|
Author
|
Topic: Peace Day?
|
|
|
krishna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1242
|
posted 11 November 2002 01:29 PM
It seems to me that this day is partly about making war veterans and their families feel like they didnt throw away their lives for nothing, and partly about reinforcing the nothing that all those dead people's lives were spent for: patriotism, a cover for the interests of the wealthy few. World war I and II certainly werent about human rights, nor were any of the mass murder sprees (aka wars) that have occurred since then.Relative to the rest of the world, the average Canadian is one of the wealthy few, and the attitude shows. A CBC poll shows that most Canadians support mass murder being carried out in their name (more money for the military), as long as they arent the ones getting killed (less than 1/3 would volunteer in a war). Now i'm not saying all those veterans and war dead were stupid. I believe that they sincerely believed they were going to giving their lives for a noble cause. It is wonderful to see what sacrifice and difficult tasks human beings are capable of, even in the face of horrifying circumstances. I merely dispute that it was a noble cause or smart strategy. So every November 11, i do remember the noble sentiments and grim determination that may have motivated of the soldiers, but i also think about those who risked their lives for peace (war resisters, e.g.), on all sides of the conflicts. There are also all those who risk their lives every day providing humanitarian aid in war zones or unstable regions. But mainly i remember this day because little or nothing has fundamentally changed since then in our society. It could easily happen again. Have a good day.
From: Ottawa and Rideau rivers area | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Adam Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3034
|
posted 12 November 2002 12:51 AM
there is somthing to marx's idea that on both sides of the bayonets there is a worker, but at the same time what mr. hitler was up to was even more terrible then capitalism. WWII was one of the few wars that we needed to fight. protesting the war back when it was going on is different then saying that we should never have gotten into it while living in the free world in 2002. quote:
Relative to the rest of the world, the average Canadian is one of the wealthy few, and the attitude shows. A CBC poll shows that most Canadians support mass murder being carried out in their name (more money for the military), as long as they arent the ones getting killed (less than 1/3 would volunteer in a war).
I really think a war would need to arise for people to properly answer this question. and i don't like the leap in logic that says that just because people support more money for the military that they support mas murder. i'd like to see more money for the military so it could carry out peace keeping missions more easily. i also think it is fine if people don't want to go to war, no matter how "just" the war is, but i also think that it is important that we are thankful of sacrafices made by those who have fought in wars. the soliders rarely decide what wars to fight in. [ November 12, 2002: Message edited by: Adam Smith ]
From: Manitoba | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
swirrlygrrl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2170
|
posted 12 November 2002 01:01 AM
Actually TimL, you seem to be taking a very whitewashed, social studies textbook view of history here IMHO - while WWII in particular has been written as good (ie British, American, Canadian, French resistance, etc.) vs. evil Nazis, with Nazi atrocities held up as THE reason to fight the war, the facts stand that the countries involved didn't really care all that much that Hitler was gassing people, since they didn't really care about the people he did it to. Or have you forgotten that to the Canadian government, "one (Jew) is too many", and that OUR COUNTRY, among other nations, sent a boatload of Jews back to Germany, to their death, rather than accept them as refugees? To honour and respect veterans (which I sincerely believe in doing, and which I think Krishna does as well, even when they are on the losing side) does not mean blindly following patriotic dogma, whether it relates to past, present or future wars. Let us look at Bush and Iraq for example - does anyone actually support Hussein? Very few, and likely none on these boards. Has he not committed atrocities that could justify an humanitarian intervention? Likely yes. But so have dozens of other countries and leaders. And the well accepted differences are, as Bush himself elequently pointed out, this guy tried to kill his daddy, and of course, oiloiloil. Why should we send more people to their death over this, and clothe it in a righteous battle? And why do people believe it? Respect for our veterans, and the sacrificies they made, MUST NOT blind us to the atrocities that are committed in the name of "good versus evil," and in fact such respect requires us to ensure that, since war is the supreme sacrifice, it is not used lightly for stupid, petty, personal or MONETARY reasons. I would not sacrifice my father or brother or partner for the sake of a hair dryer or SUV. Would you? Is that what freedom amounts to for you? For Krishna, and many others, it appears that that's what the death of those soldiers bought us today. And Krishna's post is actually an example of a relatively common socialist point about war being fought by the workers, and the real benefits going to the capitalists. Really not all that shocking of an idea, or very new. But a welcome addition to the discussion to me.
