Poppy Day

[shortyshort]

This is a picture of my Uncle.



I wish to remember all who died in the wars, not just the allies.

None of his mates made it. He died about 5 years ago.
He was not a bad man, just doing what he was told, or be shot.

Discuss, if you wish.

EDIT: He is the second from the left.

[G.W.K]

I wish to remember all who dies in the wars, not just the allies.

None of his mates made it. He died about 5 years ago.
He was not a bad man, just doing what he was told, or be shot.

Discuss, if you wish.

You stole my idea!

Yes, we should remember everyone...whether we were fighting with them, or against them. Everyone is the same in death. (Sorry to sound really morbid there!)

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

You stole my idea!

Yes, we should remember everyone...whether we were fighting with them, or against them. Everyone is the same in death. (Sorry to sound really morbid there!)

G.W.K

Sorry for stealing your idea.

He was 16 at the time of the photo.

[G.W.K]

Sorry for stealing your idea.

He was 16 at the time of the photo.

What age was he when he was killed?

(I gave you a positive, you can really talk sensibly at times. Usually when you are serious.)

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

What age was he when he was killed?

(I gave you a positive, you can really talk sensibly at times. Usually when you are serious.)

G.W.K

He was not killed.

He was captured at Normandy.

He toured the world visiting many different POW camps on his travels.

He said that the Americans treated them like dogs.
They had to pick cotton, and a certain weight every day, so, if they were light, they pee'd in the sack to make the weight up.

[G.W.K]

He was not killed.

He was captured at Normandy.

So he died naturally? I thought he died in war...?

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

This is a picture of my Uncle.



I wish to remember all who died in the wars, not just the allies.

None of his mates made it. He died about 5 years ago.

[G.W.K]

Sorry...never made that connection! 

I too made a thread on this, then I realised you had bet me (using my idea, lol)

Basically, it's the same thing. Remembering people who died, etc.

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

Sorry...never made that connection! 

G.W.K

No problem.

[G.W.K]

So, like you mentioned in another thread that you think the 2 minute silence should be an hour long. Will you have a longer, private silence tomorrow?

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

Sometimes I think about it anyway, for longer.

My parents still talk about the "blitz" and "doodle-bugs".

[ahinton]

Sometimes I think about it anyway, for longer.

My parents still talk about the "blitz" and "doodle-bugs".

I do not wish to intrude in any unwarranted manner here - still less express any thoughts about this inevitably sensitive issue that might upset anyone - but I have to say that I find the entire remembrance tradition thing utterly sickening - not at all because of the perpetuation of the annual commemorations, of course, but because that "war to end all wars" - i.e. what we now think of as the First World War (1914-1918) - is something from which subsequent history of widespread war-mongering has demonstrated beyond all doubt that we have none of us learnt any lessons at all from that 1914-19187 war. We should have learnt from that experience and, if we have not done so and continue not to do so, I have no idea how humanity can look itself in the face and continue to function in any meaningful and constructive way for anyone's benefit.

Quite how those three surviving British First World War veterans - Harry Patch, Henry Allingham and another younger one whose name escapes me right now and who has attained a mere 108 years - can face this legacy and continue to function from day to day I know not; it must be quite a tribute to them that they can somehow come to terms with how a 9-decade legacy has yet to ensure the permanent cessation of a war-mongering activity whose continued recurrence is something of which we should surely all be thoroughly ashamed.

Best,

Alistair

[G.W.K]

It's not there to go on about current wars and how we haven't stopped further wars or learnt any lessons...it's about remembering those who died so we could have the privilage to sit here and type this!

It's remembering those who sacrificed themselves for those they loved. Those men and woman who (not just in WW1 but other wars) died protecting us. It isn't a day for us to judge or condemn people that are continuing wars.

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

I do not wish to intrude in any unwarranted manner here.

Please do, oh, you already have

but I have to say that I find the entire remembrance tradition thing utterly sickening

Maybe because you claim to be a scot?

Quite how those three surviving British First World War veterans - Harry Patch, Henry Allingham

dropping names again.

it must be quite a tribute to them that they can somehow come to terms with how a 9-decade legacy has yet to ensure the permanent cessation of a war-mongering activity whose continued recurrence is something of which we should surely all be thoroughly ashamed.

You prat.
We can not just forget it.

[G.W.K]

Maybe because you claim to be a scot?

Oh come on, let us have a sensible discussion without resorting to racism!

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

It's remembering those who sacrificed themselves for those they loved.

G.W.K

Well said, have a "brownie point", (not that it will show).

And lets not forget the other team, who believed that they were doing the same.

