Talk:Buffalo Soldier

message: the article doesn't specify, were the original/early "buffalo soldiers" slaves? Were they forced to partake in wars? --Ballchef 08:34, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slaves or not? 

message: To introduce this subject with "The Spanish called them 'Smoked Yankees'?"
I just don't see what value this statement adds to the article, especially in the opening paragraphs?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.125.149.243 (talk • contribs) 14:06, 27 February 2006.
::What did the French call them?  How about the Portugese?  Canadians?  South Africans?  Swedes?  Irish?  This statement in the opening secton adds zero value as it stands.  If you really want to keep this sentence, how about moving it to it's own section and expanding that section by including slang terms from around the world?
:::A section unto it's own listing to the greatest reasonable degree of completion what every group called them (including terms which would not be used in polite society now) by other groups. Shying away from history becasue it's "uncomfortable" ensures it's repetion. A REDDSON  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.17.48 (talk) 16:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does it really add value 

message: As I recall, according to his biography, Gen Powell not only unveiled the Buffalo Soldiers statue, he spearheaded the project to create the monument.  Someone with a copy of his book might want to add that and source it. SqlPac 22:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gen Powell 

message: It may be nice for us to think that Indians referred to these men as "Buffalo Soldiers" out of admiration and respect, but this is generally disputed by Native Americans themselves.
I agree with the statement given by the anonomous user above me, who/what tribe originated this alias to the comparison of Afro-American infantry soldiers, and is there belief that the unknown Native American group significantly described them as Buffalo Soldiers for other bias reasons, as if describing them racially to their comrades? if so, was this a racial slur? --Andres Flores 00:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgive the extreme lateness of this reply, but as to the origins of the term "buffalo soldier" it would seem that it started out as nothing more than descriptive. Soldiers with dark skin and dark, curly hair....buffalo soldiers. It would seem that it was neither as derisive as to constitute a racial slur, nor as laudatory a term as many modern commentators would care to think. Simple as that.172.190.43.61 (talk) 22:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Origin of "Buffalo Soldiers" 

message: User  has added a bunch of pictures to the page ... Too Many, IMHO. Does this article really need two photos of them from the Spanish American War, especially so far apart? And what's up with the saddle & holster as the Very First image? — 17:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the pictures do add a lot to the article. Perhaps two S-A war pictures is a bit of overkill, but I think the article is far better off with the addition of the images. --Habap 16:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New pictures added 

message: Verified web references and reformatted references.  No major content changes, just minor reformatting.  SqlPac 02:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reformatted References 

message: I created a template that can be fixed up, added to and used often. See Template:Buffalo Soldiers. – Freechild (BoomCha) 17:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Template

message: Per the event noted at the link below, I request a change in the notation in this article about the date of death of the final remaing Buffalo Soldier.
http://www.patriotguard.org/ALLForums/tabid/61/forumid/11/postid/580515/view/topic/Default.aspx
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.97.45.186 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 15 July 2007
::I don't think that messageboard qualifies as a verifiable source.  Also there is nothing indicating that the soldier was actually a soldier in one of the Buffalo Soldier units, just a few mentions by various folks calling him a "Buffalo Soldier"; this might be an "honorary title" based on service in a different unit.  Perhaps the local newspapers have more information in his obituary, or ran a story after his death with more details?  SqlPac (talk) 00:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Challenge:  Date of Death of "Last Buffalo" Soldier 

