Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Army Should Rid Itself Of Symbols Of Treason

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
    Perhaps, but I can't shake the feeling that Uncle Joe would have relished to opportunity to humiliate Hitler in front of the world. Having some puppet in judge's robes lord it over the broken down founder of the '1000 year Reich' before sentencing him to death might have been too big a temptation. Joe did like a good show trial.
    Not saying it wouldn't be a show trial.

    But they would have pulled some schmuck out of Siberia, dressed him up and put that poor bastid on trial!
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
      Not saying it wouldn't be a show trial.

      But they would have pulled some schmuck out of Siberia, dressed him up and put that poor bastid on trial!
      I never knew Hitler was so accident prone!
      Chimo

      Comment


      • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
        I never knew Hitler was so accident prone!
        Clumsy moak!
        “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
        Mark Twain

        Comment


        • I must say AR not all Army officers seem to think as you do. Seems one who is now in the same profession as me was somewhat upset with me. He felt that these statues are monuments to stupidity and it is important to have them. That being the case he feels each states voters should decide if they come down. That is like asking voters of Mississippi, who are 59% white, if they should remove the Confederate Battle Flag from the state flag. Anyway the fact that they were traitors and such, none of which is mentioned on any plaques, seems to pass him by. I guess the white citizens would walk past a statue of Robert E. Lee and automatically think he was a bad guy. Sorry, he just irritated me deflecting and going off on tangents.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
            I must say AR not all Army officers seem to think as you do. Seems one who is now in the same profession as me was somewhat upset with me. He felt that these statues are monuments to stupidity and it is important to have them. That being the case he feels each states voters should decide if they come down. That is like asking voters of Mississippi, who are 59% white, if they should remove the Confederate Battle Flag from the state flag. Anyway the fact that they were traitors and such, none of which is mentioned on any plaques, seems to pass him by. I guess the white citizens would walk past a statue of Robert E. Lee and automatically think he was a bad guy. Sorry, he just irritated me deflecting and going off on tangents.
            Turkey,

            I wonder what are the branch, education and origin of the individual in question.

            Because that will have a big impact on attitudes. Also age is a factor.

            But the current force appears to be all for it.

            Retirees are uneven.

            That said...it's time.

            And as I pointed out to someone the other day....these 10 officers all went 0-10 in their last battles...and some were absolutely horrible for much of the war.
            “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
            Mark Twain

            Comment


            • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
              I must say AR not all Army officers seem to think as you do. Seems one who is now in the same profession as me was somewhat upset with me. He felt that these statues are monuments to stupidity and it is important to have them. That being the case he feels each states voters should decide if they come down. That is like asking voters of Mississippi, who are 59% white, if they should remove the Confederate Battle Flag from the state flag. Anyway the fact that they were traitors and such, none of which is mentioned on any plaques, seems to pass him by. I guess the white citizens would walk past a statue of Robert E. Lee and automatically think he was a bad guy. Sorry, he just irritated me deflecting and going off on tangents.
              I'm with your friend, these flags and statutes should be removed by their own people according to some sort of Rule of Law. Nikki Haley unilaterally deciding to pull it down works just fine. I'm pretty sure to most people flying the Confederate flag just makes you look like an idiot, and that's not really a look you want for your state.

              What's mostly annoying to me is the modern Millennial Left that wants to go back to late 19th century America and try to do Radical Republican Reconstruction, which was not politically sustainable. IMO, probably would have resulted in a multiple generation civil war in the US. I think they look at Abraham Lincoln as a guy who should have executed his 4 confederate brothers-in-law.

              And of course, it doesn't stop there: NYT's leader of the pullitizer prize winning 1619 project would like to point out that US Grant did in fact own a slave, as did the Amerindians. Where this ends, no one knows.
              "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

              Comment


              • Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                I'm with your friend, these flags and statutes should be removed by their own people according to some sort of Rule of Law. Nikki Haley unilaterally deciding to pull it down works just fine. I'm pretty sure to most people flying the Confederate flag just makes you look like an idiot, and that's not really a look you want for your state.

                What's mostly annoying to me is the modern Millennial Left that wants to go back to late 19th century America and try to do Radical Republican Reconstruction, which was not politically sustainable. IMO, probably would have resulted in a multiple generation civil war in the US. I think they look at Abraham Lincoln as a guy who should have executed his 4 confederate brothers-in-law.

