"Explosion" in Manchester

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm speaking particularly of individual interpersonal violence, rather than the policies or behaviors of martial congregations. Impunity was the rule of cultures up to the 20th century, and men killed whomever they pleased as long as they could get away with it.

But again, this isn't relevant to the subject of bravery.

Evidence of bravery is usually preceded by someone more important than you shouting "shieldwall" or "present arms" or even just "brace for impact."

Bravery requires an opponent, even if the opponent is Mother Nature herself and not another human being.

This "man" had no opponent except his own conscience.

[Montmorency]

Evidence of bravery is usually preceded by someone more important than you shouting "shieldwall" or "present arms" or even just "brace for impact."

Bravery requires an opponent, even if the opponent is Mother Nature herself and not another human being.

This "man" had no opponent except his own conscience.

I would disagree that he had no opponent, and I'm unsure about tying bravery to opposition. But ultimately I'm not interesting in delving into virtue ethics.

My main point is that we should avoid settling into the Platonic position that bravery is equivalent to, or derives from, "correct opinion".

[AE Bravo]

So you agree that it is a radical opinion of bravery then.

[Gilrandir]

HITLER!

Hitler was a warrior?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Hitler was a warrior?

He was a soldier. Served in front line combat in WW1 as a "runner." This was easy duty between things as you hung around the regimental headquarters bunker in the 2nd or 3rd line. However, the job was to run messages and orders forward during attacks etc. in case wired communication broke down, as it often did.