message: It was my understanding that the name did come from indians, but it was because the soldiers were ordered to kill off as many buffalo as possible to starve the indians and kill those they couldn't starve.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.185.202 (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not clear how the term Buffalo Soldier came into existance, there are many theories and debates but there is no definitive nor conclusive story as to how the name stuck. -Signaleer (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You may have forgotten that the members of the 9th and 10th Cavalry were issued buffalo robes in the late 1860s which were made ad hoc into over coats.  Why? Because the better overcoats were for other troops. Indians who saw these soldiers with their black faces were instantly reminded on the black faced American bison which is called a "buffalo" in America. It is not hard to imagine some one asking, 'Who are those blackfaced buffalo robed soldiers.'  Quickly the term "Buffalo Soldiers" was coined. Whether this was by Native-Americans (likely), frontiermen or settlers (less likely) is unknown. While facts are sketchy, the idea of the curly black hair of the African-American or "Negro" in the venacular of the times, being like a buffalo was first printed by the eastern press only in the mid to late 1870s. Yet the term "Buffalo Soldier" had been seen by the late 1860s in various documents. It would be an interesting study for some young college student to work on! Jrcrin001 (talk) 23:41, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually buffalo overcoats came into fairly wide use within the Frontier Army, but mainly in the 1870s. It might be better to state that the general historical consensus is that the nickname originated with Native American tribes in the late 1860s and related to their tight, curly, dark hair. Also, Grierson was not shy about claiming additional publicity for his regiment, hence the overall idea that only the 10th Cav were called Buffalo Soldiers might be incorrect.Intothatdarkness (talk) 16:53, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buffalo Soldier 

message: I'm new to Wikipedia and I don't feel comfortable editing too much yet, but I'd suggest adding some information or a link to Fort Huachuca and/or Camp Naco. Both are in Southeastern Arizona and have a long history of association with Buffalo Soldiers going after Apache and in the Spanish American War. Also I heard from a reliable source that they were called Buffalo Soldiers because the Native Americans thought the black soldier's hair felt like buffalo wool. 
~~Lyn  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.200.93.158 (talk) 05:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fort Huachuca

message: Due to the date of the forming it is strongly possible that the majority of recruits would have been African, not African-American. Is this worth changing on the main article? Moustan 86.10.97.187 (talk) 22:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to pretend that you didn't even go there. :-) —  00:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Race 

message: While there is a political discussion of the alleged role of Buffalo Soldiers as "genocidal shock troops", there is an absence of discussion of the long-held perception that segregated units were useful for only menial duty because of perceived combat failures in World War I (93rd Division), World War II (92nd Division), and Korea (24th Infantry). The counter argument was that poor and hostile commanders, inadequate training, and parcelling out of black units to foreign and support commands (all racism-related) led to the alleged failures. An unpleasant subject, true, but one necessary for a complete picture, and no one balked at alledging they might have been genocidal tools.--Reedmalloy (talk) 18:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If this "shock troop" viewpoint (belied as it is by the consistent reluctance to actually use African-American soldiers in combat) is only held by a "small minority" of historians, it should not be included as it gives undue weight to what is a fringe belief.172.190.43.61 (talk) 22:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy

message: As of April 22,2009, the following references have problems with links - 5,6,9  (Dead Links) and 14,15,16 (Links have moved). I understand how to edit articles but not the references. I did find the new location of reference 6 at http://www.nps.gov/goga/planyourvisit/upload/sb-buffalo-2008.pdf   Trippio (talk) 22:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Links in References 

message: The lede recently stated the 27th & 28th Cavalry regiments were part of the original units organized right after the Civil War. This is clearly in error. There was no 27th or 28th Cavalry regiments in the history of the US Army. For a quick historical list, please click here.
Yes, I know the 27th & 28th Cavalry Regiments are listed in the two following cites, but both come from one source - an article written for the San Diego History Journal that is scant on sources for these two units. 
* 27th Cavalry Regiment ref name=CpLockett {Citation
| title = Historic California Posts: Camp Lockett
| url = http://www.militarymuseum.org/CpLockett.html
| accessdate = 2008-01-17} ref
* 28th Cavalry Regiment ref name=CpLockett ref name="28cav" ref {Citation
| title = Defending the Border: The Cavalry at Camp Lockett 
| url = http://www.sandiegohistory.org/journal/93spring/border.htm
| accessdate = 2008-01-17} ref
Can anyone show me another source - like a US Army source? Please advise. Jrcrin001 (talk) 03:05, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Official army register from 1876 and 1896 only show 10 regiments .  However, This shows that the 27th and 28th were raised in the 1940s at Fort Clark in Texas and Camp Lockett in California, so the above sources seem to be reasonably correct.  The only thing I see here is that the 27th and 28th were not created at the same time as the other regiments so the leade was misleading but not incorrect. CosmicPenguin (talk• WP:WYOHelp!) 20:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  27th & 28th Cavalry Regiments 

