• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Top US General Slams Confederacy As ‘Treason’, Signals Support For Base Renaming

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,329
Reaction score
82,715
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Top US General Slams Confederacy As ‘Treason’, Signals Support For Base Renaming

“Those generals fought for the institution of slavery,” Gen. Mark Milley told a House hearing.

defense-large.jpg


7/9/20
The top U.S. general in a public hearing on Thursday signaled his support for renaming Army bases named for Confederate generals, slamming the Confederacy as “treason” in a passionate tirade that stood in stark contrast to President Donald Trump’s embrace of symbols of the failed secessionist movement. “Those generals fought for the institution of slavery. We have to take a hard look at the symbology,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley told the House Armed Services Committee. “The Confederacy, the American Civil War, was fought and it was an act of rebellion. It was an act of treason against the Union, against the Stars and Stripes, against the U.S. Constitution. Those officers turned their back on their oath.” Milley said he had recommended a commission to look at the issue. “The way we should do it matters as much as that we should do it,” he said, acknowledging that there are some in the military who see Confederate symbols as “heritage,” while others recognize them as “hate.” The ten Army bases named for Confederate generals and one colonel, have come under scrutiny amid the nationwide protests in response to the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. The Army publicly signaled that it was open to renaming the bases, but was quickly smacked down by Trump, who tweeted that his administration will “never” rename the bases — now a toxic flash-point in the culture wars.

Milley’s speech was remarkable both in its severe language against the Confederacy and in the division it demonstrated with the president, who is known to like the tough-talking general but has laced into protesters pushing for the removal of Confederate monuments and implicitly supported the display of the Confederate flag at NASCAR races. Milley and other military officials have sought to cast diversity initiatives, like the potential renaming of the bases, as a necessary step to maintaining an inclusive and “cohesive” fighting force. Still, he acknowledged Thursday that the decision to name the bases for Confederate leaders in the first place was “political” and that the decision to change those names would be equally so. The former Army secretary recalled a staff sergeant who approached him when he was a young officer at Fort Bragg, named for the Confederate general Braxton Bragg. “He said he went to work every day on a base named that represented a guy that enslaved his grandparents,” Milley said. “Racism, bias, and prejudice have no place in our military, not only because they are immoral and unjust, but also because they degrade the morale, cohesion, and readiness of our force,” he said.

Racist symbols and memoranda to treason should have no place in today's US military.
 
Gen. Milley put Trump on notice that Milley and the Joint Chiefs with the support of field and air-sea fleet commanders everywhere are advising Trump he is self impelled toward issuing an order Pentagon will consider illegal, ie, defending, enhancing, glorifying traitors.
 
The Confederacy is the Constitutional definition of treason.

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
 
Gen. Milley put Trump on notice that Milley and the Joint Chiefs with the support of field and air-sea fleet commanders everywhere are advising Trump he is self impelled toward issuing an order Pentagon will consider illegal, ie, defending, enhancing, glorifying traitors.

How would the order be illegal?

Trump is dead wrong and Milley and the army are right but I don’t see how a Presidential order to not rename the bases would be illegal.
 
How would the order be illegal?

Trump is dead wrong and Milley and the army are right but I don’t see how a Presidential order to not rename the bases would be illegal.

Endorsing traitors and secession is a violation of oath.

Read Gen. Milley's statement on behalf of the Joint Chiefs....and senior generals and admirals in the continental USA and globally. Plus the huge majority of the retired corps of flag officers.

Milley got right in Trump's face by what he said, specifically using the word "traitors." Nobody in Pentagon has talked like that before, nor has a CJCS got in the face of the Potus/CnC who's openly and actively supporting treason and secession, and who is defending it, which no post WW II Potus/CnC has done either. Truman made some tradeoffs of the battle flag and junk within military units for his EO desegregating the armed forces yet this isn't that either. We're not looking for tradeoffs at this point in time, developments, events, circumstances.

Moreover, Milley stepped figuratively onto the sacred soil of hundreds of thousands of Americans who died to defeat the treason and secession. This connects strongly to the vow they shall not have died in vain. Neither are these the days or times of Brown v Board or of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the like. This is Trump and it is Trump the barbarian ramming racism and division in your face and up your...nose.

With the election coming, the ballots, the electoral college, the inauguration and the dark room hiatus in between November and January the armed forces across the board in the USA know they're going to have to assert themselves and this is the beginning of that. Trump is violating his oath in this yet it's like Al Capone the mass murderer going to prison for tax evasion. It's the otherwise little things that get you, the reason being people understand and respect oath taking, treason, secession.
 
Endorsing traitors and secession is a violation of oath.

Read Gen. Milley's statement on behalf of the Joint Chiefs....and senior generals and admirals in the continental USA and globally. Plus the huge majority of the retired corps of flag officers.

Milley got right in Trump's face by what he said, specifically using the word "traitors." Nobody in Pentagon has talked like that before, nor has a CJCS got in the face of the Potus/CnC who's openly and actively supporting treason and secession, and who is defending it, which no post WW II Potus/CnC has done either. Truman made some tradeoffs of the battle flag and junk within military units for his EO desegregating the armed forces yet this isn't that either. We're not looking for tradeoffs at this point in time, developments, events, circumstances.

