Affairs in 2015 when he said the naming of installations is a memorialization of a distinguished individual.

“Every Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a place in our military history,” Frost said, according to the report. “Accordingly, these historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies.”

 

"distinguished individual"   Hard to find more distinguished than Medal of Honor recipients. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.