How many people don't think of remembrance day as anything special? Why should we limit ourselves to November 11? Is it supposed to be "special" remembrance? I fail to see how sorrow can have varying amplitudes.
Printable View
How many people don't think of remembrance day as anything special? Why should we limit ourselves to November 11? Is it supposed to be "special" remembrance? I fail to see how sorrow can have varying amplitudes.
In.
Unless there is a day dedicated to it many won't think about it at all. It is good to honour those who fell, and setting aside a day for it is a good thing to do. The second we start questioning it is the second we have forgotten.
Lest we forget.
Well, this is more of a backroom topic and it was being discussed in the "cheer up" thread.
I can't really see any strong arguments for or against it.
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
On a serious note, as I mentioned in the other thread, I think that it's severely constrained by nationalism at this moment in time, and I think that we should drop the whole idea of remembering "Our Boys", and that we should commemorate the suffering of humanity in war as a whole, since that, and humour are the only things which truly unite us, IMHO.
Not every remembrance of those of your nation is nationalist (at least not in a bad way), and like it or not, "our boys" did die for our country and not others. I do honour the dead of more than one country for different reasons and therefore I observe more than one national ceremony, but there is no reason to get rid of the national ceremonies dealing with the soldiers of that nation. Nonetheless, this is a Backroom topic so I'll stop for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
Whilst I'm fine commemorating all those poor German sods who died, I distinctly doubt sharing a united sense of humour with them. :smash:Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
Same here. See my post in the official 'remembrance' thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
The fact some idoits can't shut there mouths for a few mintues and pay some respect is rather telling.
:grin: How true...Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
I am surprised you are so brave, SFTS. I am waiting to see if this is edited and you receive an infraction/warning. I guarantee if I posted this, the punishment would be swift and harsh :skull::thumbsdown:. Your post violates a few rules, but the main one is that the Frontroom is entirely non-confrontational, literally a "Kingdom of Peace an Love" as it is colloquially referred to. I remember I wrote a few lightly negative posts and those were taken down, although the statements were not offensive to anyone nor harsh. Just not positive.
I am watching...
Alright. You pay respect. Does everyone else? I take a look at the general ambivalence towards everything, and infer that there can be no way those faceless masses would go out of their to sincerely pay respect, any more than the respect they would give for July 4, Christmas, or whatever break off of work it is that day. Why do we do this? Why do we need a special day to remember, yet end up not doing so anyways?
I didn't know what day it was...when you walked into the room. I said "Hallo" unnoticed; you said goodbye too soon.
*backs AVSM*
But yes, this is already too Backroomish. I still stand by my statement regarding SFTS though.
Brave is not the correct word. But if the mods warn me they warn me, I feel saying that is worth a few points.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
It's a simple acknowledgment of sacrifice most of us will never hafto make because a few have. Go play pesudo internationalist another day.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Very Super Market
I realize you may be more intelligent than us all but please allow us half wits our day.
AVSM is not attempting to portray himself as an internationalist. I have good reasons to believe his stance is very close, if not identical to mine on this issue. He is merely being a pessimistic realist, as I am.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Strike, this has crossed the line. AVSM is not making it personal, but you are. I find it hard to recollect myself flaming others like this in the Frontroom (Backroom is another issue), and I have pages of warnings and infractions...Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Don't mistake me for an intellectual, but I'm just trying to rant as far as I can.
And faceless masses wasn't? This isn't an issue about peoples lack of respect, nearly everyone and every buisness I know did something today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
And I'm fully aware that there is tragedy in the world but it doesn't change the fact a 19 year old kid from Snyder Texas is in Bum **** Iraq because some politicians in DC decided it would be a good idea.
Both of you are taking this sweeping veiws on the issue when it is simply a matter of looking a fellow man in the eyes and saying thank you.
The guys on the front line have no control over western bias or what the war means in the context of history some just shake there hand tell them thank you and forget about all this other crap for one day.
And you're clearly missing the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Very Super Market
I think people are looking too much into this, it's just a day to stop for a minute and remember the tragic loss of millions of lives on all sides. Anyone who brings nationalism into it is perverting the day away from what it is.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by miotas
I'm unsure I understand. It was very hard to miss people going out of their way to do what this day is intended for. The 'faceless masses' are much more caring than you give them credit for, of course some do not do so but that is their own troubles and not yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Very Super Market
I've always thought of this day as what it means to you, not what it means to someone else. It's a personal day to take time and remember on your own time, when you can really let it soak in all the lives lost and those who serve for your nation even now. I think the question of "Why do we need it?" is rather fruitless, when more interesting questions of "What does it mean to me?" and "What will I do in light of that?" are on the table.
