FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Protection for war heroes part 2
Protection for war heroes part 2
Jump to: Newest in thread
Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
"
Unfortunately it happened. Regardless of who was at fault, millions of lives have been lost.
Do we just eradicate all statues and mermorials that represent the great wars?
How far back are we going to go?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
Unfortunately it happened. Regardless of who was at fault, millions of lives have been lost.
Do we just eradicate all statues and mermorials that represent the great wars?
How far back are we going to go?
"
I don't think anyone is trying to eradicate the past.
Some people just have issues with what the statues represent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
You are already irradicating the past by your flippin remarks of war memorials, and of how they are of no use to modern day ,crappy memorials ,im wondering how i would feel if i was the surviving member of a platoon who saw his mates in pieces in bomb craters wondering what for.You disgust me with your views,those dark days might be comming again soon,give us a bell if you get scared |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
"
I agree not all wars start that way but often for some country it turns into that. As you say WW1 was quite different in its origin but for countries like France and Belgium it turned into that as they were invaded.
Ex British colonies wars were all about freedom
Take away a countries history no matter how UN palatable is very very dangerous |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
I agree not all wars start that way but often for some country it turns into that. As you say WW1 was quite different in its origin but for countries like France and Belgium it turned into that as they were invaded.
Ex British colonies wars were all about freedom
Take away a countries history no matter how UN palatable is very very dangerous"
Serous question..are the ones who fought im the colonies honoured?surely not if they were fighting against us?
I honestly dont think the past is being eradicated.Its being discussed and that can only be a good thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"You are already irradicating the past by your flippin remarks of war memorials, and of how they are of no use to modern day ,crappy memorials ,im wondering how i would feel if i was the surviving member of a platoon who saw his mates in pieces in bomb craters wondering what for.You disgust me with your views,those dark days might be comming again soon,give us a bell if you get scared"
Eradicating. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
A cenotaph that gives remembrance of the ordinary men that gave their lives - usually a plain monolith or a cross, with names engraved - is something that should be preserved. The remembrance service does not glorify war, it looks back with sorrow at the losses that happen on both sides, hoping that by remembering history we can learn from it.
However statues and monuments that glorify the bodies and deeds of Bad People - often the ones that had ordinary people do the dying while they made a tidy profit in one way or another - should not be welcome in our society. This is not to say they should necessarily be destroyed, and in many ways it could be better to remember these people as the monsters they were.
The tearing down of the Colston statue in Bristol was after a long, totally unsuccessful campain to have a plaque attached explaining that this was a slave trader, not somebody to be looked up to. A suitable re-erection of Colston might be in a museum that admits the bad parts of our history, educates not glorifies. "This is Edward Colston who made money from the sale and murder of human beings. He was responsible for the misery and death of xxx thousand people." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
I agree not all wars start that way but often for some country it turns into that. As you say WW1 was quite different in its origin but for countries like France and Belgium it turned into that as they were invaded.
Ex British colonies wars were all about freedom
Take away a countries history no matter how UN palatable is very very dangerous
Serous question..are the ones who fought im the colonies honoured?surely not if they were fighting against us?
I honestly dont think the past is being eradicated.Its being discussed and that can only be a good thing."
You mean like Gandhi though as trigger on fools and horses said
He made one great film then never heard of again.
The protests and violence is not just in the UK but all over.
My opinion is the statues should remain. The country should not be afraid to face its past in public.
Here we are this is the UK and its past. We don't deny it but we do learn from it.
Removal should only be done on the instruction of the people in some sort of vote |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adetMan
over a year ago
South of Ipswich |
"Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right"
George Orwell, 1984 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
I agree not all wars start that way but often for some country it turns into that. As you say WW1 was quite different in its origin but for countries like France and Belgium it turned into that as they were invaded.
Ex British colonies wars were all about freedom
Take away a countries history no matter how UN palatable is very very dangerous
Serous question..are the ones who fought im the colonies honoured?surely not if they were fighting against us?
I honestly dont think the past is being eradicated.Its being discussed and that can only be a good thing.
You mean like Gandhi though as trigger on fools and horses said
He made one great film then never heard of again.
The protests and violence is not just in the UK but all over.
My opinion is the statues should remain. The country should not be afraid to face its past in public.
Here we are this is the UK and its past. We don't deny it but we do learn from it.
Removal should only be done on the instruction of the people in some sort of vote"
Cant disagree with that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adetMan
over a year ago
South of Ipswich |
"Just carrying on the thread
World war 1 was nothing to do with protecting freedom.It was about great power status.
The wars faught by ex British colonies for independence?not sure if they would be honoured in the statues.