[thalbergmad]

Quite how those three surviving British First World War veterans - Harry Patch, Henry Allingham and another younger one whose name escapes me right now and who has attained a mere 108 years - can face this legacy and continue to function from day to day I know not; it must be quite a tribute to them that they can somehow come to terms with how a 9-decade legacy has yet to ensure the permanent cessation of a war-mongering activity whose continued recurrence is something of which we should surely all be thoroughly ashamed.

Best,

Alistair

I don't think they have come to terms with it and probably never will. They know that war solves nothing and that the following war was a direct consequence of the one they fought in.

As GWK said, it is a day to remember those who died, not a day for judgement, as the lessons will never be learnt.

Thal

[G.W.K]

Well said, have a "brownie point", (not that it will show).

And not lets forget the other team, who believed that they were doing the same.

LOL, thanks. I can't give you one for another hour.

True, both sides fighting for a good cause. Both sides were fighting for the same reasons, just different beliefs.

G.W.K

[G.W.K]

As GWK said, it is a day to remember those who died, not a day for judgement, as the lessons will never be learnt.

Very true! You got a point for that.

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

True. You got a point for that.

G.W.K

You are not supposed to applaud your own point. 

[ahinton]

It's not there to go on about current wars and how we haven't stopped further wars or learnt any lessons...it's about remembering those who died so we could have the privilage to sit here and type this!

It's remembering those who sacrificed themselves for those they loved. Those men and woman who (not just in WW1 but other wars) died protecting us. It isn't a day for us to judge or condemn people that are continuing wars.

G.W.K

You evidently misunderstand my meaning entirely. Why should we at this time (or indeed any other) push under the carpet the fact that the lessons of World War One have yet to be learnt? You seem to think that what I have written on the subject might imply that I am somehow unsympathetic to the outcome of that war, yet the very fact of my concern that more than 900,000 British citizens alone died during that conflict as a direct consequence of their involvement in it should surely persuade you otherwise. I am not seeking to stand in judgement for or against anyone in particular here, but we can surely not just sit and remember those poor souls who suffered and died in that war (and their families who suffered the losses of their loved ones as a direct consequence of this) without considering what that experience - even though we have not gone through it ourselves - has done to people? No - we need to address this in a more positive an constructive manner and this, if anything, is what - in my humble opinion - the continued annual remembrances are for.

Best,

Alistair

[shortyshort]

No - we need to address this in a more positive an constructive manner.

Best,

Alistair

Go on then.

[G.W.K]

You evidently misunderstand my meaning entirely. Why should we not at this time (or indeed any other) push under the carpet the fact that the lessons of World War One have yet to be learnt? You seem to think that what I have written on the subject might imply that I am somehow unsympathetic to the outcome of that war, yet the very fact of my concern that more than 900,000 British citizens alone died during that conflict as a direct consequence of their involvement in it should surely persuade you otherwise. I am not seeking to stand in judgement for or against anyone in particular here, but we can surely not just sit and remember those poor souls who suffered and died in that war (and their families who suffered the losses of their loved ones as a direct consequence of this) without considering what that experience - even though we have not gone through it ourselves - has done to people? No - we need to address this in a more positive an constructive manner and this, if anything, is what - in my humble opinion - the continued annual remembrances are for.

It sounds as if you do disagree with the rememberances. "address this in a more positive and constructive manner"...what, dance around singing songs whilst throwing confetti everywhere? It's national mourning!

We cannot learn much now. We know war is wrong...some people fight because they are doing it for thier religion, some are forced, etc.

You are not supposed to applaud your own point. 

I wasn't applauing...I was emphasising how important my point was.

G.W.K

[ahinton]

Please do, oh, you already have

And your point is?...

Maybe because you claim to be a scot?

Whilst I am indeed what you believe that I "claim" to be, I might be intrigued to know just what difference that might make to any argument on this topic, given that Scots people died in service in that war just as English did?

dropping names again.

From whence might your "again" originate"? - i.e., where have I supposedly "dropped" names on this topic previously?

You prat.
We can not just forget it.

You trade insults just as you please and I will ignore them just as I please, but what you seem not to understand is that I agree that we cannot forget it. Of course we "can" - but we shouldn't. That statement does not undermine anything that I have said previously. It is surely a gross indictment against humanity that those vital lessons that should have been learnt from the experience of that war that ended 90 years ago this month have yet to be learnt, as subsequent experience has shown.

Best,

Alistair

[michel dvorsky]

We are not celebrating death.  We are commemorating sacrifice. 

Each war has its own lesson.

