Help support TMP


"The Case for Renaming the USS John C. Stennis" Topic


22 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the TMP Poll Suggestions Message Board

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2009-present) Message Board


Action Log

29 Jun 2020 1:39 p.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Crossposted to TMP Poll Suggestions board

Areas of Interest

General
Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Showcase Article

Lemax Christmas Trees

It's probably too late already this season to snatch these bargains up...


Featured Workbench Article

Painting Copplestone's News Crew

Personal logo Dentatus Sponsoring Member of TMP Fezian thinks Mark's work is among the best available for all-around gaming and painting.


Featured Profile Article

Instant Mix Epoxy

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian learns to pay attention to all of the details when buying two-part epoxy...


Current Poll


719 hits since 25 Jun 2020
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian25 Jun 2020 4:12 p.m. PST

While the debate about renaming military bases named for Confederates rages throughout the land, the West Wing, the Pentagon, and in the halls of Congress, I want to bring the discussion closer to the waterfront. Since the military and defense leaders seem to be amenable to hearing what the "dark-blue" and "dark-green" soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines have to say, and since most of them are not in a position to speak frankly, I thought I would make an attempt. This will be an uncomfortable conversation—one I only committed to writing on after a good deal of research—and I ask readers to conduct their own research before weighing in or dismissing the idea out of hand…

link

I never understood the argument for naming a warship after Stennis, and now I fully support change.

pzivh43 Supporting Member of TMP25 Jun 2020 4:48 p.m. PST

Maybe makes the case for not naming ships after anyone until about a hundred years after their passing.

arealdeadone25 Jun 2020 5:05 p.m. PST

It should be renamed USS Woketown, stripped of weapons and fighter aircraft and used as a police free homeless shelter and social welfare dispensary as well as a special privilege checking facility.

Wackmole9 Supporting Member of TMP25 Jun 2020 6:01 p.m. PST

Stop naming ships for presidents and uses the famous carriers of ww2 names.

john snelling25 Jun 2020 6:22 p.m. PST

Was a crew member of the USS Iowa, Mississippi and South Carolina. Revert back to older way of naming ships.

Skarper25 Jun 2020 6:35 p.m. PST

I've always had a problem with the name of Ronald Reagan on a warship. Any president for that matter.

Battles, states and cities etc is the way to go. Or traditional names like Enterprise.

It's high time the USN removed the worst cases and stopped making trouble for themselves by putting names of people on ships.

I also disagree with the RN naming their carriers after Royals. Even long dead ones. There are plenty of names which can be recycled.

Personal logo Dan Cyr Supporting Member of TMP25 Jun 2020 7:09 p.m. PST

They name them after politicians just to suck up to them for budget purposes. Doubt anything will change. Stennis was a long time white supremacist and racist. Why not name it after him (sarcasm mode off).

arealdeadone25 Jun 2020 8:07 p.m. PST

I also disagree with the RN naming their carriers after Royals. Even long dead ones. There are plenty of names which can be recycled.

But that's an age old tradition. Why change it? Is the monarchy that on the nose these days?!?

And if it's because they might be "racist" then naming ships after battles as you recommend is just as bad just because most of those battles were part of greater colonial or empire building wars.

Pretty much everything will be offensive to someone.

---

It could be worse. The Australian military bureaucracy is working hard at stamping out "Anglo Saxon warrior spirit" (you know the stuff that made Aussie diggers such good soldiers in the first place).

In essence there are serious attempts to make the Aussie military totally PC – in some instances only women are recruited and they get the best choice of postings and can even chose to be posted with friends. They also fund cosmetic surgery for female soldiers such as breast enlargements.

Violent unit insignia or artwork such as skulls has been made illegal. Training is being neutered and made more "caring" and "understanding".

Soldiers are being pursued in legal courts by military lawyers for such things as utilising grenades in close quarters fighting where these things caused civilian casualties.

Soldiers are even told to display that they are an LGBTIQ* ally by displaying a rainbow flag on the national ADF staff directory.

link

link

PDF link

link

link


One of my mate's brothers who was a career NCO left cause he was sick of the encroaching political correctness on all aspects of military service.


The future Australian digger is most likely a woke feminist whose main priority is to ensure political correctness is adhered to by whatever effeminate men are still willing to serve.

Defending the country from hostile threats will be second to defending the values of political correctness.

"I can't shoot at those Chinese landing craft landing on our coast because the military I work for is part of a patriarchal cisgendered racist society who through genocide usurped this land from its rightful indigenous inhabitants, oppressed women and minorities and didn't have appropriate toilets for transgender people."

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP25 Jun 2020 9:10 p.m. PST

Very sorry to hear that about Oz.

There are a lot of loony policies ALL over the globe.

I suspect it is a sign of the "Pre-Post-Apocalyptic Era" (Copyright 2020) that we are currently living in.

