»

[PMC]

Very apt Blobrana

[metalman]

Memorial Day

To all those who served, but didn't return, I honor.
To all those who served, and returned, I thank

Including my Father and Uncle, who with the 45th Infantry, 180th regiment "Charley Company" received an all expenses paid US government sponsored 429 day geological hiking and digging tour of the Yonchon-Chorwon area of Korea, including landmarks, Old Baldy, Pork Chop Hill, Heartbreak Ridge, and and particularly enthusiastic visit by over 30,000 Chinese at Christmas Hill. where they discussed the boundaries of Korea's present-day DMZ.

They returned home, each with several copies of a small ribbon with a star as a memento of places they visited along their trip.


The pacifistic attitude is that "war is not the answer" or its corollary "war never solves anything." War is the option of last resort, and history has shown, a war fought until one side gives up, can resolve irreconcilable differences.

Pacifists fail to recognize that, the absence of war is not necessarily peace, the difference between, peace within and between societies, and that peace without freedom is slavery. The Pacifists response is that we need to dialoge with the enemy, persuade them to stop committing the evil acts they are committing. Some pacifists will suggest imposing economic sanctions should those talks be unsuccessful. But what should we do when the summits, the peace talks, and the sanctions don't work? How long do we continue trying to reason with the unreasonable? Pacifists advocate talking indefinitely.

The America was shocked at the cost lives lost in The First World War, "The war to end all wars," and chose to enter a period of world isolation afterwards. The internationally devised solutions to WWI were disarmament, nation state judicial settlements, peace education, international legal organizations and world federalism, but the result was not peace, but the rise of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, and the Japanese Empire.

The cost of Neville Chamberlain's "peace for our time" Munich Agreement (September 30, 1938) can be quantified as the 52 million people world wide who later died in WWII.

The Covenant of the League of Nations, the 1928 General Treaty for the Renunciation of War, and the modern day United Nations have all failed to prevent wars and genocides.

Those who profess to be a part of the "peace movement" don't understand that the emotion of "wanting peace" is not enough to gain individual freedom, and only results in slavery. On occasion, a nation has to demonstrate that it is willing to fight to be able to maintain its national freedoms. Lives have been lost, large amounts treasure have been expended, but the true price of freedom is blood.

[FluffyMcDeath]

metalman wrote:

The cost of Neville Chamberlain's "peace for our time" Munich Agreement (September 30, 1938) can be quantified as the 52 million people world wide who later died in WWII.

Actually that was the cost of Hitler renegging on the deal. If he had continued east and given grief to the Russians everyone would have been happy. Anyway, it didn't last long but it did buy the allies a little extra time to arm up and plan.

If the war had started earlier and the allies had gone off half {bleep}ed Hitler could have won the whole shebang.

Besides which, one also has to consider that Neville was of the upper classes and Hitler had many supporters in the upper classes in Britain and throughout Europe, and also in the US. In fact, George W Bush's grandfather's bank was a big Hitler supporter and loaned money for building the concentration camps.

[metalman]

FluffyMcDeath wrote:

Actually that was the cost of Hitler renegging on the deal. If he had continued east and given grief to the Russians everyone would have been happy. Anyway, it didn't last long but it did buy the allies a little extra time to arm up and plan.

If the war had started earlier and the allies had gone off half {bleep}ed Hitler could have won the whole shebang.

The Remilitarization of the Rhineland

A German general interviewed after the Second World War, claimed: "If you French had intervened in the Rhineland in 1936 we should have been sunk and Hitler would have fallen".

Hitler himself later said: "The forty-eight hours after the march into the Rhineland were the most nerve-racking in my life. If the French had then marched into the Rhineland we would have had to withdraw with our tails between our legs, for the military resources at our disposal would have been wholly inadequate for even a moderate resistance."

Appeasement of Hitler

Hitler had so far managed to achieve great success without the loss of a single German soldier, the obvious course of action for him in the face of continued appeasement was to continue his policies. It is likely that he expected continued appeasement even after the Munich Agreement, because of the British Government's fervent wish to avoid war.

Nazi Germany

Germany invaded Poland on 1 September 1939. This led to the outbreak of the Second World War in Europe when on 3 September 1939, the United Kingdom and France both declared war on Germany. The Phony War followed. On 9 April 1940 the Germans struck north against Denmark and Norway. British and French forces landed in the north, only to be defeated in the ensuing Norwegian Campaign. In May, the Phony War ended when Hitler took a gamble and sent German forces into France and the Low Countries. Later that year, Germany subjected the United Kingdom to heavy bombing during the Battle of Britain.

Germany invaded the Soviet Union on 22 June 1941 and on the eve of the invasion, Hitler's former deputy, Rudolf Hess, attempted to negotiate terms of peace with the United Kingdom in an unofficial private meeting after crash-landing in Scotland.

