You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Back on topic.............
You can control your actions but you can't control how people react to them. So you can wear a poppy with all the right intentions (remembering the overall futility of war for example), but you can't then play the "I'm sorry for any offence caused but not my own actions" card if someone else chooses to view your symbol as a memorial of your sides victory over them. So if you don't want to offend anyone, best not to do it.
Just like you can say the bombing of Dresden was "strategic", it was, but it's not as a synonym for precision,
“What was our strategy?”
To terrroise, de-house and kill the workers that provided the weapons for their armed forces.
Read up on the Hamburg Firestorm in 1943. Absolutely horrific. However, it did disrupt industrial output and divert valuable resources to air defence.
Luckily for the UK, the Germans didn't have the same capability in 1940.
The Germans invented modern strategic bombing at Guernica in 1937. The UK and USA perfected it.
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody else, and nobody was going to bomb them. At Rotterdam, London, Warsaw, and half a hundred other places, they put that rather naïve theory into operation. They sowed the wind, and now, they are going to reap the whirlwind"
Fair enough I say.
I agree with the fair enough statement, it was. Fighting dirty and and crossing over the line of what is reasonable in normal times was required. More recognistion and analysis of that is much more preferable to the miltaristic nonsense attached to the poppy.
Fair enough I say.
The argument that we did it, because they started it - falls down when you consider that the allies or nations associated with the allies, then used strategic bombing against North Koreans, the Vietnamese and the Cambodians - to level cities and civilian populations aka terror bombing. Neither of these countries ever engaged in strategic bombing against any allied nation.
These events are currently filed under
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/I_Can%27t_Believe_It%27s_Not_Terrorism
It's all a bit -
Fair enough I say.
I don't think bombing innocent civilians could ever be described as fair could it?
If you read that article on page 1 it talks about the ways different nationalities view their armed forces, their personnel and their conflicts as either distinct entities or as a a collective whole.
Personally I don't believe that the German population should have been collectively punished for the acts of the Nazi party, and I don't believe that the german soldier or bomber crew was necessarily any more complicit in their actions than ours. It's all very well putting up propaganda posters saying 'our brave boys are out there avenging the bombing of Coventry / Dresden', the reality was in a lot of cases they were one disobeyed order away from being shot for cowardice.
Some of the armed forces would have been genuine believers, others sucked in by the propaganda, and others there under duress.
Dehumanising and killing a group of people? Not just a Nazi thing.
The argument that we did it, because they started it –
We did it to defeat Germany.
We only had to do so as they were the aggressor.
Germany wanted to dominate Europe and parts of Asia, control all of the resources and enslave entire nations.
What is it with the hand wringers who make excuses for them and then spout crap about the evil that the British Empire did? Can the Third Reich really be compared to the British Empire?
No one has yet explained, even with the benefit of hindsight, what other options we really had apart from total war?
I once met a Mosquito pilot, really pleasant unassuming bloke, he told me about attacking German convoys and how they normally had around 20% losses on each sortie. I asked him how did he get back in the aircraft and take off, time after time, his answer was simple, to paraphrase, "we knew the job had to be done, if we didn't do it, who would?".
Truly humbling, that's why I wear a poppy, to remember the sacrifice made by all involved, including the ones that survived.
To say a poppy glorifies war is utter tosh.
What is it with the hand wringers who make excuses for them and then spout crap about the evil that the British Empire did? Can the Third Reich really be compared to the British Empire?
You know when you missed the point the fist time.
War is bad full stop, things were done that in the cold light of day were beyond lines. People justified these things to themselves at the time. What people are saying is we can look back at the conflict and not take sides and objectively analyse it.
Truly humbling, that’s why I wear a poppy, to remember the sacrifice made by all involved, including the ones that survived.
To say a poppy glorifies war is utter tosh.
But still people use the occasion to do that, bringing it back to us and them, saying who deserved it and who didn't. How morally we behaved and how we had no choice.
We did it to defeat Germany.
We only had to do so as they were the aggressor.
But then we went on to carpet bomb various brown people around the world, without that justification?
Can the Third Reich really be compared to the British Empire?
Pretty much, yes. The famines caused by the British in India alone, during the 19th century killed 30 million.
That puts Stalin and Hitler to shame.
The argument that we did it, because they started it – falls down when you consider that the allies or nations associated with the allies, then used strategic bombing against North Koreans, the Vietnamese and the Cambodians – to level cities and civilian populations aka terror bombing. Neither of these countries ever engaged in strategic bombing against any allied nation.
