I think that what he suggests takes it too far, but I do see what he is saying. It may be that he is trolling for a point. Trying to spur thought on why we name things what we do. To sum up what he is saying: We name our most badassed weapons after Native Americans to make the NA's seem more badass. Like they were worthy opponents, and we were fought hard to win our country. When in reality the Native American's fell to a wave of soldiers, trickery and disease. That they hardly put up a resistance, let alone a fight. What he is saying is that we should be ashamed of what we did to the Native Americans, and not white wash it by naming deadly weapons systems after them, to make them seem more worthy an opponent. This, in my estimation, goes too far though. While the national psyche should have a bit of shame for what the country did to the NA's, that legacy is all the Natives have left. Take it away, and all they have is the feeling that they weren't a proud people that fought hard, but a battered spouse sitting in a shelter. One that isn't going to be helped. I guess that even pride based on a lie is better than no pride at all.