Eric Bogle - And the Band played Waltzing Matilda
Now when I was a young man I carried me pack
And I lived the free life of the rover
From the Murray's green basin to the dusty outback
I waltzed my Matilda all over
Then in 1915 my country said: Son,
It's time to stop rambling, there's work to be done
So they gave me a tin hat and they gave me a gun
And they marched me away to the war
And the band played Waltzing Matilda
As the ship pulled away from the quay
And amidst all the cheers, the flag waving and tears
We sailed off for Gallipoli
How well I remember that terrible day
When our blood stained the sand and the water
And how in that hell that they call Suvla Bay
We were butchered like lambs at the slaughter
Johnny Turk, he was waiting, he'd primed himself well
He showered us with bullets, and he rained us with shell
And in five minutes flat, he'd blown us all to hell
Nearly blew us back home to Australia
And the band played Waltzing Matilda
When we stopped to bury our slain
Well we buried ours and the Turks buried theirs
Then we started all over again
Oh those that were left, well, we tried to survive
In that mad world of blood, death and fire
And for ten weary weeks I kept myself alive
While around me the corpses piled higher
Then a big Turkish shell knocked me arse over head
And when I awoke in me hospital bed
And saw what it had done, well, I wished I was dead
Never knew there was worse things than dying
For I'll roam no more Waltzing Matilda
All around the green bush far and free
To hump tents and pegs, a man needs both legs
No more waltzing Matilda for me
So they gathered the crippled, the wounded, the maimed
And they shipped us back home to Australia
The the legless, armless, the blind, the insane
Those proud wounded heroes of Suvla
And when the ship pulled into Circular Quay
I looked at the place where me legs used to be
And thank Christ there was nobody waiting for me
To grieve and to mourn and to pity
But the Band played Waltzing Matilda
As they carried us down the gangway
But nobody cheered, they just stood there and stared
Then they turned all their faces away
And so now every April I sit on me porch
And I watch the parade pass before me
I see my old comrades, how proudly they march
Reviving old dreams of past glories
Amd the old men march slowly, all bones stiff and sore
They're tired old heroes of a forgotten war
And the young people ask "What are they marching for?"
And I ask meself the same question
But the band plays Waltzing Matilda
And the old men still answer the call
But as year follows year, more old men disappear
Some day no one will march there at all
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda
Who'll come a-Waltzing Matilda with me?
And their ghosts may be heard as they march by the billabong
Who'll come a-Waltzing Matilda with me?
While I agree with Strike that's its just a day to say thanks to certain people (I was surprised with a few today when I opened my wallet and they saw my military ID, hell, maybe I would have gotten free lunch in uniform)...the fact is that most people see it as a day off work and don't do jack.
My father goes to his dead dad's grave every veterans, memorial and birth day and drops flowers. He was 6 when he died and never knew the man. HE always cries. It perplexes me, but I guess I understand.
Ahoy! What's this? A young, innocent thread from the Frontroom wandering wide-eyed and lost in the Wasteland?
Come here little one, and let me whisper in your ear. You are growing up very fast now, and want to be beastly. Very well, but be beastly with respect.
Oh, and understand that unlike a soccer game where you get to mime and scream and play the referee, here it's rugger. Gamesmanship is of a different order here, and such posturing is more likely to get one a penalty and a ten-yard march closer to no posts.
Carry on.
To me it's a day to remember the madness and sheer absurdity of World War I and to remind myself of just how stupid the human race can be.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Very Super Market
Sadly enough, it was not the "War to end all Wars" and human stupidity prevailed and is still prevailing over common sense, which is proven by the fact that the organised butchering of human beings (aka "war") still continues.
Again and again and again political leaders convinced the common man and woman to go to war and again and again and again he obliged and got himself shot into little pieces for some sort of glorified ideal after having shot some other people who also died, just like him, for reasons not worth dying for.
I suggest you catch up on some reading. Not history books and such, but read some work from war poets like Wilfred Owen. I can also strongly recommend you the work of William March.
Go to your local VFW and pose your question to the gentlemen gathered within.
