The Secretary of War should direct that Confederate battle streamers be returned to Army National Guard Unit colors

Arguments supporting this initiative, which are explained in more detail on the next page:

• Demonstrates that former foes can respect each other’s valor and honorable service
• Shows that we are mature enough to take the strengths of former enemies and use them as building blocks for, or inputs to, a new, improved American military and nation
• It is dangerous to judge the actions of past Americans by modern standards, and cancel heroes from the past because they did some things that we disapprove of today. Where does it stop?  Who will be canceled next?
• Is being perceived as insulting, even disrespectful, to the millions of U.S. servicemen who are descended from former Confederates
• Is being perceived as a sign that the U.S. government has concluded that Confederates only fought to sustain slavery—instead of fighting for their homes, or a sense of duty, or their rights as they perceived them
• American soldiers have always been presumed to be fighting for “the man to the left of them and the man to the right of them,” which is an honorable thing. Why does this no longer apply to Confederates? 
• It appears to be a double standard. The U.S. Army flies helicopters named for Native American tribes that not only killed U.S. soldiers, but tortured them, along with civilians
• Many Southerners feel taken advantage of: for decades we supported the U.S. military, even during times like Vietnam when the military was unpopular—and now we are being cast aside?  (“Oh, it’s Tommy This and Tommy That, And Tommy Go Away/ But it’s ‘Thank You, Mr. Atkins’ When The Band Begins to Play.”).
• Did someone in the White House or Congress think that we were too stupid to notice? Are we supposed to simply “lie back and think of Congressional majorities?”
• Battle streamers are virtually invisible to the general public. Hardly anyone will notice if they are returned to the colors.  The chances that they will provoke public outcry are slim.
• SecWar can accomplish this immediately, at virtually NO cost to U.S. government

POC: Don Smith, Arizona Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans

(520) 230-6304.  dieburg277@gmail.com

For decades, U.S. National Guard units (mostly Army) that were descended from former Confederate units, had battle streamers from their Confederate service on their regimental colors. The Naming Commission recommended that the Confederate streamers be removed, and the Secretary of Defense agreed. They were removed in the summer of 2023.

The Secretary of War should reverse that action and put the streamers back on the unit colors. Here is why:

• Having Union and Confederate campaign streamers on the National Guard colors demonstrated that, after the war, former enemies could not only reconcile and come together, but also find ways to commemorate the honorable actions of their former foes. That is a powerful example our military can (and has, in the past) set for other countries.
• E plurubus unum. Out of many, one. Putting Union and Confederate battle streamers on National Guard colors shows that we are able to take the strengths of former enemies and use them as building blocks for a new, improved American military and nation. It is the same reason we have, on U.S. Army helicopters, the names of Native American tribes. The children of Revolutionary War Loyalists, Confederates, and Native American warriors all fought with bravery and distinction in the U.S. military from the beginning of the 20^th century onward.  The courage and valor of past foes, blended with the courage and valor of past United States soldiers, has created the rich heritage of today’s American military.
• Removing the streamers sets a bad precedent. If we are now going to judge the actions of past Americans by modern standards, and cancel heroes from the past because they did some things that we disapprove of today—-where does it stop? What heroes will we have left? ALL of our heroes from the past have done things that some people nowadays are troubled by. This is another example of cancel culture.
• Americans have generally been forgiving of what their soldiers did in combat, as long as the soldiers followed their orders and behaved honorably. If we now start deciding who can be honored or not, based on whether we approve now of the missions they were given back then,or the tactics they used, that is not fair to the legacies of those veterans from the past.
• This singling out of one group of American veterans—removing Confederate streamers but leaving Union ones—sets a dangerous precedent. Standards are only fair if they are applied fairly, to everyone.  If the modern-day U.S. Army cannot have Confederate battle streamers, then it shouldn’t fly helicopters named for Native American tribes that also fought against the United States and de facto enslaved people—the white and Hispanic settlers they took captive, and often tortured and murdered.  Federal government officials should explain why they are applying different standards.  If you treat one group of a society differently than others, it corrodes trust throughout the society and makes the society’s leaders—the federal government, in this case—seem unjust and unfair.
• The “Southern Smile” is the nickname for the curve of states, through the American Southeast, that has for decades produced more than its share of American servicemen and women. NO ONE likes to see their ancestors treated with disrespect, contempt or indifference.  Removing the battle streamers creates the impression that some in the federal government feel that, now that it’s gotten decades of dedicated service from Southerners, it can discard them.   (And replace them with…what?  AI?)
• The FY 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, which created the Naming Commission, said that the commission’s purpose was to develop plans that would “remove all names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederate States of America (commonly referred to as the ‘Confederacy’) or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from all assets of the Department of Defense.” (Emphasis added).  The battle streamers do not fit either of those categories.
  • They commemorate state units, not Confederate national units. Individual states raised regiments for state service during the Civil War.  Many Confederate soldiers had much stronger allegiances to their states than they did to the Confederacy itself.  They considered their states to be their countries, their homes.  These men volunteered to defend their states; it was the state governments that sent them into Confederate service.
  • The streamers commemorate regiments—groups of men, not any single “person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America.” They commemorate the valor of men who fought bravely, and for each other.  They fought for the man to their left and right—as American soldiers have always done.  These men bonded together, under the most trying circumstances, into a unit—and the streamers honor those units.
  • Many Confederate soldiers did NOT serve voluntarily. The Confederacy instituted mandatory conscription in early 1862.  Usually, only those men with money or political connections could avoid service.  Also, many men enlisted because there was a strong social stigma against “shirkers” in the early years of the war.  They feared being shunned by their communities if they didn’t enlist.
• For people who are offended by any sight of Confederate iconography, returning the battle streamers should cause them no problems. The streamers will blend in with all the other battle streamers from past American wars on a unit’s colors.  You literally have to be standing next to the flag itself, combing through the streamers, in order to see an individual one.  Most Americans only see unit colors from far, far away, at public events like parades.