In hindsight, World War I was indeed a fairly pointless war.  If nothing else that war should be a warning about the dangers of blind nationalism.  In what way does commemorating the lives of millions of young people who died in horrible circumstances on both sides glorify the stupidity, myopia, and cowardice of their leaders?

World War II is proof that freedom and democracy are worth fighting for.  We should commemorate the sacrifice of our grandparents in the defeat of global fascism. Those on the losing side have learned the lesson of supporting bankrupt ideologies.

Show some respect.

[shortyshort]

It sounds as if you do disagree with the rememberances. "address this in a more positive and constructive manner"...what, dance around singing songs whilst throwing confetti everywhere? It's national mourning!

We cannot learn much now. We know war is wrong...some people fight because they are doing it for thier religion, some are forced, etc.

G.W.K

I would give you another point but I can't for 30 mins.

I wasn't applauding...I was emphasising how important my point was.

G.W.K

OK

[ahinton]

Well said, have a "brownie point", (not that it will show).

And lets not forget the other team, who believed that they were doing the same.

Indeed.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I don't think they have come to terms with it and probably never will. They know that war solves nothing and that the following war was a direct consequence of the one they fought in.

As GWK said, it is a day to remember those who died, not a day for judgement, as the lessons will never be learnt.

Thal

Sadly, that seems all too true, but that should not of itself excuse the lack of effort to learn those all-important lessons, should it? - or am I missing something?...

Best,

Alistair

[shortyshort]

Sorry Gwk, I just gave my Brownie point to MD.

[gyzzzmo]

I wish to remember all hundreds of thousands innocent Iraques, Afghanistan and people from many African countries who got killed and still get killed, and conveniently are forgotten by US media and goverment.

And yes its abit of a statement but an important one.

gyzzzmo

[shortyshort]

I wish to remember all hundreds of thousands innocent Iraques, Afghanistan and people from many African countries who got killed and still get killed, and conveniently are forgotten by US media and goverment.

And yes its abit of a statement but an important one.

gyzzzmo

So do I.

I'm not sure if I have enough "Brownie Points" for this thread?

EDIT: to give out.

[ahinton]

It sounds as if you do disagree with the rememberances. "address this in a more positive and constructive manner"...what, dance around singing songs whilst throwing confetti everywhere? It's national mourning!

Heaven forfend! Clearly I have expressed my thoughts most inadequately - or you and others have misread them fundamentally. This is indeed a most serious matter and what I mean by "addressing" the issues concerned "in a more constructive manner" is trying to learn from those events that are commemorated in services of remembrance so that present and future generations do not end up getting embroiled in similar conflicts and being remembered in similar ways decades hence, in some kind of constant self-perpetuating round of horror - no more, no less. Do I now make myself clear? I hope so.

Best,

Alistair

[michel dvorsky]

Heaven forfend! Clearly I have expressed my thoughts most inadequately - or you and others have misread them fundamentally. This is indeed a most serious matter and what I mean by "addressing" the issues concerned "in a more constructive manner" is trying to learn from those events that are commemorated in services of remembrance so that present and future generations do not end up getting embroiled in similar conflicts and end up being remembered in similar ways decades hence, in some kind of constant self-perpetuating round of horror - no more, no less. Do I now makle myself clear? I hope so.

Best,

Alistair

Yes, because when I learn about my fellow Canadians sacrifice at Vimy, it fills me with a Nationalistic rage that only killing the Hun can satisfy. 

[ahinton]

We are not celebrating death.  We are commemorating sacrifice.

Of course - although at the same time we should, I believe, be conscious of the fact that these sacrifices should never have had to be made and we should at the same time consider what brought us to that situation.

In what way does commemorating the lives of millions of young people who died in horrible circumstances on both sides glorify the stupidity, myopia, and cowardice of their leaders?

It doesn't and of course cannot, but that doesn't of itself mean that such services of remembrance should not take place or that their principal thrust is in any sense undermined because of that past stupidity, myopia and cowardice...

World War II is proof that freedom and democracy are worth fighting for.  We should commemorate the sacrifice of our grandparents in the defeat of global fascism. Those on the losing side have learned the lesson of supporting bankrupt ideologies.

Show some respect.

I don't think that I have done otherwise, although at the same tiome I cannot help but note that even World War II has taught all too few people that this kind of international aggression does nothing but bring about human misery wherever it may manifest itself - and that this fact is in its own right all too ample a proof that the WWI experience had taught this lesson to insufficient numbers of people by 1939 and that those lessons have still self-evidently to be learnt today...

