I don't agree with the second one because of the way it was transacted, but truly, I have no dog in the fight. I didn't service in the Army and never was stationed at any of the bases affected. I did serve in the AF just in case service is a requirement to comment on service related issues. I know you never implied that, just mentioning since others did and I mentioned my lack of direct connection to the Army above.
You asked if they "would they be petty enough to change them again" and I said the current admin was petty for changing it back. The damage had already been done with the first change whether you liked it or not. Congress passed the appropriations bill with the required renaming with an overwhelming majority and Trump didn't veto it which would have stopped the whole thing in its tracks. He didn't because he didn't want to be seen attacking the military which would have hurt his re-election campaign. A few years later, they change the name back while "honoring" someone with the same name to skirt the law. Sure, that's not petty, but if it is changed again, that would definitely be petty.
ETA: Hog pointed out Trump did veto the act, but it was overridden by Congress so I stand corrected on that line.