message: dont print it print about 7 pages  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.76.112.216 (talk) 22:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  this stinks 

message: I removed the following paragraph. 1) It was not cited nor supported by any documentation. 2)  It is not supported in his TR's memoirs and it is a myth based on another incident. See the link and cite: Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919). The Rough Riders. Chapter IV - The Cavalry at Santiago. See paragraph 43.
"Theodore (Teddy) Roosevelt was ambiguous in his assessment of the Buffalo Soldiers, in his memoirs recalling he had to "draw" down to force them up the hill.  The Buffalo Soldiers present that day recalled the event differently in that the volunteer colonel had mounted an escaped horse which loped onto the battlefield and when the soldiers attempted to get the officer off the horse and back to cover he disuaded them by drawing his sidearm." (This was the paragraph removed)
This is an example where citation is so important on Wikipedia. Jrcrin001 (talk) 18:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teddy 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Buffalo Soldier's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "4th":
From Jamaica: 
From 10th Cavalry Regiment (United States): 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 06:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Buffalo Soldier]] 

message: "In addition, they were also subjected to indignities such as being issued worn out equipment, being forced to ride old or broke-down horses, given sub-standard rations, and had to deal with segregation on the bases where they were stationed as well as the surrounding communities." 
Please cite exactly how they were treated differently. Most of the Army at this time used worn out Civil War equipment, hard tack rations and older horses. This makes a better article. Jrcrin001 (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Systemic

message: I removed the category "Buffalo Soldier" from an article on my watchlist, Freddie Stowers.  I'm not trying to start a categorization war, but I think the category is being over-applied.  I'm copying my post from that pages talk page below.
"Buffalo Soldiers"
I have removed the Buffalo Soldiers category because Stowers and his unit were not, strictly speaking, "Buffalo Soldiers." I have included a note about the Buffalo Soldiers service during the war, which was stateside, although they did see action against...Mexico! One important difference, besides their founding dates and lineages, is that the 93rd had black officers, which the Buffalo Soldiers never did (at least not prior to desegregation: Their descendant units did, but they also had white troopers).
Although the information I have found online states that all the officers of the 93rd Division were white, I know that Vertner Tandy, serving in the 369th, was commissioned during the war (and I believe he was a warrant officer before that; the United States did not have Army warrant officers until 1916, so if he was, that would be another difference between the 93rd and the Buffalo regiments, which as far as I know had no warrant officers, black or white). I had thought that there were other black company-grade officers in the 371st, but I may have been mistaken---I will have to do some more research. In any case, the soldiers of the 93rd were not "Buffalo Soldiers." (Not all pre-1948 black soldiers were Buffalo Soldiers---and, since the units had white officers, not all Buffalo Soldiers were black!) Jpbrenna (talk) 17:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is the issue of the 92nd Division having a buffalo emblem, and black soldiers being called "buffalo soldiers" in popular parlance at the time, something which I overlooked until now. Was Lieutenant Jackie Robinson a "Buffalo Soldier?" Yes, because he was initially assigned to a traditional Buffalo unit before he became an officer. Were the other men in his eventual unit, the 761st Tank Battalion "Buffalo Soldiers?" Not the way I have seen the term traditionally used. Where does it start and stop? Was Jehu Grant a Buffalo Soldier? Are we going to call every post-Civil War but pre-1948 integration black soldier a "Buffalo Soldier?" To me, the term belongs to a specific period and type of a unit, and although we should mention later units of African-American soldiers or integrated units adopting the term, should we really put them in the same category? Has this policy been discussed? I hate to nit-pick, but I think there should be a category for all pre-integration units, with a special subcategory for the tradtional Buffalo Soldier cavalry units only.Jpbrenna (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Category "Buffalo Soldier"