Moreover, Milley stepped figuratively onto the sacred soil of hundreds of thousands of Americans who died to defeat the treason and secession. This connects strongly to the vow they shall not have died in vain. Neither are these the days or times of Brown v Board or of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the like. This is Trump and it is Trump the barbarian ramming racism and division in your face and up your...nose.

With the election coming, the ballots, the electoral college, the inauguration and the dark room hiatus in between November and January the armed forces across the board in the USA know they're going to have to assert themselves and this is the beginning of that. Trump is violating his oath in this yet it's like Al Capone the mass murderer going to prison for tax evasion. It's the otherwise little things that get you, the reason being people understand and respect oath taking, treason, secession.

Treason.

What is treasonous in retaining the current names of bases?
 
Gen. Milley and the Joint Chiefs are in a direct opposition to Trump and his doctrines of racism and division against the United States Constitution, ie, "We The People." In the way Gen. Milley and JCS frame it, Trump is supporting traitors and secession. Indeed, the only way to settle this is to have it out between 'em, once and for all. It is the only way to end this stalemate of a cold civil war.


Congress_Pentagon_Leaders_83724.jpg-f028c_c0-0-5472-3190_s885x516.jpg

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley testifies during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Thursday, July 9, 2020, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Michael Reynolds/Pool via AP)


The Confederacy and its leaders were guilty of “treason” against the United States and honoring them in today’s military can be deeply troubling to minority service members, America’s top general said Thursday in blunt comments that highlight the Pentagon’s growing rift with President Trump. In testimony to the House Armed Services Committee, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark A Milley said it is vital that the military undertake a thorough review of its ties with the Confederacy, which include at least 10 Army installations named after Confederate generals. Military officials, lawmakers and a host of other stakeholders have expressed strong support for nixing those names, but the president opposes the change.


Gen. Milley seemed to show support for renaming the bases and more generally for ending any and all military practices that portray the Confederacy in a positive light. Glorification of the Confederate cause, he said, is problematic for a military that’s increasingly made up of Black service members. “In the Army for example … We’re up to 20-plus% African-American and in some units you’ll see 30%. And for those young soldiers who go on to a base, a Fort Hood or a Fort Bragg or wherever, named after a Confederate general, they can be reminded that general fought for an institution of slavery that may have enslaved one of their ancestors,” Gen. Milley said. “The Confederacy, the American Civil War, was fought and it was an act of rebellion,” he continued. “It was an act of treason at the time against the Union, against the Stars and Stripes, against the U.S. Constitution. Those officers turned their back on their oath.”

Gen. Mark Milley signals support for nixing treasonous Confederate flags, Army base names - Washington Times
 
Last edited:
It's not. It's just tangmo spouting out tangmobable as usual. Facts and realty have no connection to tangmobable.

Said the PutinTrumpRower who marches hard and high among the PutinTrumpRowers that defend the CSA -- which is all of 'em virtually.

PutinTrumpRowers and CSA lovers fit like a custom kneeboot they do.


All the same braindrain do kindly bring me up to date. Cause last time I looked you were in active duty service. You said you were an E-6 or E-7, which it is I don't remember exactly, so you must have some years in regardless. Neither do I recall at this point where your billet posting might be. This is all voluntary stuff at a discussion board of course so it's up to you whether you might bring me up to date on your military service status, thx either way. I'm just curious of course my being a veteran myself who was honorably separated from active duty service in the Army Infantry (11A) on expiration of my contract.
 
Said the PutinTrumpRower who marches hard and high among the PutinTrumpRowers that defend the CSA -- which is all of 'em virtually.

PutinTrumpRowers and CSA lovers fit like a custom kneeboot they do.


All the same braindrain do kindly bring me up to date. Cause last time I looked you were in active duty service. You said you were an E-6 or E-7, which it is I don't remember exactly, so you must have some years in regardless. Neither do I recall at this point where your billet posting might be. This is all voluntary stuff at a discussion board of course so it's up to you whether you might bring me up to date on your military service status, thx either way. I'm just curious of course my being a veteran myself who was honorably separated from active duty service in the Army Infantry (11A) on expiration of my contract.

More tangmobabble that ends with a rather ridiculous claim...

A real officer would not post as you do.
 
Said the PutinTrumpRower who marches hard and high among the PutinTrumpRowers that defend the CSA -- which is all of 'em virtually.

PutinTrumpRowers and CSA lovers fit like a custom kneeboot they do.


All the same braindrain do kindly bring me up to date. Cause last time I looked you were in active duty service. You said you were an E-6 or E-7, which it is I don't remember exactly, so you must have some years in regardless. Neither do I recall at this point where your billet posting might be. This is all voluntary stuff at a discussion board of course so it's up to you whether you might bring me up to date on your military service status, thx either way. I'm just curious of course my being a veteran myself who was honorably separated from active duty service in the Army Infantry (11A) on expiration of my contract.

