volkom said: »
I can't find anything about this~ please share sources
How about you share sources? You claimed that forts were named during the "reconciliation" aka Reconstruction Era. Prove it.
ALL TRUMP!!! ALL THE TIME!!!
ALL TRUMP!!! ALL THE TIME!!!
How about you share sources? You claimed that forts were named during the "reconciliation" aka Reconstruction Era. Prove it.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
volkom said: »
the fort names should be left alone. Many of the forts named after confederate generals is because of reconciliation between the north and the south.
Camp Beauregard - 1917
Fort Benning - 1918
Fort Bragg - 1918
Fort Gordon - 1941
Fort A.P. Hill - 1940
Fort Hood - 1942
Fort Lee - 1917
Fort Pickett - 1942
Fort Polk - 1941
Fort Rucker - 1942
Read the comment I was responding to regarding forts from the "reconciliation" aka Reconstruction as it is actually referred to. This can't be that hard.
A save at what? I was very specific about the claim of forts needing to be renamed from the reconstruction era. What about that is so difficult for you to understand?
It's reasonable to assume that Volkom is only concerned about the names of forts that actually exist today. Any Confederate-named forts established before the end of the Civil War are long gone, and therefore nobody is trying to change their names.
Assumption = stupidity, always.
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
There is no confusion to the stupidity. There was no "reconciliation", it was a term used by a couple of posters, including yourself, to refer to the actual act of Reconstruction. Keep trying Rava, and keep failing.
volkom said: »
No, your last post had nothing to add to this...but the previous post referred to the "reconciliation" which isn't even a thing.
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
[+]
[+]
volkom said: »
He doesn't read, he just sees a few words and "assumes" what the rest of it says.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
But to make it easy:
Quote:
The Army’s top spokesman, Brig. Gen. Malcolm B. Frost, issued a brief statement in the aftermath of questions about whether the military ought to consider changing the name of bases like Fort Bragg, North Carolina, which is named after the man who led the Confederate Army of Tennessee, Gen. Braxton Bragg.
“Every Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a place in our military history,” Frost said. “Accordingly, these historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies. It should be noted that the naming occurred in the spirit of reconciliation, not division.”
“Every Army installation is named for a soldier who holds a place in our military history,” Frost said. “Accordingly, these historic names represent individuals, not causes or ideologies. It should be noted that the naming occurred in the spirit of reconciliation, not division.”
[+]
Garuda.Chanti said: »
It was mentioned as a possibility buy some nutjob. The nutjob happens to be our president.
As to say, "This is how dumb this all is.." not as a genuine suggestion.
But, thanks for reminding us you don't like Trump. I'd forgotten.
[+]
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
That was literally the post I was referring to. Wow, this must be really hard for you.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
That was literally the post I was referring to. Wow, this must be really hard for you.
Typical Rava deflection. lol...let's discuss a different topic since you lost at this one.
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
That was literally the post I was referring to. Wow, this must be really hard for you.
Typical Rava deflection. lol...let's discuss a different topic since you lost at this one.
I get this feeling if you went to a nursing home to play UNO with the residents there, you'd cheat if you had to.
[+]
Prong said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
That was literally the post I was referring to. Wow, this must be really hard for you.
Typical Rava deflection. lol...let's discuss a different topic since you lost at this one.
I get this feeling if you went to a nursing home to play UNO with the residents there, you'd cheat if you had to.
I'm all tingly that you have feelings for me. What is UNO?
A very simple card game.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
[+]
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
That was literally the post I was referring to. Wow, this must be really hard for you.
Typical Rava deflection. lol...let's discuss a different topic since you lost at this one.
Irony skill +1.
Maybe the Confederates would have won the war if they had just declared themselves the winners. But hey, if you makes you feel better to think you won an internet argument despite all evidence to the contrary, then by all means go buy yourself a trophy to commemorate the occasion.
[+]
Prong said: »
A very simple card game.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I'm not familiar with simple card games. They are quite beneath me, and I have an inherent inability to connect with foolish uneducated individuals, regardless of what they are trying to say.
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lolwut? When did I refer to Reconstruction as "reconciliation" except in a direct response to your own connection of the two terms?
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
The confusion comes from your narrow interpretation of the general term "reconciliation" to mean the very specific "Reconstruction" when it's fairly clear that that was not implied and doesn't make sense in the context of the forts in question. I guess that connection was your "assumption", and therefore your "stupidity".
Busted! lol
That was literally the post I was referring to. Wow, this must be really hard for you.
Typical Rava deflection. lol...let's discuss a different topic since you lost at this one.
Irony skill +1.
Maybe the Confederates would have won the war if they had just declared themselves the winners. But hey, if you makes you feel better to think you won an internet argument despite all evidence to the contrary, then by all means go buy yourself a trophy to commemorate the occasion.
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Prong said: »
A very simple card game.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I'm not familiar with simple card games. They are quite beneath me, and I have an inherent inability to connect with foolish uneducated individuals, regardless of what they are trying to say.
So, Chanti, Ravael AND Volkom are uneducated. Mmmkay.
Wait a second....is this that British fella who hated America on an alternate account? What was his first login name, Dnofx, Dnix, Dookieshoez...my memory these days. I mean, saying everyone and everything is beneath...claiming intellectual superiority...it has all the symptoms!
[+]
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Prong said: »
A very simple card game.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I just mean, you seem rather competitive, as you mentioned winning and losing a few times in reference to your disagreement over a conversation with a stranger on the internet.
I don't see any winning or losing, it just seems you are not quite connecting with what they are trying to say.
I'm not familiar with simple card games. They are quite beneath me, and I have an inherent inability to connect with foolish uneducated individuals, regardless of what they are trying to say.
[+]
This is going to drive me nuts, someone help me out, what was the name of that British fella who'd delete his entire account every time he got topic banned/reprimanded? I think he may have even been the one who started the CornoVirus in America thread, just so he could Americabash.
Prong said: »
So, Chanti, Ravael AND Volkom are uneducated. Mmmkay.
That's rather harsh, but if you insist.
Prong said: »
This is going to drive me nuts, someone help me out, what was the name of that British fella who'd delete his entire account every time he got topic banned/reprimanded? I think he may have even been the one who started the CornoVirus in America thread, just so he could Americabash.
Kireeky
Viciouss said: »
Directx, and no ozment is not that person.
That was it, damn you. I just found the name in a quote in another thread. That fella genuinely had a incorrectly high opinion of himself. And, was an ethnocentric turd.
Ragnarok.Ozment said: »
Prong said: »
This is going to drive me nuts, someone help me out, what was the name of that British fella who'd delete his entire account every time he got topic banned/reprimanded? I think he may have even been the one who started the CornoVirus in America thread, just so he could Americabash.
Kireeky
Only thing I recall about the Kireek account is he had an avatar that reminded me of Cocytus from Overlord.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Understandable, most people do take quite the interest in me. Your interest is a little bit excessive though, more than most. It makes me wonder what emotions are driving your interest in me.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.