Nothing wrong with remembering, 'we' weren't involved in WW1 but it's something that should be remembered as something that happened to all nations involved it was pure violent madness, maybe even something evil the first world war has always been extremely sinister to me. I like the take of the game 'Eternal Darkness', flesh for the ancients. WW2 hit us pretty hard though, we do honor our liberators every year, it's always humbling the country is completely silent for 3 minutes. Yay for memorials some things should not be forgotten, not because of 'let it never happen again' and all that crap of course it's going to happen again maybe not this century but the only constant in history is repetition, but out of decency. Thx UK, USA, Canada, Poland, now you will never be able to get rid of us.
We only bothered liberating Holland for the weed. :smoking:
Brits have a more entertaining way of remembering WW1, by watching and re-watching Blackadder Goes Forth. It's funny, it plays around with history, but it still gets the main points across and keeps them fresh in our memory. Goodbyeee! is particularly well-known for that, making points about the campaigns of attrition, Pals' battalions, and ending with a field of poppies. There are a lot of laughs along the way, but by the end, one is almost ready to cry, and determined not to let anything like that happen again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
I think the British still feel very guilty over WWI. WWII was a "good war", one that was nessecary, obviouslt to stop Hitler.
But WWI? Was that a "good war"?
Everything that was wrong with the last century in europe can practically traced to WW1 thats why people can be ambivalent about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
Has to be said, WW1 is the reason why I am against the European Union, we are building the same situation all over again, but even worse because the EU wants an army. And something goes wrong, than what. Everybody will be devided, army will take over.
Nobody takes note because all of the above is untrue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
Rather than crush the routed German army, and push deep into Germany, the allies accepted Germany's plea for peace. The allies thus spared Germany from having to undergo what Germany itself had done to Europe.
Yet from the very beginning, Germany undermined this most magnanimous armistice, for which it itself had asked and to which it had agreed.
After the armistice, the retreating German army plundered and destructed on an enormous scale, wantonly destroying property. It returned home with victory parades, under improvised triumphal arches.
Then rather than aiming for peace, Germany abused the good will of its victors by spending the next twenty years undermining the peace and preparing for another war, starting it all over again. Sixty million deaths later, it had finally sunk into the German nationalists that the combined forces of the civilised nations are stronger. (<- The real tragedy of the armistice. A million more German deaths in 1918 would've spared the world WWII)
Of course, contrary to what is constantly spouted on the internet, the German command already in the armistice agreed to occupation of the Rhineland and the payment of reparations. What's more, to ensure keeping the peace in Europe, the final peace treaty of Versailles was even more magnanimous than the armistice was.
Terms of the armistice here:
http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/armisticeterms.htm
:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
The only WWI poet* for me, 'Dolce et Decorum est' is the definitive poem of WWI.
*Unless one considers Apollinaire's Calligrammes war poems.
Bollox :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Futility is better. Period.
Move him into the sun -
Gently its touch awoke him once,
At home, whispering of fields unsown.
Always it woke him, even in France,
Until this morning, and this snow.
If anything might rouse him now
The kind old sun will know.
Think how it wakes the seed -
Woke, once, the clays of a cold star.
Are limbs, so dear-achieved, are sides,
Full-nerved - still warm - too hard to stir?
Was it for this the clay grew tall?
- O what made fatuous sunbeams toil
To break [earth's]1 sleep at all?
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
We will see, I doubt we are not that very united when the incident on the Balkan is going to happen, this is going to be pretty old-fashioned. Of course there will be war, someone is going to cut of some ones trade. When there is less to spend watch the mgaic happen
wutQuote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Wait, so is being divided a good thing, or a bad thing?:dizzy2:Quote:
Everybody will be devided, army will take over
Trying overstretching yourself, baaaaaaaaaaaaaad. insert sheep smiley.
I remember once being in a class, when this happened, except everyone else went silent except for me and I didn't have a clue what was going on and thought I entered the twilight zone.
School days... who can ever forget them?
Powerful comedy right to the gut. I've not seen that before.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
Armistice/Veterans Day is best observed without being soiled by politics. As long as the day has significance for you, be glad for that. Those who do recognize and observe the day do so within their means and in a way they deem appropriate. Be it simple words, watching a movie, laying flowers or marching in a parade, it is the heart that gives a personal observance its significance. Carry the spirit onward though others (in your eyes) may waver. Don't let your Remembrance be jaded by others.
So say my cheesy words.
No Wilfred Owen, noooooooo!