Heedless Horseman Supporting Member of TMP25 Jun 2020 9:24 p.m. PST

I am REALY TIRED of this whole 'Racism' thing…and now it has been exported to the U.K…Nelson and Churchill were 'racist'? So What? EVERYONE has 'heroes' whatever their attitudes and culture, at that time. Why cannot people just recognise that, although 'values' change…'History' does not…except in interpretation.
As a Brit, I have long recognised the enormous contribution, heroism and losses incurred by 'Imperial' troops and sailors. Why should this be 'wrong' because they fought in an 'Imperialist' cause?
Same argument applies to the U.S Civil War…THEY fought for their States, because that is where they were from…and, they got payed and fed…NOT a small argument…even for the rich!
As for naming ships: from THIS side of the Pond, U.S 'Victories' are YOURS… so celebrate them, by all means. You have a much bigger Navy than WE do, so you will run out, LOL! But, be cautious…the Heroic sacrifice if those who served on great ships will NOT be recognised…as someone…'Will' find a way to say that South Carolina, Mississippi or WASP has something that THEY can disagree with. Brits will ALWAYS want to serve on an 'Ark Royal', or 'Invincible'…even if others got sunk! As things are going, (UK.)it will be "Boat 19…your time is up!"
The U.S.A…ALL of the U.S.A…has a 'history' , AND great pride for ALL of their their predecessors part in it… WHATEVER that part was. MOVE ON! What was THEN, IS NOT NOW…so let the old things lie in peace and stop wrecking the future!

arealdeadone25 Jun 2020 9:55 p.m. PST

Totally agree Heedless Horseman.

I suspect most of these people arguing for renaming and toppling of monuments(and probably book burnings in the future the way we are going) don't even understand the things they are fighting against.

I was just debating with a couple of these woke idiots on a heavy metal website. One is a supposed white teacher in the US and he argued it's Ok to take down statues of Ulysses S. Grant or Theodore Roosevelt or Captain James Cook "cause racism" but bizarrely did not support removing monuments to Thomas Jefferson who owned hundreds of slaves.

I doubt he knew who Grant or Roosevelt were before I posted the article about their statues removed.

Bizarrely he calls Confederates "traitors," something which was avoided in America to unify a broken country. And him a man who opposes the US military and calls the US system of government "terrorism."


Basically these people are no different to the Communists trashing history so they could rewrite it to meet their version of reality.

Dn Jackson25 Jun 2020 11:04 p.m. PST

I'd like to know what the argument was in favor of naming the Stennis after him. Did whatever good he did over ride the bad?

Striker25 Jun 2020 11:25 p.m. PST

I'm with you wackmole. I figured the system is what it is when they named a carrier for Truman.

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian25 Jun 2020 11:44 p.m. PST

Did whatever good he did over ride the bad?

Different times? I think it was seen as a reward to Mississippi, where he is from, and I'd guess it had something to do with getting the votes in Congress?

But no sailor or airman feels inspired by the example of Stennis, do they?

pzivh43 Supporting Member of TMP26 Jun 2020 6:38 a.m. PST

"What was THEN, IS NOT NOW" Heedless Horseman. I like that---perfect way to answer the leftists who can do naught but scream and rage.

Wackmole9 Supporting Member of TMP26 Jun 2020 7:04 a.m. PST

Hi


Iam Not a defender of Stennis, but I believe it was named for him due to is unending support for the navy in congress

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP26 Jun 2020 9:28 a.m. PST

When will the Robert Byrd freeway, statue(s), AND numerous buildings (apparently there are over 50) all be renamed, or destroyed?

USAFpilot In the TMP Dawghouse27 Jun 2020 2:16 p.m. PST

The prestigious Yale University is named for the slave trader Elihu Yale. It really shows the hypocrisy of the "woke" crowd in which statues and names they attack and which they don't. Their movement has very little to do with the issue of racism and everything to do with politics. Sure, America has its problems, but on the whole, we are one of the least racist countries in the world.

Ed Mohrmann Supporting Member of TMP28 Jun 2020 9:44 a.m. PST

I do recall from my brief time at Yale that Elihu
Yale was involved in the slave trade, although at
that time any information about him and the slave
trade was hard to come by (1961).

The inscription on his tomb says, in part: '…much
good, some ill…'. No idea how much of either.

As far as naming warships, if the DoN wants to name
them after persons, USS Dorie Miller is a good one -
perhaps enlisted personnel (USN/USMC/USCG) MoH
awardees would be appropriate.

Absent those, the historic names from the RevWar
and 1812 would serve well.

Skarper28 Jun 2020 2:12 p.m. PST

How about some British Generals of 1776 and 1812???

Ed Mohrmann Supporting Member of TMP29 Jun 2020 7:04 a.m. PST

Skarper, thinking more along the lines of the
ships – some of those names still in use, such
as USS Constitution (still in commission, I think).

President was a frigate of the period and Congress;
Intrepid was associated with Decatur against the
Barbary states.

Philadelphia was a frigate captured at Tripoli and then
destroyed by Decatur in what Nelson called 'The
most bold and daring act of the age'.

The name Philadelphia was first used for one of the
gunboats built by Benedict Arnold for service on
Lake Champlain during the AWI. She was sunk during
the action but was raised (1935 ??) and is currently
on display in the Smithsonian.

von Schwartz30 Jun 2020 6:44 p.m. PST

I think Lt. Col. Allen West recently said it best, "History is not there for you to like or dislike." He went on to say that "It is there for you to LEARN from." (my emphasis)

Then of course there is the famous quote from George Santayana, "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.