message: In addition to what is on the "Buffalo Soldier" article under the heading,"Korean War and integration,(e.g., "the 24th Infantry Regiment saw combat during the Korean War and was the last segregated regiment to engage in combat."), I must add that there was another segregated combat unit which served in Korea - the 2d Ranger Company. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Rangers, "Korean War" section, which says, "October 28, 1950 would see the next four Ranger companies formed. Soldiers from the 505th Airborne Regiment and the 82nd Airborne's 80th Anti-aircraft Artillery Battalion volunteered and, after initially being designated the 4th Ranger Company, became the 2nd Ranger Company—the only all-black Ranger unit in United States history."
There is a book about the 2d Ranger Co (which I believe was also an Airborne Ranger Company) and it is on my Amazon "wish list." When I purchase it, I shall return and flesh out that article with more detail.
I also plan to talk with the Curator of the Houston Buffalo Soldier Museum and see if he can provide additional information.
Ranger Jim (talk) 17:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Afro-Americans in the Korean War 

message: "In August 1918, the 10th Cavalry supported the 35th Infantry Regiment in a border skirmish, the Battle of Ambos Nogales, in which German military advisors fought along with Mexican soldiers. This was the only battle during World War I where Germans engaged and died in combat against United States soldiers in North America."
:: The Battle of Ambos Nogales was part of the Mexican Revolution rather than WWI. Unless you want to make The Mexican Revolution part of WWI (or viceversa.)193.9.13.133 (talk) 21:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it involved German troops agitating tensions along the border between Mexico and the USA, this border battle can be listed as WWI, Border Battles and as a side note of the Mexican Revolution.  The key here is that Americans killed and buried German soldiers who were involved in the fighting. Don't forget the Zimmerman Telegram and the efforts the Germans conducted to get Mexico to disrupt the USA during WWI.  Here is another example; would the German sabotage in 1918 be part of the Border battles or Mexican Revolution? No, it is listed with WWI.  Because USA was in an active war with Germany, the involvement of German troops places the Battle of Ambos Nogales primarily as a WWI incident, second as a Border Battle and then part of the Mexican Revolution. I hope this helps. Jrcrin001 (talk) 03:19, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Um wow... No. Jersey John (talk) 04:09, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because it happened before 11/11/1918, and yes even with two German advisors present, in no way makes it a part of WW1. This battle is not OFFICIALLY recognized either here nor abroad as having been such. I corrected this in the article. Jersey John (talk) 04:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  WWI? 

message: I'm not an expert.  I am studying history of the US.  I am confused by the link for smoked yankees that redirects to this page for buffalo soldier.  In my text "The American Story", combined volume 4th edition by Robert A. Divine, page 523, it refers to "smoked yankees" during the Spanish-American war.  The "Spanish troops soon came to fear the 'smoked yankees', as they called them."  Up until this time in history, we have not come across this term.
Thanks for checking into this matter.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.3.40.142 (talk) 14:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  smoked yankees 

message: I've removed the "regiments of the U.S. Army" category since the article deals with several units instead of an individual regiment.  As best I can tell, all the individual Buffalo Soldier regiments are listed in the "regiments of the U.S. Army".Ocalafla (talk) 16:55, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category 

message: I see the English wiki, as politically correct and subservient to the fringes as ever, lends a hand in encouraging people to continue believing the falsehood that it's "possible" (nice hedging of bets) the Native Americans referred to black soldiers as "Buffalo Soldiers" due to bravery and/or respect of alleged observed skill (a falsehood,) rather than firmly siding with truth and lending more appreciable weight to the connection in observed similarities the Native Americans made between the nappy hair and dark skin of black soldiers and the coarse, nappy hair and dark coloring of buffalo. Jersey John (talk) 04:04, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Respect" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Buffalo Soldier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051127012025/http://www.hood.army.mil:80/4id_1-10cavalrysquadron/sqdrnhist.htm to http://www.hood.army.mil/4id_1-10cavalrysquadron/sqdrnhist.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070915020632/http://www.nps.gov:80/pwso/honor/pershing.htm to http://www.nps.gov/pwso/honor/pershing.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Cathay Williams [](September 1844 - 1892) was an American soldier under the pseudonym William Cathay. She is the first African-American female to enlist, and the only documented to serve in the United States Army assigned to the 38th infantry, the "Buffalo Solders". There was precedent for granting a pension to female soldiers disguised as men, but Williams application was rejected.  The exact date of Williams' death is unknown, but it is assumed she died shortly after being denied a pension, probably sometime in 1892. Her simple grave marker would have been made of wood and deteriorated long ago. Thus her final resting place is now unknown.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.119.33.180 (talk) 21:30, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female Buffalo Soldier 

message: First and foremost, there should not even be a section for bashing these heros of our countries as that violates NPOV. Secondly, the line  "the Buffalo Soldiers were used as mere shock troops or accessories to the forcefully expansionist goals of the U.S. government" has no source on it and is written in a degrading way. This is a page about famous Military units that are well known by people even outside of the US.
Take your pseudo-racist progressive crap out of here. Leave only the important information in the article and have a moderator trim the extra fat off of this page.
Yes I am angry  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.255.49.47 (talk) 20:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What sort of racist POS wrote the controversy page? 