                And of course, it doesn't stop there: NYT's leader of the pullitizer prize winning 1619 project would like to point out that US Grant did in fact own a slave, as did the Amerindians. Where this ends, no one knows.
                Sorry, but you are wrong. His stance is just cover to keep these things up in their states as they would never be voted out in a general election. He knows it and you know it. Treason, slavery, torture, and cruelty do not deserve to be memorialized nor to have their existence upended into a different story.

                I take it you must be the Millennial Right. You are concerned that the Left want to do a new Radical Reconstruction of history. I do believe the first radical reconstruction of history was the Lost Cause where the DAR and their likes rewrote the history of the South in a much nicer light than they truly deserved. Now the light is being turned back around on them to rewrite the book back to the truth.

                Oh, almost forgot. Flying the Confederate Flag in Alabama and Mississippi doesn't make those white citizens feel like idiots in the slightest. They are far more likely to say fvck you too.

                Comment


                • TBM3FAN,

                  Once correction....not DAR. It was the UDC...the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The Daughters Of The American Revolution were fairly benign.

                  And get these traitorous names off my Army's posts.
                  “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                  Mark Twain

                  Comment


                  • GVChamp,

                    What's mostly annoying to me is the modern Millennial Left that wants to go back to late 19th century America and try to do Radical Republican Reconstruction, which was not politically sustainable.
                    "politically sustainable" is a function of power.

                    IE, Reconstruction would have been significantly more sustainable had Lincoln lived instead of Andrew Johnson, whom sought to wreck Reconstruction. the Radical Republicans needed the support of the Unionist Republicans, whom mostly dissolved as an organization after the Union was saved.

                    Lincoln was the unifying figure in the party.

                    as it is, Reconstruction worked until roughly 1876, although significant political capital was wasted on intra-Republican fighting, again thanks to Johnson.

                    for today's case, I find it's quite insightful indeed to connect some of the aspects of what BLM/millennial left is pushing for with Radical Republican Reconstruction. it's essentially to -complete- what was given up, which was the elevation of Black economic power in conjunction with Black political representation. Once "40 Acres and a Mule" was given up, Black political power in the South was essentially left to the mercies of a terrorist campaign.
                    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
                      TBM3FAN,

                      Once correction....not DAR. It was the UDC...the United Daughters of the Confederacy. The Daughters Of The American Revolution were fairly benign.

                      And get these traitorous names off my Army's posts.
                      Thank you AR as I was typing on the fly and completely missed that one.

                      Can you confirm for me that the Constitution of the Confederacy had no provisions for seceding from their Union which would be the same for the real Constitution. Also that much of it's talk concerned slavery and wrote that no law shall be passed that would end or abolish slavery? Basically meaning in perpetuity. Last, for all the blather about states rights. the Confederacy was a pretty centralized government?
                      Last edited by tbm3fan; 25 Jun 20,, 18:08.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
                        Turkey,

                        I wonder what are the branch, education and origin of the individual in question.

                        Because that will have a big impact on attitudes. Also age is a factor.

                        But the current force appears to be all for it.

                        Retirees are uneven.

                        That said...it's time.

                        And as I pointed out to someone the other day....these 10 officers all went 0-10 in their last battles...and some were absolutely horrible for much of the war.
                        I've been thinking about suitable/distinguished soldiers that those bases should be named for.

                        Fort Bragg should be renamed Fort Sparks

                        Working on the others

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                          Fort Bragg should be renamed Fort Sparks
                          Shouldn't that be Fort Gavin?
                          Chimo

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                            Shouldn't that be Fort Gavin?
                            Oh no. I thought about that but feel that it should defiantly be named after the US Army's Premiere Airborne Soldier. 1stLt Mike Sparks.

                            We Should rename it Fort Michael Sparks,The US Army Center for Air Mech Strike Excellence

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                              Oh no. I thought about that but feel that it should defiantly be named after the US Army's Premiere Airborne Soldier. 1stLt Mike Sparks.

                              We Should rename it Fort Michael Sparks,The US Army Center for Air Mech Strike Excellence
                              How about Vernon Baker or Edward Carter from WWII?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                                Oh no. I thought about that but feel that it should defiantly be named after the US Army's Premiere Airborne Soldier. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...th-a-t-72-tank
                                We Should rename it Fort Michael Sparks,The US Army Center for Air Mech Strike Excellence
                                Maybe the crew of this Turkish ACV15 channeled their inner Lt. Sparks. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...th-a-t-72-tank

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X