Memories of Higher English are flooding back to me. :wall:
...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Because naturally, Germany was guilty for World War One. :juggle2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
This isn't true. I won't comment on the "destruction" for now, but only von Lettow-Vorbeck was allowed an actual triumphal parade, and that was because he was the only one who actually was victorious.Quote:
After the armistice, the retreating German army plundered and destructed on an enormous scale, wantonly destroying property. It returned home with victory parades, under improvised triumphal arches.
Germany abused the terms of the treaty, but not goodwill. This is because whatever "goodwill" the victors had certainly didn't make it into the treaty. The terms of Versailles were harsh, and based on a presumption that wasn't true, at least not entirely. If you say that Germany got off lightly, you are basing your argument on precisely the same flaws.Quote:
Then rather than aiming for peace, Germany abused the good will of its victors by spending the next twenty years undermining the peace and preparing for another war, starting it all over again.
I've never known you to troll before. :inquisitive:Quote:
Sixty million deaths later, it had finally sunk into the German nationalists that the combined forces of the civilised nations are stronger.
More power blocs, an upset in the balance of power, a potential civil war, I could go on. I don't think Fragony is using the best analogy, I'd prefer to use the collapse of a more recent empire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
For once I side with EMFM. Louis may have French bias, and EFMF his German bias, as both are nationals of the respective countries, but Louis is a tad too aggressive in his statements. Oh well, Louis was never a moderate, and all his posts are bold exaggerations and generalizations – usually wittier than anything we can hope to match, and sometimes correct, but many times they hold easily discernable flaws. A moderate position is always a safe and usually the most correct one in a typical argument IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Moving on, Germany is not to be demonized for its role in WWI as Louis advocates. There are numerous countries to blame. Wilhelm II may have had his youthful, foolish ambitions of German dominance, and his actions have certainly contributed to the start of the war (especially his neglect of the Bismark-era skillful diplomacy of alliances and pacts), but there are pages of other arguments. For instance, Russia’s mobilisation was the deciding factor in the actual beginning of the war. Russia could have chosen not to proceed, and let Austria pummel Serbia, but once it started, there was no way back. Germany was obligated to do the same as an ally of Austria. Gavrilo Princip armed the bomb, Austria directly prepared the fuse for the war, and Russia lighted the spark with its mobilisation.
However, Serbia was in the scope of Russia’s interests. Abandoning it and losing influence in the Balkans was inacceptable, not at least because it would drastically upset the balance of power. Not to mention, Serbs are Slavs, of our kin. Nowadays such petty pan-nationalist ideals are a thing of the past, but back then it was a major influence.
Bankrupting germany with reparations was one of the main things leading to WWII. They couldn't pay, so we lent them money which they payed to the british, who used it to pay back loans they owed us if I remember it right. I don't remember how it fell apart exactly or how it was tied to the great depression.
Not only blaming Russia, but France also had a role in these mobilizations that Germany looked on nervously. Ironic, since Louis happens to be French. Or perhaps that is why he takes this attitude, who knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus
It is not about guilt (but yes, Germany was the most guilty, and no, the Treaty of Versailles did not lay the blame at Germany), it is about losing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Germany lost. Rather than bleeding it completely dry, or to take revenge, Germany was magnanimously granted the peace it sought. This peace offered the best conditions a losing side has had in Europe in centuries. All it asked was for Germany to become a democracy, to pick up its share of the civilian damages (roughly five percent), and please not start another war.
(What, I wonder, would they have deemed fair? The victorious allies paying for all of the civilian damages of the war on their own? The war wasn't fought on German soil, so the civilian damages were on the allied side. Germany was only asked to pay a small percentage towards reconstruction, while the allies payed the lion's share.
Plus they'd have wanted to let the losing Germans their army fully intact and operational, ready to strike once it had regained full strenght in a year or two? While the allies must spend their time and resources repairing civilian damages, and the Americans and Commonwealth troops return home?
This is preposterous. These two are some of the fundamental flaws in the interpretation of Versailles as needlessly harsh)
No, what happened is that German nationalists could not stomach defeat. This is the origin of WWII. Twenty million deaths, and all they could think about was starting it all over again. Stubbornly expecting a different outcome this time.
And this, sixty million deaths to try one's luck once more, I do not consider an act of civilization. Call it trolling, call it being a tad too agressive, I call it putting the blame back where it belongs.