message: In the American Frontier video game Red Dead Revolver, there's a black character named "Buffalo Soldier" who's clearly a reference to this phenomenon.  Is this noteworthy enough to warrant mentioning on the section?
Cameron Nedland (talk) 15:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Buffalo Soldier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100327135307/http://www.carson.army.mil/units/4id/units/unitsindex.html to http://www.carson.army.mil/units/4id/units/unitsindex.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020829202546/http://www.denix.osd.mil:80/denix/Public/ES-Programs/Conservation/Legacy/AAME/aame2.html to https://www.denix.osd.mil/denix/Public/ES-Programs/Conservation/Legacy/AAME/aame2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061010065537/http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/hisnps/NPShistorians/invisiblemen2.pdf to http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/hisnps/NPShistorians/invisiblemen2.pdf
*Added  tag to http://therawhidetrail.17.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=218
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061231133746/http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil:80/Eng/317EngineerBattalion.htm to http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/Eng/317EngineerBattalion.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:32, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A: A lead sentence, stating the scope of the topic.   An encyclopedic lead sentence cannot start out like the lead of a periodical's article, or the first topic sentence in the preface of a novel; rather it it must get right to that single task, looking a lot like (one of) the dictdef(s) 
: for the name used as the (un-dabbed) title of the article, or 
: for the phrase that is the title of the article.
   Specifically, in the accompanying article, it cannot start out 
: Buffalo Soldiers originally were ... 
[emphasis added] bcz the topic is not limited to the origin of the name.--Jerzy•t 02:29, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Q:''' What does this article lack, that every WP article ''or WP stub'' must have? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Buffalo Soldier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071220013418/http://www.buffalosoldiers-lawtonftsill.org/28-cav.htm to http://www.buffalosoldiers-lawtonftsill.org/28-cav.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061231133746/http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/Eng/317EngineerBattalion.htm to http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/Eng/317EngineerBattalion.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070627001955/http://garrison.leavenworth.army.mil/sites/about/Buffalo.asp to http://garrison.leavenworth.army.mil/sites/about/Buffalo.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120405155050/http://www.lwfaam.net/wf/hist_cult/wf_aabtl.htm to http://www.lwfaam.net/wf/hist_cult/wf_aabtl.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Buffalo Soldier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070512200542/http://shadowsoldier.wilderness.net/ to http://shadowsoldier.wilderness.net/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070512200542/http://shadowsoldier.wilderness.net/ to http://shadowsoldier.wilderness.net/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed the part that was in the first paragraph that said the name was based on the hair. The wiki page has a whole section on this that has more than just that one theory. I watched a short history video from the history channel that attributed the origin of the name to one of the other theories mentioned in the etymology section so clearly there is still some dispute. Simply saying that native americans gave the name is all that's really relevant for an intro. 75.100.33.6 (talk) 01:59, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: first paragraph 

message: This statement contains no reference citation and I believe it to be incorrect. The U.S. Military was OFFICIALLY desegregated, along with all government institutions, following the civil war, although the dominance of the officer corps by southerners created a highly bigoted environment where black military personnel were treated badly. The return to official, systemic racism throughout the federal government occurred during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson - an avowed racist, who recruited many klansmen into his administration and gave them free reign to impose segregation wherever they could. Economic concerns dominated the next two decades, and Franklin Roosevelt had no desire to anger his southern supporters, so desegregation was delayed until Republican pressure forced President Truman to sign his executive order in 1948 and finally led to the Civil Rights Act of 1957. 68.5.194.159 (talk) 02:00, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:   The regiments were racially segregated, as the U.S. military would not desegregate until 1948.