It's war, essentially when it comes to it, people will do what they think is necessary at the time. But carpet bombing is pure terrorism, nothing more. There's also an argument against the effectiveness of it. As really what stopped the germans, ultimately was the russian war for a the large part. And the japanese you can speculate if the russian invasion of china had and effect as much the nukes or not, but lets just say the japanese where able to withstand an awful lot of firebombing, and even then they had to be convinced to surrender after the nukes. And the vietmanese were able to withstand the americans..
It's interesting the modern term - rules of engagement, they only really apply when you've got superior strength, and even then in the case of vietnam, when that isn't enough, even then people will resort to mass murder.
It's all a shitfest and should not be glorified for one minute. But shit does indeed happen in war, ultimately there are no rules when it comes to it.
Can the Third Reich really be compared to the British Empire?
Pretty much, yes.
You really believe that?
The British have done some terrible things in the past.
However, nothing on the scale and with the pure evil intent that the Germans were guilty of in the 1930's and 40's.
However, nothing on the scale and with the pure evil intent that the Germans were guilty of in the 1930’s and 40’s.
The famines caused by the British in India alone, during the 19th century killed 30 million.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)
Next, do we need a scale of deaths to declare something bad? You must get over this many dead per year to qualify?
Part of being objective is to be able to dispassionately look at events, take being on one side or the other out of it and look at the events that took place.
From a consequentialist perspective, the British Empire achieved the same levels of human destruction as the Nazis did - whether you gas and shoot 30 million to death is no different to you starving them to death.
That puts Hitler to shame.
I think there is a defining line there, which is worse is up to you, but a defining line there might be that british atrocities were a consequence of their search for profit, hitler was really just getting started on a much more deliberate and sinister approach to genocide.
I do think one was worse than the other. But both are shameful.
So killing out of deep seated political and social conviction is worse than the cool swarve crime of killing for profit? 😀
I think I know why the British are always the baddies in movies now...
I think you missed the bit where I said hitler was just getting started. can you imagine if the 3rd reich lasted even 20 years?
France would be free of the French?
Sadly, the poppy has been hijacked up here by the uber-unionists, anyone who dares to speak against war will be deemed a snowflake, or even worse, a nationalist....
We did it to defeat Germany.
And Germany did it to defeat us.
Thinking of it in black and white terms of "we are good, Germany was bad" doesn't help prevent future wars, it just perpetuates them.
What is it with the hand wringers who make excuses for them
Has anyone made excuses for them? You don't have to be pro one side and anti the other, I don't personally feel either side should be viewed uncritically or without sympathy either. The only person "making excuses" is you with reference to the allied bombing campaign.
No one has yet explained, even with the benefit of hindsight, what other options we really had apart from total war?
I'm waiting for someone to answer this. Because in WW2 we really were the good guys, certainly in our intent. The Nazi's were an atrocity, I genuinely think if they'd prevailed the nightmare would still be happening.
I’m waiting for someone to answer this. Because in WW2 we really were the good guys, certainly in our intent. The Nazi’s were an atrocity, I genuinely think if they’d prevailed the nightmare would still be happening.
I don't disagree, but that doesn't make everything the allies did above criticism.
I’m waiting for someone to answer this.
You will be waiting a long time as they can't answer this.
It's been asked a number of times on this thread.
The reality is, the majority of Europe owe their freedom to the USA, the UK and the people of it's Commonwealth/Empire.
Without them they would now be either part of the Third Reich or the USSR.
but that doesn’t make everything the allies did above criticism.
Obviously not, but there's definitely a sniff of we were as bad as them from some posters. If you look at the actions of individuals or specific policies in isolation you'll find plenty wrong with every side in every war.
But from time to time war is the only way to defend yourself from an aggressor. WW2 was definitely one of those times. And terribly it was a war we just couldn't loose whatever the cost.
I genuinely think if they’d prevailed the nightmare would still be happening.
and
Without them they would now be either part of the Third Reich or the USSR.
My, I'd forgotten that Spain is still a fascist state, is Franco still around then?
But from time to time war is the only way to defend yourself from an aggressor. WW2 was definitely one of those times.
And no one is disputing that, they are simply saying that we were little better than the opposition.
You revisionist snowflakes ought to be grateful to the armies of the allied forces for the fact that we have free speech to discuss this sort of thing.
#WearItWithPride
My, I’d forgotten that Spain is still a fascist state, is Franco still around then?
What are you on about?
we were little better than the opposition.
Not true, Complete shite.
And no one is disputing that, they are simply saying that we were little better than the opposition.
I find it hard to believe anyone who's made even the most passing research about the Nazis could come to such a conclusion. Were weren't little better than them, we were vastly better than them.
Were weren’t little better than them, we were vastly better than them.