Who is surprised by more lies from tangmo.
So let's start at the top. Let's see you quote a single post of mine defending the CSA. We both know you can't. But let's see you try. Or just one again have the entire forum see your less for what they are.


I would answer you questions about my service except that I don't voluntarily give military information to stolen Valor types. Of which you most certainly are.
 
How would the order be illegal?

Trump is dead wrong and Milley and the army are right but I don’t see how a Presidential order to not rename the bases would be illegal.

It should come from congress
 
Who is surprised by more lies from tangmo.
So let's start at the top. Let's see you quote a single post of mine defending the CSA. We both know you can't. But let's see you try. Or just one again have the entire forum see your less for what they are.


I would answer you questions about my service except that I don't voluntarily give military information to stolen Valor types. Of which you most certainly are.

Hell, I'll play. I retired from the Army nearly 7 years ago, with just over 20 years of service, holding the rank of Master Sergeant. And any PFC with 18 months of service knows that isn't an illegal order.
 
Who is surprised by more lies from tangmo.
So let's start at the top. Let's see you quote a single post of mine defending the CSA. We both know you can't. But let's see you try. Or just one again have the entire forum see your less for what they are.


I would answer you questions about my service except that I don't voluntarily give military information to stolen Valor types. Of which you most certainly are.

Hell, I'll play. I retired from the Army nearly 7 years ago, with just over 20 years of service, holding the rank of Master Sergeant. And any PFC with 18 months of service knows that isn't an illegal order.

Alas, now I need to prove I'm not guilty of you disagreeing with me. Hence I stand accused of a serious crime against existing law.


It is important to know and understand what Stolen Valor is, and what it is not. To be guilty of Stolen Valor, the suspect must have claimed at least a bronze star and used his/her claims for monetary gain. To make a charge of Stolen Valor against another veteran without proof is a crime. It falls under libel and defamation of character, and it could result in a lawsuit.

Although this being social media those who abuse the laws of society could theoretically get away with character assassination that is willful, deliberate, calculated and otherwise unstoppable simply because the identity of each member is cloaked, which is fine per se.

Still however there are the Rules and the Terms of Service that exist at a given website of the social media. There are cases in which people on social media have won their case in a court of law in instances of libel and defamation of character in accusations of Stolen Valor without proof.


How prevalent do you think false accusations are?

Happen all the time: 77%
There must be some foundation for them: 23%
No one is ever falsely accused: 0%

The survey was taken at a forum where I am a member. It is a military forum of active duty and retired members of the armed forces, to include Reserve and National Guard, of all services and of all ranks. The link is available upon request as I believe linking to another forum is against the DP Rules.
 
Last edited:
Hell, I'll play. I retired from the Army nearly 7 years ago, with just over 20 years of service, holding the rank of Master Sergeant. And any PFC with 18 months of service knows that isn't an illegal order.

We would need to know the order, its specifics, its reasons and rationale, its purposes and means.

Reasons and rationale to include purposes could be written in the order or not written in the order. For instance, if the R&R of the order were not written in it, the R&R could be considered as stated verbally by Potus/CnC in his discussions of the order and the specific issue.

If Potus/CnC were interpreted or understood to be attempting to justify treason, secession or secessionists, by his order, then the order could be considered illegal by the highest chief(s) and/or commanders of the armed forces. It thereby would be justified to declare the order, to include its rationale if one were provided, to be an illegal order.

Moreover, the order and its R&R would necessarily be rejected outright and the Potus informed of it. Potus would then be presented with an alternative course of action for him to consider. At that point it would all be on the Potus/CnC.
 
Alas, now I need to prove I'm not guilty of you disagreeing with me. Hence I stand accused of a serious crime against existing law.


It is important to know and understand what Stolen Valor is, and what it is not. To be guilty of Stolen Valor, the suspect must have claimed at least a bronze star and used his/her claims for monetary gain. To make a charge of Stolen Valor against another veteran without proof is a crime. It falls under libel and defamation of character, and it could result in a lawsuit.

Although this being social media those who abuse the laws of society could theoretically get away with character assassination that is willful, deliberate, calculated and otherwise unstoppable simply because the identity of each member is cloaked, which is fine per se.

Still however there are the Rules and the Terms of Service that exist at a given website of the social media. There are cases in which people on social media have won their case in a court of law in instances of libel and defamation of character in accusations of Stolen Valor without proof.


How prevalent do you think false accusations are?

Happen all the time: 77%
There must be some foundation for them: 23%
No one is ever falsely accused: 0%

The survey was taken at a forum where I am a member. It is a military forum of active duty and retired members of the armed forces, to include Reserve and National Guard, of all services and of all ranks. The link is available upon request as I believe linking to another forum is against the DP Rules.

Tangmobable with no proof of his claim that I have ever defended the CSA.
How unsurprising.
 
Tangmobable with no proof of his claim that I have ever defended the CSA.
How unsurprising.

Let's clear this up.


Do you support bases named after traitors to America?
 
Instead of Stolen Valor we can use 'Military impostor'.

Or as the Brits would say. 'Walt' after Walter Mitty.

Do you support bases named after traitors to America?
 
Back
Top Bottom