[blobrana]

@metalman
Hum,
indeed,
as you say `War is the option of last resort`, no one doubts that because it is such a stupid and wasteful option that it should be the last option; but to then say `history has shown, a war fought until one side gives up, can resolve irreconcilable differences` is clearly false - this can be seen in the reasons why 2nd world war took place.

But, all of this is not pertinent to what the original poster is saying. Unless you are implying that pacifistics do not attend Memorial Days etc.

[metalman]

blobrana wrote:
@metalman
Hum,
indeed,
as you say `War is the option of last resort`, no one doubts that because it is such a stupid and wasteful option that it should be the last option; but to then say `history has shown, a war fought until one side gives up, can resolve irreconcilable differences` is clearly false - this can be seen in the reasons why 2nd world war took place.

But, all of this is not pertinent to what the original poster is saying. Unless you are implying that pacifistics do not attend Memorial Days etc.

Rephrasing:
A war fought to the debellation of the defeated state.

referring to "political Pacifists", exemplī grātiā; Peaceniks, Anti-War activists, Peacemongers, anarchists, anti-capitalists.

photo examples here
Anti-War Rally

They demonstrate "against war" because they prefer a victory by the other side.

The pacifist traditions associated with religion, e.g. the Mennonite, Quakers, and Brethren, are non-political and draw guidance from the Sermon on the Mount

[Boot_WB]

Remember the dead:

Soldiers in the service of Afghanistan: 8587
Soldiers in the service of Iraq: 30,000 during the invasion, 6547 post-war.
Soldiers in the service of the US: 3441
Soldiers in the service of the UK: 149

Total soldiers killed in the service of their country: approx 48724.

Civilians who happened to live in Afghanistan: 3485
Civilians who happened to live in Iraq: Estimates range between 64400 and 655,000 (as of October 2006).
Civilians who happened to live in the UK: 56
Civilians who happened to live in the US: 2996
Coalition contractors killed in Iraq: 398

Total non-military personnel killed: between approx 71335 and approx 661935.

Note - all of these are estimates from a wide variety of sources, as no reliable data exists. I cannot confirm whether the Afghan estimates includes the number of Taliban (Taleban) fighters killed in either/or civilian or army figures.

Remember the dead on remembrance day. Just remember them all.

[KThunder]

memorial day is not a day to remember all who died in wars(ours theirs or otherwise)
it is a day to honor severvice men and women.
the nazi dead did nothing for my freedom, neither did the taliban dead or the redcoats of the british empire days.
i dont know if there is a day to remember the dead from the other side or civilians for that matter.
you seem to want this to be all about current events but it really isnt

[KThunder]

as for current events:
the reason we are having so much trouble in iraq is because we are trying to do the same thing there as we did years ago in japan and germany. we defeated them in war and are trying to help them rebuild with a new government.
the problem is germany and japan were devastated by the war and had very little capability on there own, to rebuild, govern or otherwise especially in germany.
iraq is different there is still a power stucture in iraq, the tribal, and religious sects there have power and weaponry and can wage a limited war on coalition forces and between each other.

[blobrana]

Hum,
to have a memorial day just to celebrate the dead of you country is an alien concept in the UK.
Such a remembrance day would remove the humanity of the event, and would have tones of insularity and superiority.


@metalman

>>They demonstrate "against war" because they prefer a victory by the other side.

Even if that were true - This is their right, and it is up to them. No one would sensibly want to restrict that very freedom that so many have served and died for... would they?

But, i will say again our current freedom, (or political or non political persuasions) should have nothing to do with the act of remembering those who have died.

[metalman]

blobrana wrote:
Hum,
to have a memorial day just to celebrate the dead of you country is an alien concept in the UK.
Such a remembrance day would remove the humanity of the event, and would have tones of insularity and superiority.


@metalman

>>They demonstrate "against war" because they prefer a victory by the other side.

Even if that were true - This is their right, and it is up to them. No one would sensibly want to restrict that very freedom that so many have served and died for... would they?

But, i will say again our current freedom, (or political or non political persuasions) should have nothing to do with the act of remembering those who have died.

Did I Say it was not their right???

Do I not have the right to point out that their motives are not pacifist motives?

Memorial Day is a day to honor only those who served in defense of this country, including Allies.

[blobrana]

The purpose of remembering should be to avoid it happening again.

[Wilse]

@Malakie:

You do not seem to understand that those of us who have served are the very same ones that gave you the FREEDOM to post your message.

Please, I'm anxious to learn about what you personally did to give me freedom.
Could you explain?

[Wilse]

the reason we are having so much trouble in iraq is because we are trying to do the same thing there as we did years ago in japan and germany.

Sweet, suffering jehosify!

I thought your patter about Mr. bush was out there but this takes the whole bakery.



Misinformed bollox once more.

And, just in case you get confused again, I'm referring to what you wrote, rather than you yourself.

[Karlos]

blobrana wrote:
The purpose of remembering should be to avoid it happening again.

Amen.