Best,

Alistair

[michel dvorsky]

I don't think that I have done otherwise, although at the same tiome I cannot help but note that even World War II has taught all too few people that this kind of international aggression does nothing but bring about human misery wherever it may manifest itself - and that this fact is in its own right all too ample a proof that the WWI experience had taught this lesson to insufficient numbers of people by 1939 and that those lessons have still to be learnt today...

Your heart wouldn't bleed so much if your mind was amenable to the actual lessons of history.

Human nature is unchanging throughout history.  There are always some people who wish to control and manipulate others.  We are only perfectible insofar as our institutions and societies discourage us from doing each other harm. 

Still, the international arena is still very much a Hobbesian state of nature.  The President of the USA has a duty to serve the self interest of the American people.   The president of Russia has a duty to serve the self interest of the Russian people.  It is not sensible, and certainly not virtuous for the President of the United States to do what is in the interest of the Russian people, unless these interests happen to overlap.  This is why the UN sits with its arms crossed whilst Rwandands and Congolese butcher eachother and why countries have to sometimes form alliances and sometimes take ideological and military stands against eachother.

It so happens that free and democratic nations tend to get along a lot better than unfree and undemocratic nations.  These principles are worth fighting for and worth dying for given the right circumstances.

[G.W.K]

I'm not sure if I have enough "Brownie Points" for this thread?

EDIT: to give out.

You can give each person 1 per hour.

I too gave MD a point for his first post in this topic. Alistair, I don't know how to respond to you...I still find that you are giving off mixed signals here.

G.W.K

[ahinton]

Your heart wouldn't bleed so much if your mind was amenable to the actual lessons of history.

The extent to which you may perceive it to do so in this context might be seen to be down to you alone to decide; that to which you may or may not believe my mind to be amenable is likewise, for what that may or may not be worth...

Human nature is unchanging throughout history.

If so (and I'm not saying that it is), is that your fault or mine or anyone else's in particular?...

r The President of the USA has a duty to serve the self interest of the American people.   The president of Russia has a duty to serve the self interest of the Russian people.  It is not sensible, and certainly not virtuous for the President of the United States to do what is in the interest of the Russian people, unless these interests happen to overlap.  This is why the UN sits with its arms crossed whilst Rwandands and Congolese butcher eachother and why countries have to sometimes form alliances and sometimes take ideological and military stands against eachother.

OK, so we each agree that the UN is far from perfect. The activitites of presidents of certain countries in serving - or attempting to serve or trying to be seen to serve (take your pick) - the best interests of their own electorates / subjects need not of itself presume the need to succeed in war against other countries in order to achive the avowedly desired effect...

It so happens that free and democratic nations tend to get along a lot better than unfree and undemocratic nations.  These principles are worth fighting for and worth dying for given the right circumstances.

But, with respect, that is arguably not quite the point. Our sadly increasing experience of global war-mongering and its consequences should surely by now have taught us all that sending the troops out with some kind of agenda to "defend" something or other, whatever it may be, is likely to be fraught with possibly insuperable difficulties and bring about substantial human casualties and increased sens of enmity on all sides without necessarily achieveing the purportedly desired - or indeed any worthwhile - result; one has only to consider what is and has been going on in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan and the Congo over the past three or more decades to realise that.

Best,

Alistair

[G.W.K]

Aside from the world fighting with each other: we should wear our poppies with pride and honour. I know that may sound a little stupid to some of you but aside from the fact that the world cannot live in peace together, people are dying!

Yes, we need to address that. People have to stop dying because of wars, I agree there but tomorrow, we shouldn't think about how the human race could improve and stop all this. We should just remember the fallen.

After tomorrow, we can think about how the human race can improve.

G.W.K

[rc]

I was listening to a radio program about Germany trying to recover their war dead, and they mentioned how for men of a certain age, enlistment was manditory for Germans under the Nazi regime.

My understanding is that WWII was a result of the treaty of versailles being too punitive on Germany.  It screwed Germans over, creating fertile circumstances for the rise of fascism.  I don't believe they made the same mistake after WWII.

Then, reading about the arms race that came after WWII, the cold war, I think was an encouraging outcome - nobody blew up the world.  I think, slowly, we are making progress.

So, I'm off to find a poppy.  They donate to war vets right?

Here's a radio broadcast, Churchill speaking about the atrocities of war and securing peace.  The context he was speaking in is different from today, but I find one thing similar with our times - it's not always so clear what the right course of action is for the future, though it seems obvious in hindsight.  At the time, Churchill was a lone voice and the prevailing opinion was one of appeasement.  To him, WWII could have been nipped in the bud...  Which I believe was the idea behind invading IRAQ, though I'm not sure there was as much insight behind that decision - where are the WMDs?