I'm not a big buff about the american civil war tbh.
I didn't say they shouldnt be forgotten.I just think they it's a bit of a myth to say every war was fought to protect our "freedom'
I agree not all wars start that way but often for some country it turns into that. As you say WW1 was quite different in its origin but for countries like France and Belgium it turned into that as they were invaded.
Ex British colonies wars were all about freedom
Take away a countries history no matter how UN palatable is very very dangerous
Serous question..are the ones who fought im the colonies honoured?surely not if they were fighting against us?
I honestly dont think the past is being eradicated.Its being discussed and that can only be a good thing.
You mean like Gandhi though as trigger on fools and horses said
He made one great film then never heard of again.
The protests and violence is not just in the UK but all over.
My opinion is the statues should remain. The country should not be afraid to face its past in public.
Here we are this is the UK and its past. We don't deny it but we do learn from it.
Removal should only be done on the instruction of the people in some sort of vote"
I don't think the people that pulled them down in the first place would care much about a democratic vote, that's not how anarchy works |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
William Wallace, the real one, not tne Mel Gibson version committed atrocities, burning women and children taking refuge in a building.
His memorials should be taken down |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"William Wallace, the real one, not tne Mel Gibson version committed atrocities, burning women and children taking refuge in a building.
His memorials should be taken down"
And Robert The Bruce has a bit of a mucky past too. Should his statues be removed also.
And yet both these two men almost pale into insignificance when compared with the horrors committed by Edward I (aka Hammer of The Scots). There's quite a few monuments to him also.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago
milton keynes |
"William Wallace, the real one, not tne Mel Gibson version committed atrocities, burning women and children taking refuge in a building.
His memorials should be taken down
And Robert The Bruce has a bit of a mucky past too. Should his statues be removed also.
And yet both these two men almost pale into insignificance when compared with the horrors committed by Edward I (aka Hammer of The Scots). There's quite a few monuments to him also.
"
Should the tower of London be pulled down to. Was not renowned for being a place of luxury. Should the Italians pull down the coliseum . They fed slaves to lions for entertainment. Why is that deemed ok? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"A cenotaph that gives remembrance of the ordinary men that gave their lives - usually a plain monolith or a cross, with names engraved - is something that should be preserved. The remembrance service does not glorify war, it looks back with sorrow at the losses that happen on both sides, hoping that by remembering history we can learn from it.
However statues and monuments that glorify the bodies and deeds of Bad People - often the ones that had ordinary people do the dying while they made a tidy profit in one way or another - should not be welcome in our society. This is not to say they should necessarily be destroyed, and in many ways it could be better to remember these people as the monsters they were.
The tearing down of the Colston statue in Bristol was after a long, totally unsuccessful campain to have a plaque attached explaining that this was a slave trader, not somebody to be looked up to. A suitable re-erection of Colston might be in a museum that admits the bad parts of our history, educates not glorifies. "This is Edward Colston who made money from the sale and murder of human beings. He was responsible for the misery and death of xxx thousand people.""
and then of course, in the same vein, continue, "despite this he was also a great benefactor to the people of Bristol and could not help being 'of his time' and not of the C21st" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"William Wallace, the real one, not tne Mel Gibson version committed atrocities, burning women and children taking refuge in a building.
His memorials should be taken down
And Robert The Bruce has a bit of a mucky past too. Should his statues be removed also.
And yet both these two men almost pale into insignificance when compared with the horrors committed by Edward I (aka Hammer of The Scots). There's quite a few monuments to him also.
Should the tower of London be pulled down to. Was not renowned for being a place of luxury. Should the Italians pull down the coliseum . They fed slaves to lions for entertainment. Why is that deemed ok?"
This is the point exactly. All these things are 'of their time' they cant be anything else. The important thing is that context is given to those of us who have come along later so that we might understand (and hopefully not repeat any past wrong-doings). An ethnic minority cause that attacks the culture of the land where it finds itself is being very counter-productive to their own cause and grievance - It will provoke a backlash - this was evinced by the Burnley banner episode. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"William Wallace, the real one, not tne Mel Gibson version committed atrocities, burning women and children taking refuge in a building.
His memorials should be taken down
And Robert The Bruce has a bit of a mucky past too. Should his statues be removed also.
And yet both these two men almost pale into insignificance when compared with the horrors committed by Edward I (aka Hammer of The Scots). There's quite a few monuments to him also.
Should the tower of London be pulled down to. Was not renowned for being a place of luxury. Should the Italians pull down the coliseum . They fed slaves to lions for entertainment. Why is that deemed ok?"
I read somewhere they fed slaves, some of which were english to the lions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