Try telling that to Indians, Zimbabweans, Kenyans, the Irish, the Chinese, the former French Indochina, Iraqis etc etc
What are you on about?
You think that the Third Reich would still be in existence had the western allies not intervened.
Which is bollocks - because no fascist state lasts more than about 50 years.
I’d be hobbling off to a factory with a shamrock embroidered armband were it not for the glorious victory of the allies.
I find it hard to believe anyone who’s made even the most passing research about the Nazis could come to such a conclusion. Were weren’t little better than them, we were vastly better than them.
Keeping this on context, the UK has committed some huge atrocities through history, we accept that and that we are not the same people that committed them.
In the same way that the people of Germany are not the people who carried out these actions.
For historical perspective to have been an Adult at the end of WWI you would be 118 years old at this point.
To have been an adult at the end of WW2 you would be 90 years old.
None of the people about today played any senior role in either war.
it celebrates all soldiers everywhere, a remembrance
Still can’t trust ‘em though mike
Without them they would now be either part of the Third Reich or the USSR.
Don't knock it. Who knows, 70 years later we may have been in a better place if that had happened.
Try telling that to Indians, Zimbabweans, Kenyans, the Irish, the Chinese, the former French Indochina, Iraqis etc etc
A lot of mistakes have been made over hundreds of years.
However, the right thing was done eventually. particularity regards to India, Zimbabwe and Kenya.
Not sure when we built factories to systematically murder people and recycle what ever of value from their carcasses?
Not sure what French Indochina has got to do with the UK?
You do know that on the Eastern Front, the German Army actually used the bodies of their enemies to improve the roads?
Do you think the UK had POW camps like what the Japanese had?
What about Oradour? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oradour-sur-Glane_massacre
Don’t knock it. Who knows, 70 years later we may have been in a better place if that had happened.
FFS.
majority of Europe owe their freedom to the USA, the UK and the people of it’s Commonwealth/Empire.
erm...
you do see this, don't you ?
Do you think the UK had concentration camps like the Japanese had?
Google images - search - "Lizzie van Zyl"
Not sure what French Indochina has got to do with the UK?
We are talking about the western allies, yes?
However, the right thing was done eventually. particularity regards to India, Zimbabwe and Kenya.
Oh yes, that's alright then - genocide and murder are okay because we were just trying to be paternalistic and educate the savage bum****s. And once that was done, we saw sense and stopped finding excuses to kill them.
You think that the Third Reich would still be in existence had the western allies not intervened.
Which is bollocks – because no fascist state lasts more than about 50 years.
Roman Empire? They were around for a bit.
Saudi Arabia? They are a bit facisty.
Roman Empire? They were around for a bit.
For the times, the Roman empire was on the democratic end of the spectrum.....
We are talking about the western allies, yes?
The French did little or nothing to assist in the liberation of Europe.
Besides, I was talking about the actions the UK armed forces.
As really what stopped the germans, ultimately was the russian war for a the large part.
Yup, and our Bombing helped keep Russian in the War on our side. Stalin loved us bombing cities, and from his POW we were doing very little else to help him. The Allies were well aware that Russians could do another deal with Hitler, end the war on the Eastern Front and leave Hitler to go back west. They'd have known Hitler was going to come back their way once the UK was defeated but it would give them breathing space to massively re-arm and in the meantime Britain and Germany would have bled each other white.
We'll never know if that was necessary to keep Stalin onside, but nor did the people making the decision a the time. That's on top of all the other reasons listed above. (To put a number on one of those reasons it by the end of the War Germany was using 33pc of it's resources on Anti Aircraft weapons. Would it have been better if that resource had gone on Tanks?)
WW2 was a uniquely attritional war. It's didn't matter where you wasted your enemy away, it was all useful and for much of the war Bombing, for all it's flaws, was the only contribution we could make.
For the times, the Roman empire was on the democratic end of the spectrum…..
For the times, the British Empire was on the benign end of Imperialism.
The First Army alone of the Free French, which were involved in the liberation of Europe - was comprised of 130,000 men.
So whilst I enjoy bashing the French, saying the Free French did little or nothing is balls.
For the times, the British Empire was on the benign end of Imperialism.
Yes! they were very kind, especially that Briggs fella, giving all those funny foreign chaps 'new villages' to live in!
For the times, the British Empire was on the benign end of Imperialism.
Apart from all those other countries that didn't engage in imperialism, or were actively opposed to it - like the Americans were. And it was a detriment to the world when they decided to go British on the world in the Philippines and a lot of other places post WW2.
I find it hard to believe anyone who’s made even the most passing research about the Nazis could come to such a conclusion. Were weren’t little better than them, we were vastly better than them.