Anyways, here's some short Churchill broadcasts worth hearing:

https://www.archive.org/download/Winston_Churchill/1934-11-16_BBC_Winston_Churchill_The_Threat_Of_Nazi_Germany.mp3

https://www.archive.org/download/Winston_Churchill/1938-10-16_BBC_Winston_Churchill_We_Must_Arm.mp3

[lucylucy]

sorry...but
he was a NAZI ?

[thalbergmad]

sorry...but
he was a NAZI ?

If you had a choice of becoming a Nazi or being shot, what would you do??

Thal

[pianochick93]

Would you all stop arguing with each other and show some respect?

They shall not grow old, as we who are left grow old
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun, and in the morning
We will remember them.

Lest we forget.

[lucylucy]

If you had a choice of becoming a Nazi or being shot, what would you do??

Thal

sorry...but it wasn't that !!!
i can't say that they have choise but if they didn't want to be nazi they could go to the camps of uprising

[G.W.K]

sorry...but
he was a NAZI ?

Although we consider the Nazi's as enemies, they believed they were fighting for a good cause. They thought the same as us, just slightly differently.

Thal made a good point, if they didn't become Nazi's then they (and probably their families) would be killed, whether they went to P.O.W. camps. If you had to make a choice between your life and those you love...I think you would probably choose to save yourself and your family. Wouldn't you?

G.W.K

[lucylucy]

Although we consider the Nazi's as enemies, they believed they were fighting for a good cause. They thought the same as us, just slightly differently.

Thal made a good point, if they didn't become Nazi's then they (and probably their families) would be killed, whether they went to P.O.W. camps. If you had to make a choice between your life and those you love...I think you would probably choose to save yourself and your family. Wouldn't you?

G.W.K

it's not the question ok ? 
most of nazis were nazy because they agreed with hitler !!!!! not because hitler told them "if u don't want to be a nazi, then i'll kill you" !!!
sorry, if everyone thought like u...then the nazis would be still here. -_-'

[G.W.K]

All I said was a simple statement. I was not saying anything more. Please try and get through a thread without trying to start a fight or distract a topic from it's original discussion.

G.W.K

[shortyshort]

it's not the question ok ? 
most of nazis were nazy because they agreed with hitler !!!!! not because hitler told them "if u don't want to be a nazi, then i'll kill you" !!!
sorry, if everyone thought like u...then the nazis would be still here. -_-'

I understand what you are trying to say.

But, it's hard to imagine what you would do when put in that situation, especially if you were brought up to believe that it was correct, by your country.

I don't think that you can condem a man for doing what he thinks is his duty.

Many French people joined and/or helped the Nazi's.

We were lucky too, to have the sea between us and mainland Europe.

EDIT: Most of the people that you say were Nazi's were only wearing the uniform of their country.

[G.W.K]

I understand what you are trying to say.

But, it's hard to imagine what you would do when put in that situation, especially if you were brought up to believe that it was correct, by your country.

I don't think that you can condem a man for doing what he thinks is his duty.

Many French people joined and/or helped the Nazi's.

We were lucky too, to have the sea between us and mainland Europe.

EDIT: Most of the people that you say were Nazi's were only wearing the uniform of their country.

Well said. It all basically comes down to what they were taught and what they believed was the right thing. Take WW2, Germany was clearly the better country. It had the best weapons, security and living standards.

Britain (and other countries) were not good. But because they believed in themselves, because they wanted to protect their families, etc...they continued fighting. Thus, Germany lost. Those who continued to fight were also soon stopped by the attack by the Americans on Japan.

But, this isn't really a History thread. And History isn't my strong point...lol

lucylucy: please consider what you're saying. I know you weren't referring to all Germans being evil and Nazis, but that could be kind of prejudice. It would be like the Germans calling all French people "frogs". I AM NOT SAYING ANYTHING AGAINST YOU, I AM JUST SAYING A FACT!!!

G.W.K

[communist]

Although we consider the Nazi's as enemies, they believed they were fighting for a good cause. They thought the same as us, just slightly differently.

Thal made a good point, if they didn't become Nazi's then they (and probably their families) would be killed, whether they went to P.O.W. camps. If you had to make a choice between your life and those you love...I think you would probably choose to save yourself and your family. Wouldn't you?

G.W.K

your just mad because they f*cked your country up

[G.W.K]

your just mad because they f*cked your country up

Who the hell do you think you're talking to? I wasn't even born! And for your information: I'm not mad, I'm stating a fact.

G.W.K