Am I wrong? I think the US is the only country with military bases named after enemy commanders

[Recursion]

Can anybody come up with an example otherwise?

There are 10 US bases named after Confederate generals. Four of them house regiments who fought against that commander, just for that last little "fuck you" the military loves to give.

I really can't think of another country that honored its enemies this way.

[lapucelle]

1. I've always found this odd as well.

I think that the reason that there's little outrage over this is because it's not widely known.

[doc03]

2. Probably all are in the former confederate states,

must have tossed them a bone to make them happy. Maybe the host state had the honor of naming the base. I wouldn't expect to see a Fort Patton in Germany.

[neverforget]

3. Fort Benning, Georgia should have been named Fort Sherman

[Igel]

4. Some names predated the Civil War.

Some were named not for what the men did during the war, but before or after.

It's also worth noting that Lincoln's entire push after the war was to say that we weren't conquerors and conquered, Americans and the subjugated states, but again all Americans and equal states. Took a few decades to get there, and longer for some populations to be considered "Americans", to be sure.

So Confederate American soldiers were deemed American soldiers and the government assumed payments for their interment. It really is worth recognizing that some roles are quite reversed: Of Sherman and Lee, one was pro-slavery and the other opposed to it. Both fought out of duty for their side, but it was the Southerner who was anti-slavery and the Northerner who was in favor of it. So when Sherman issued the "40 acres and a mule" field order to get the ex-slaves following his troops off his back, it wasn't out of great respect for them.

Some like to make sure their enemies are truly crushed and humiliated. Fortunately, Lincoln wasn't that narrow minded or vindictive and tried to unite the states afterwards, instead of treat the North as an imperial power with southern colonies. (I suspect the South, because of the kind of culture it nurtured in its population throughout the 1800s, would have been precisely that narrow minded and vindictive.)

[Jeffersons Ghost]

5. yes, you are wrong...

Using the word "only" or other words like "never" and "always," simply do not apply to real physics or existence. These English words have been in use for a very long time: However, the phrase "everything" that goes up must come down" has "nothing" to do with Sir Isaac Newton's Laws of Motion. In this equation, no scientist is able to mathematically disqualify the Law of Gravity, which states; "Every object in the Universe is attracted to every other object in the Universe." This Third Law of Motion is also worded "For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action."

The third law states that all forces between two objects exist in equal magnitude and opposite direction: if one object A exerts a force FA on a second object B, then B simultaneously exerts a force FB on A, and the two forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction: FA = −FB. The third law means that all forces are interactions between different bodies, or different regions within one body, and thus that there is no such thing as a force that is not accompanied by an equal and opposite force. In some situations, the magnitude and direction of the forces are determined entirely by one of the two bodies, say Body A; the force exerted by Body A on Body B is called the "action", and the force exerted by Body B on Body A is called the "reaction". This law is sometimes referred to as the action-reaction law, with FA called the "action" and FB the "reaction". In other situations the magnitude and directions of the forces are determined jointly by both bodies and it isn't necessary to identify one force as the "action" and the other as the "reaction". The action and the reaction are simultaneous, and it does not matter which is called the action and which is called reaction; both forces are part of a single interaction, and neither force exists without the other

[Recursion]

6. And so you have a counterexample?

Rather than a not-even-wrong lecture about physics, you could give me an example of another country with a military base named after an enemy commander?