Keep the quote in context, I was talking about the carpet bombing of German industrial cities Vs the carpet bombing of British industrial cities.
But even out of context, as alluded to by others British history is littered with pretty appalling incidents.
The point I was trying to make was, blind patriotism and the idea that our side was always in the right does nothing to hold those in power or on the frontline to account.
The First Army alone of the Free French, which were involved in the liberation of Europe – comprised of 130,000 men.
130k men is about 10 Divisions. There were 250 German Divisions in the East at one point. More French people fought for the Axis than fought for the Allies. Which isn't to suggest any blame whatsoever. When a country is occupied for years people are going to find it very difficult to avoid helping their invaders and very hard to contribute to their allies. Especially if they're scared of the communists.
Also don't forget the German Army was 90pc unmechanized at the start of WW2. German soldiers marched. The vehicles that allowed for a speedy invasion of Russia were largely captured French vehicles which the French failed to destroy when they surrendered.
France: Overall nothing to be too ashamed of, overall nothing to be too proud of IMHO.
So whilst I enjoy bashing the French, saying the Free French did little or nothing is balls.
The Vichy french had a similar sized army. 130,000 men is next to nothing in the bigger picture.
Apart from all those other countries that didn’t engage in imperialism, or were actively opposed to it – like the Americans were. And it was a detriment to the world when they decided to go British on the world in the Philippines and lot of other places post WW2.
The Americans? What about Mexico and Texas?
You do know the Americans were in the Philippines before WW1?
Vichy Frances standing army was 75,000.
The Free French numbered 320,000 during their push into Germany in the final stages of the war.
So I get the feeling that's shite as well.
You do know the Americans were in the Philippines before WW1?
Yes, which pretty much initiated their inexorable slide into British style imperialism.
didn’t engage in imperialism, or were actively opposed to it – like the Americans were.
Japan in 1850, Cuba to name but two.
Have a listen:
https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-49-the-american-peril/
Did more Frenchmen fight for the Axis than for the Allies? I thought so, but there's a thread about it here for anyone who's interested:
I’d be embarrassed if my people had built factories that were used to murder millions of men, women and children.
So Globuchul, as there are people around in living memory of the Mau Mau uprising - are you embarrassed by British atrocities.- or are you going to keep up with the apologism?
70 years later we may have been in a better place if that had happened.
The way the Nazi's were planning to make Europe a better place was via "the hunger plan". Google that and come back and explain why Europe would be 'better' if that had happened.
– are you embarrassed by British atrocities.- or are you going to keep up with the apologism?
You could go on for ever trawling history for atrocity. The Mau Mau were far from clean themselves, nobody ever is in a conflict.
But it's just not credible to compare British actions with those of the Nazis. Dead is dead I know, being killed by the "right side" is no comfort. But the scale and most importantly the intent of the Nazis puts them on a completely different scale.
Good points Taxi, but globuchuls ability to point out where Germans should be embarrassed but avoid any kind of embarrassment on his part is symptomatic of the malaise that blights the British view of it's place in the world.
The British frame everything with "but we're the good guys", which is clearly not true. It damages our ability to engage positively with the rest of the global community.
But it’s just not credible to compare British actions with those of the Nazis. Dead is dead I know, being killed by the “right side” is no comfort. But the scale and most importantly the intent of the Nazis puts them on a completely different scale.
But we can also consider both part of history now and treat them as such.
I was in Ypres two weeks ago, I visited the Menin Gate first in the early morning, covered in wreaths from all those that visited to pay their respects. All the within the arch, lining the stairs and above the arches inscribed with names of nearly 55,000 UK soldiers who died at the Salient but were never recovered. Other nations have monuments to their soldiers too. As we left a large group of workers went around preparing the monument for that days visitors, moving the wreaths around so the migrated to the upper levels were the oldest ones were removed.
Afterwards we walked around the town and enjoyed how nice it was, enjoying coffees and looking in the shops were Poppys are a regular feature. Before we left we visited In Flanders museum. The whole build up to the conflict was detailed, the early battles to the end of the war. The changes in uniforms to weaponry manufactured in the industrial age and its brutality. Throughout it all you progressed through interactive displays controlled by an RFID wristband that you input your details into so your language was spoken. As you moved along with the various other nationalities visiting the museum that day, many of them Europeans but also Australians, Japanese and Chinese in equally large numbers and also remembering their own who had come to fight and never returned from this land. As the displays show the war and the campaigns you see the towns and land before, during and now, the armies from both sides as well as the civilians caught up in it all. The final section details the devastation that left Ypres levelled by bombardment, the displaced population returning to rebuild their homes and the present with so much ordnance regularly being found. One of the last displays, after the volumes of books listing the names of the dead, is the pictures of the Ypres levelled and then images of it being rebuilt again to how it was before the war so that it can stand as a living memorial to the conflict. As you leave the poppy's are prevalent in the art work and the shops, including RBL, sell books and poppy's and at the exit is s large clear collection box to deposit your RFID wristband for recycling. Its full of white silicon wristbands with a large red poppy on them. You then walk out and back into the town centre to the realisation that you had been walking around the memorial all the time and it's not just the gate or the museum, it is the whole town.