(AP - I am not demonizing Germany's role in WWI. A silly war that should not have been reprised twenty years later all over again. I am talking about the origin of WWII. Demonizing, or rather, putting the blame for WWII, fair and square on German nationalists. Unfortunately, they whinged and cried so much ever since 1918, increasingly so since 1933, and renewed since the internets, that many people forget that Germany was not the victim of Jews, Bolshevists, Versailles, France or Octosquids, but was the agressor)
Louis, huge portions of that post are false, especially when dealing with the terms of the treaty. Husar and myself have already quoted you the relevant sections in another thread.
Germany wasn't bankrupted because of reparations. (Neither were France or Belgium, even though both payed the lion's share of reparations - some 95% to Germany's 5%)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Germany was perfectly capable of paying. And it could borrow all the money it needed. Contrary to lingering propaganda, Versailles didn't seek nor resulted in a crippled Germany. It wanted a viable, functioning Germany.
The runaway inflation of the early twenties was caused by German policians in a deliberate bid to undermine the Versailles system, not because it couldn't pay or had to pay so much.
After this policy of deliberate inflation was ended, Germany enjoyed enormous economical growth again. The very small sum Germany had to pay (could borrow) was no impediment to affluence and growth whatsoever.
Versailles nor the reparations were tied to the Great Depression. This was an international phenomenon.
Germany was not required to pay anything since before Hitler gained power, in 1932.
After Germany had started WWII, Germany was condemned to pay the reparations for WWI after all. They will finish paying in 2020.
Maniac - nope, everything in my post is quite correct. History, as they say, is a matter of interpretation.
History is a matter of interpretation, yes, but when you're talking about the treaty when it is quite clearly readable and available it would be good to have it coalesce with what you are saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Most of what Louis says at first glance seems right from my own studies of WWI. Will need to read all the thread to see where the main disagreement is though.
Edit: There is a disagreement fault. I see it now, Germany isn't sole blame for World War 1 at all. I also remember the communications between the Tsar and the Kaiser to try to end the war last second and the generals basically turned around and said it was too late.
WWII was Germany's fault though, even though it could be argued that the 2nd war is a continuation of the first in many respects.
Well, I was not really discussing the origins of WWI, but rather those of WWII.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
As to the origin of WWI. The direct origins of WWI are so complex that they do not really arouse much passion or public sentiment. More for the lovers of high diplomacy. I would say Germany is most directly responsible. With the caveat that all belligerents take a large share of the responsibility - so much so that 'blaming' Germany as the most directly responsible loses much political significance and all moral meaning.
For a more ulterior context of the origins of WWI, Blackadder said it best: 'The British [and French] empire stretches across a third of the globe. Meanwhile, the German empire consists of a single sausage factory in Tanganyika'.
No moral highground for the Imperialist powers there.
Let's not just focus on the generals and governments. Public sentiment craved for war, jingoism and revanchism was rampant. Nationalism was at its peak. Art and literature glorified war, artists rushed to the trenches (see: Hitler). Industry embraced the thought of war. Freudians sexualized war as a pseudo-homosexual orgy, of young men embracing each other in physical struggle. War was aestethically appreciated, politically thought of as a fresh wind. To die for the fatherland was the highest a man could achieve in life. Even the nominally internationalist socialists fell for the trap.
Gah! It shouldn't have happened. It was so needless and fruitless! :bigcry:
Yes, but it is his other assertions about the Treaty which I disagree with, which I believe Husar and myself provided an argument against using direct quotes from the Treaty itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Origins of WW1 are complex indeed, I would rather lay the blame on the Russians because of their support of Balkan nationalism, they have had an eye on that searoutes the Ottomans were holding for quite some time, and correspondence between Serbian and Russian leaders indicate that WW1 was deliberately started.
While the blame for starting our WWI could probably be determined at some point, the groundwork was there for some time. Europe was a ticking time bomb, for no reason but old-fashioned diplomacy and delusions by all sides. In this regard we cannot tie the blame on any one faction, they all took part of the :daisy: and ended up in an even bigger one.
Well, I admit I know very little about it (high school history). I think the amount was such that germany couldn't pay it off till 1990 or something? We didn't try and make them pay reparations after WWII anyway. I think we had some act that pumped money in to revitalize the economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
But yours is a perspective I hadn't heard before, interesting.
