Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
Posted by (+4461) 12 years ago
Figured you can't assume everyone's seen the original.
Greatest Metallica album by far.
Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
HEY HEY HEY!!!! This is an Armistice Day thread - if you want to start a Veteran's Day thread, do it on your own time.
Posted by (+300) 12 years ago
I pretty much knew you were gonna say that, Bridgier.

It was fun waiting for it though.

It was fun waiting for it though.
Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
And would you care to guess WHY I'm making a distinction between Armistice Day and Veteran's Day?
Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
Well, I do like their cheeses, and their fries are world famous...
Anyways...
Armistice Day points to a concrete event, the cessation of a war fought for no particularly good reason beyond "we wanted to", a war that had consumed an entire generation of young European men and which ultimately set up the dominoes leading to WWII, dominoes which began falling almost as soon as a final "peace" was established.
As such, we can talk about this concrete event and attempt to define what lessons we can learn from the specific actions that were taken by the combatants upon both sides.
For those who have vested interest in promoting "the old lie", any conclusions reached in the context of WWI are almost entirely negative: "winning" the war cost everyone but the United States a shocking amount of lives and material, the British empire began its dissolution while Italy was rewarded with crippling inflation and Benito Mussolini. The losers fared far worse: reparations that have only recently been retired, massive territorial losses, etc.
The replacement of a specific Armistice Day with a more generic Veteran's Day elides all this. We move from discussing the specifics of WWI to memorializing the service of all US veterans everywhere and everywhen, expanding the scope of discussion while simultaneously contracting it to focus primarily upon those selfsame veterans. No Americans fell at Ypres, and once Armistice Day becomes Veteran's Day we begin the process of forgetting the meaning of Flanders Field. Armistice Day asks for reflection, Veteran's Day offers hagiography.
If you truly want to honor Veterans, then move Veteran's Day to the first Tuesday in November and make it a federal holiday.
Anyways...
Armistice Day points to a concrete event, the cessation of a war fought for no particularly good reason beyond "we wanted to", a war that had consumed an entire generation of young European men and which ultimately set up the dominoes leading to WWII, dominoes which began falling almost as soon as a final "peace" was established.
As such, we can talk about this concrete event and attempt to define what lessons we can learn from the specific actions that were taken by the combatants upon both sides.
For those who have vested interest in promoting "the old lie", any conclusions reached in the context of WWI are almost entirely negative: "winning" the war cost everyone but the United States a shocking amount of lives and material, the British empire began its dissolution while Italy was rewarded with crippling inflation and Benito Mussolini. The losers fared far worse: reparations that have only recently been retired, massive territorial losses, etc.
The replacement of a specific Armistice Day with a more generic Veteran's Day elides all this. We move from discussing the specifics of WWI to memorializing the service of all US veterans everywhere and everywhen, expanding the scope of discussion while simultaneously contracting it to focus primarily upon those selfsame veterans. No Americans fell at Ypres, and once Armistice Day becomes Veteran's Day we begin the process of forgetting the meaning of Flanders Field. Armistice Day asks for reflection, Veteran's Day offers hagiography.
If you truly want to honor Veterans, then move Veteran's Day to the first Tuesday in November and make it a federal holiday.
DULCE ET DECORUM EST
Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped behind.
Gas! Gas! Quick, boys! - An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime . . .
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est
Pro patria mori.
Wilfred Owen
8 October 1917 - March, 1918
Posted by (+300) 12 years ago
I just want to be clear...you said:
I'll agree that the socio-economic pressures at the start of WWII were influenced by the events you spoke of, but there were a lot more significant issues involved in the start of that war and it's spread throughout Europe...not the least of which was a lunatic dictator (yes, yes, I know, those same pressures were part of what put him in power).
and:
I'm ALL for that. I don't believe I've EVER had a Veteran's Day off...but I see a lot government offices closing for it all the time...and I'm a twelve-year Navy vet. What's up with that?
...a war that had consumed an entire generation of young European men and which ultimately set up the dominoes leading to WWII...
I'll agree that the socio-economic pressures at the start of WWII were influenced by the events you spoke of, but there were a lot more significant issues involved in the start of that war and it's spread throughout Europe...not the least of which was a lunatic dictator (yes, yes, I know, those same pressures were part of what put him in power).
and:
If you truly want to honor Veterans, then move Veteran's Day to the first Tuesday in November and make it a federal holiday.
I'm ALL for that. I don't believe I've EVER had a Veteran's Day off...but I see a lot government offices closing for it all the time...and I'm a twelve-year Navy vet. What's up with that?

Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
but there were a lot more significant issues involved in the start of that war and it's spread throughout Europe
And those were?
Posted by (+300) 12 years ago
but there were a lot more significant issues involved in the start of that war and it's spread throughout Europe
And those were?
When I read this back, I realized it could be read two ways... I meant it to say there were multiple significant issues involved in the start of the war, not that there were other issues that were MORE significant.
Sorry about that.
Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
multiple significant issues involved in the start of the war
And those were?
Posted by (+300) 12 years ago
Gonna make me recall my history, are you?
As I recall, there were issues with borders in dispute, cultural differences that had been increasing in pressure for many years. Look at Poland's position in Europe, for example...it's borders were hard to defend and it's leadership was almost crippled by the chaos in it's legislative body. Poland had been invaded over and over by it's neighbors, especially when there was any wealth to be had.
Defense of Poland had traditionally been handled by individual wealthy land owners that were only loosely united. They couldn't stand up to the concerted efforts of a government with expansion at any cost as it's goal.
The cultural disputes in Europe have raged for millennia ... and it's been a contributing factor if not a driving factor in many conflicts, not the least of which were both both WWI and WWII.
On a bit of another tack, and for comparison's sake, I was frankly amazed that the EU was able to get acceptance of Euro passed in many countries... the recent economic events such as Greece's near bankruptcy requiring bailout from the rest of the EU, the refusal of many members to accept changes to pension plans (I'm not debating whether the changes are warranted, just stating that it's an issue). It's interesting to note that Germany is going to have to be a major contributor to the EU's bailouts and attempts to stabilize the currency. It's possible we'll see similes to economic pressures leading to the wars in Europe.
I know I got off on a bit of a bunny trail here...but there you are.
[This message has been edited by Tracy Walters (11/17/2010)]
As I recall, there were issues with borders in dispute, cultural differences that had been increasing in pressure for many years. Look at Poland's position in Europe, for example...it's borders were hard to defend and it's leadership was almost crippled by the chaos in it's legislative body. Poland had been invaded over and over by it's neighbors, especially when there was any wealth to be had.
Defense of Poland had traditionally been handled by individual wealthy land owners that were only loosely united. They couldn't stand up to the concerted efforts of a government with expansion at any cost as it's goal.
The cultural disputes in Europe have raged for millennia ... and it's been a contributing factor if not a driving factor in many conflicts, not the least of which were both both WWI and WWII.
On a bit of another tack, and for comparison's sake, I was frankly amazed that the EU was able to get acceptance of Euro passed in many countries... the recent economic events such as Greece's near bankruptcy requiring bailout from the rest of the EU, the refusal of many members to accept changes to pension plans (I'm not debating whether the changes are warranted, just stating that it's an issue). It's interesting to note that Germany is going to have to be a major contributor to the EU's bailouts and attempts to stabilize the currency. It's possible we'll see similes to economic pressures leading to the wars in Europe.
I know I got off on a bit of a bunny trail here...but there you are.
[This message has been edited by Tracy Walters (11/17/2010)]
Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
And the Second Polish republic was created when?
And those borders which were in dispute were drawn when?
And why am I bothering to continue this conversation if you aren't willing to engage any of my initial premises?
And those borders which were in dispute were drawn when?
And why am I bothering to continue this conversation if you aren't willing to engage any of my initial premises?
Posted by (+300) 12 years ago
Good point Bridgier ... I just don't have time to look it all up.
You win.
You win.
Posted by (+4461) 12 years ago
I remember someone telling me once that our unwillingness to sell oil to Japan for their valuable 'peacekeeping' work in Asia was one of the leading causes, at least as far as american involvement goes.
Posted by (+9526) 12 years ago
Well yes - if the Americans don't embargo Japan, Japan has no reason to attack Pearl Harbor. While it was almost certainly the correct policy for the US to take, the fact that it provoked a military response from Japan shouldn't have come as much of a surprise.
However, sans a conflict in Europe, would WWII be WWII? In other words, if WWI hadn't ended the way it had, would the second Sino-Japanese War have been allowed to grow as large as it did? China was initially an ally of and received various forms of aid from most of the "western" powers: Germany, Britian, the US, etc.
As far as further aggression into south-east asia is concerned, would Japan have been able to pursue its aims if France, Britain and the Netherlands had been able to defend their asian colonies effectively?
However, sans a conflict in Europe, would WWII be WWII? In other words, if WWI hadn't ended the way it had, would the second Sino-Japanese War have been allowed to grow as large as it did? China was initially an ally of and received various forms of aid from most of the "western" powers: Germany, Britian, the US, etc.
As far as further aggression into south-east asia is concerned, would Japan have been able to pursue its aims if France, Britain and the Netherlands had been able to defend their asian colonies effectively?