The suggestion that the poppy glorifies war is ridiculous. If you feel this way go to Ypres and tell them as such although I don't think you'd be taken seriously.
As for wearing a poppy in Germany, then do so. I and many others have done for years, no one comments on it. Some may ask to look more closely at the limited edition designs. The Germans don't observe Armistice of 11 November but do have a national day of mourning marked by a bank holiday later in November. Parades from the church to the memorial with the laying of flowers mark the occasion.
The suggestion that the poppy glorifies war is ridiculous. If you feel this way go to Ypres and tell them as such although I don’t think you’d be taken seriously.
It's good as that is not what people are saying, it's more that people are using it as a badge to celebrate the heroics of war as a part of nationalistic pride. As a symbol of remembrance it's important that it stays just that.
To add I've been to Ypres and most of the Somme area, seen the memorials and the Normandy coast from WWI. I know what it's about there.
The RBL are clear on what they see it as:
The poppy is
- A symbol of Remembrance and hope
- Worn by millions of people
- Red because of the natural colour of field poppies
The poppy is NOT
- A symbol of death or a sign of support for war
- A reflection of politics or religion
- Red to reflect the colour of blood
Wearing a poppy is a personal choice and reflects individual and personal memories. It is not compulsory but is greatly appreciated by those it helps – our beneficiaries: those currently serving in our Armed Forces, veterans, and their families and dependants.
Anything else is probably a personal interpretation, but wide of the intention. Also, going to the RBL site I found out that Scottish poppies have 4 petals and no leaf....
When I was a kid in my parish church, we had a number of WW2 vets, one of whom was a German soldier. I always found it moving when he and a British vet would lay a wreath together.
We did it to defeat Germany.
What role did the destruction of Dresden have in the defeat of Germany?
In war you end up compromising more than your life, you compromise your conscience, your morality, your humanity. No matter which side you're on, what you 'believe' in, when you're alone with your thoughts all of this eats away at you. The guilt for surviving, the guilt at killing other humans, all of this never leaves you. You can try and ignore it, but it's always there, in the back of your mind.
Crack on and debate the legalities and morality of military decisions from decades ago, you achieve nothing apart from foaming at the mouth, mostly talking about things you know little of and could never understand, none of us could, we weren't there with the German war machine knocking on the door. The pressure on those in command, to try and win a war against a superior enemy, as soon as was viable, is hard to imagine. What I know is it's easy to become the very thing you fight, to follow them down the path of darkness. When it happens, the important thing is recognising that and to walk back from that, not to continue. Ask yourselves what you would do if you were in their shoes, tasked with winning a war. Tactical hindsight is always 20/20.
The military, it's leaders and soldiers may not be perfect, they will falter and make some absolute heinous decisions, but they will be based in the context of the moment, flawed as that may be, but the pressure from being responsible for lives other than your own can on one hand cause a detachment from consequence; you just see unit names and numbers, on the other a pressure like no other; to order soldiers to their job, knowing some will never come back, I pray that none of you ever have to shoulder that burden. I wish I never had.
The poppy was meant as symbol for unified remembrance of the pure horror of war and a time for the nation to unite and acknowledge the absolute brutal slaughter of millions of people: soldiers, civilians and those permanently damaged by war. It has been hijacked by all comers to twist it one way and the other, everyone who cares about other humans above their own self interest should wrestle the meaning back for all of those poor bastards who died and every bystander who witnessed the slaughter.
Do I wear it with pride? Not really, I wear it because the intent of it was pure, the reason was altruistic before the mouth-breathers of both sides perverted it. I wear it because it makes the old boys and girls who genuinely fought for my freedom happy one day of the year. I'll keep wearing it even after there's none left, even though I don't need it to remind myself that there were once ordinary men and women willing to do the unthinkable to give me and my family a safer future. That was their honest belief, and that's a good enough reason for me.
Very fine post Moose.
On the original question, we used to have rather a lot of servicemen stationed in Germany, together with their families, so the poppy was hardly an uncommon sight at this time of year.
Well said Moose.
Moose +1