I think German reparations were only 2% of the German GDP (or 2% of German income). Arguably, some say it is a lot, bearing in mind it does limit the potential of the economy (American loans resolved this, before the depression.) However, there is the argument that it is only 2%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
In order to prevent war in Europe, two superblocs developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side, and the Germans and Austro-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
But there was one problem with the plan. It was bollocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
So the poor old ostrich died for nothing :no:
I don't think it was an accident, there has been extensive correspondence between Serbia and Russia mentioning the need for an incident in the Balkans since 1890, and the evidence that the Serbian government was actually behind the kill is kinda hard to refute. I think Russia used Serb nationalism as a crowbar to wreck the Austra-Hungarian monarchy, and yes provoke war. Problem with this, Russia wasn't ready for was their railroads were underdeveloped, but we are dealing with radicals and Paschtich is known to have said to the Russian ambassador that it was already too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Your post is pretty accurate, except for this. The Russians mobilized much faster than anyone thought possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
My bad. Anyhow when you think of it the whole guilt thing is based on the existance of plans, but that is what generals are payed for, making plans. That is no evidence, of course generals make plans. We will probably never know what really happened but it certainly isn't just Germany going nuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
Permission to ask a question, sir...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
The thing is: The way I see it, one day, there's a war on, right? And, ages ago, there wasn't a war on, right? So, there must have been a moment when there not being a war on went away, right? and there being a war on came along. So, what I want to know is: How did we get from the one case of affairs to the other case of affairs?
Do you mean how did the war start?Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
The war started because of the vile Hun and his villainous empire building.
+1.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
We already quoted that line and the accurate response to it, we need a new one now.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
Baeeeh
Blackadder must be the most quotable show ever.
Private Plane
Lord Flasheart: Always treat your kite like you treat your woman.
Lieutenant George: How do you mean, sir? Do you mean, take her home at the week-end to meet your mother?
Lord Flasheart: No! I mean get inside her five times a day and take her to heaven and back!
Captain Blackadder: I'm beginning to see why the suffragette movement want the vote.
Lord Flasheart: Hey, hey! Any bird who wants to chain herself to my railings and suffer a jet movement gets my vote!
Excuse me but WTF? Pasic (Serbian latin - Pašić, no need to germanize his name) was very much opposed to the Black Hand and Colonel Apis. That was a separate military clique that tried to wrestle control from the politicians. Apis owed his position to his involvement in the coup of 1903. In fact, that same government with Pasic at its head, with the agreement from the king, had Apis shot in 1917.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Furthermore, Austria didn't have a clue about what happened and initially they blamed Narodna Odbrana (National Defense, another nationalistic organization) for the crime. The government in Vienna pushed for the war before the investigation was over, not to mention the trial. After the ultimatum was sent, Austrian ambassador in Belgrade was instructed to interpret any answer as a no, just in case that Belgrade does accept it.
Lastly, Radical Party didn't have much in common with modern day nationalistic Radical Party. Their program involved some pretty liberal ideas (liberal for the 19th-20th century Balkan anyway). Serbia wasn't ready for the war and didn't want war in 1914, even with Russian backing.
True Austria-Hungary wanted war all along, but I find it kinda hard to believe that they didn't know because Pašić had send out a warning. Pašić was no black hand but he was a fierce believer in a Greater Serbia and his correspondence with Russia doesn't exactly speak in his favor. I think it all just happened too early, but it had to happen.
edit, and I know this is revisionism don't hurt me
Millions of men have fought, and many have died, to bequeath the luxury of blissful ingratitude upon free men, and free women, and free children.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
That SOMEONE remembers is sufficient.
Just thought I'd throw that in. Now we return to your regularly scheduled argument.
I can't believe this thread has made it to page three and nobody has posted the song the title references.
Is this comic relief or what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Well, it's hardly nationalism in a modern sense of the word. Balkans were lagging behind the rest of Europe since they were basically divided between the last two dynastic empires of Europe, Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary. The desire to incorporate Bosnia wasn't anything like the desire to create Greater Serbia but to do something that most of Europe had already done - to create a nation state.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Pasic did send out a warning about the possible attempt on the archduke's life, true but the warning was vague. Serbian ambassador in Vienna didn't speak about the existence of the actual plot, instead he talked about the danger for the archduke in general. That was probably because Serbian government wasn't aware about the exact details of the plot, just that there was something brewing.
The fact remains that both Russia and France didn't give up on diplomacy till the very last minute. Most of Austrian government pressed for war and similar pressures were coming from Berlin.
The military command did, not so sure about the Monarchs. Conrad was a hardliner who wanted war, but the war wasn't immediatly declared, instead an ultimatum, which was actually under presurre of Berlin. Schedules for war were on the tables in Berlin, but that's what generals do, german generals were known to present a plan yearly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Remembrance Sunday is important.