From: the bushes outside your house | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625
|
posted 12 November 2002 01:47 AM
TimL, we didn't get into World War II because of the holocaust. Our government was fiercely anti-semitic. It let in more Nazi war criminals after the war than Jewish refugees during the entire six year period we were actually at war. We got involved to support "Mother Brittannia", and that's about it. Most soldiers I'm sure were fighting for freedom, and to end the holocaust (those who knew of it. Most didn't until they started liberating camps), but it wasn't the mission the government of Canada sent them to serve. Let's not kid ourselves.I really appreciated this article. The last couple rememberance days, I always felt guilty for feeling somewhat torn, and even bitter and resentful, during the day, and especially the two minutes silence. I felt the day should be about rememberance, peace, and paying respects to those who fought truly believing "never again". Not what I feel is the prostitution of their lives and sacrifices- the use of this day and their memory as a war cry, and an occasion for blind patriotism and hypocritical denunciations. Even today, after having read the article last night, I still felt it difficult to reconcile the rift between what I think this day is about, and what the mainstreme of our culture and press say it is about. They said I should be thinking about certain things during those two minutes today. I agreed with some of the suggestions, but felt violated by others. So I felt guilty and torn during today's two minutes as well. One moment stood out in the day, however. When watching the National's coverage of the assault on Kibbutz Metzer, which we know as being progressive, and fundamentally committed to peace and reconciliation, the reporters reached a resident woman for comment. They asked her how such a thing could happen- digging for racial slurs and anger toward all Palestinians. Instead of giving them what they were looking for, she said with a sorrowful face, "He is human". Prior to those simple words I had been struggling in my mind to find any reason as to why a person could do such a thing- I had just about settled on mental illness- but hearing those words deeply touched me. I almost began to cry. How someone so personally affected by such a horrendous deed could have any feeling but hate for the person who carried it out amazed, and inspired me. Unfortunately, we live in a world where people like this woman are one in a million, instead of the norm. I'm confident that will change, sooner or later, and the world will be in no short supply of people like her. But I think what rememberance day should be about is hoping, and working to make it sooner, rather than later. [ November 12, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]
From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192
|
posted 12 November 2002 05:16 AM
I've always seen Remembrance Day as being primarily about WWI - the choice of day, "In Flanders Fields," etc. - and I think that has coloured my perceptions of it. Hundreds of thousands of men signed up in Canada alone, but they didn't know what they were getting into. What ended up happening to them was more horrible than they could imagine. And a lot of them came to realise that it was a meaningless war - that "Mother England" had sold out her young men. I see it as a turning point in a lot of ways. I think this was when Canada began to realise that Britain did not always have their best interests at heart, and I think this started turning public opinion around on subjects like pacifism. I don't think honouring veterans' sacrifices has to imply honouring what they sacrificed for. They were all so young, and they suffered so much. And I take Remembrance Day as a time to think about that, and to remember not to think or talk about war lightly. quote:
Not what I feel is the prostitution of their lives and sacrifices- the use of this day and their memory as a war cry, and an occasion for blind patriotism and hypocritical denunciations.
That is appalling. I really hope those uses are in the minority. I think this year has brought it home to us again how pointless and painful war can be, and I think Canada's position on the issue of war has overall been very cautious - certainly we are not sounding the war cries like the Americans are. [ November 12, 2002: Message edited by: Smith ]
From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arch Stanton
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2356
|
posted 12 November 2002 07:02 PM
I've spent a fair bit of the last couple of days in the company of World War Two veterans. I've seen their eyes well up with tears as they thought about, and told me about the deaths of their friends.I saw their eyes well up with tears as they told me about the joy that liberation brought civilians from France to Holland to Norway. I asked them about the meaning of poppies and remembrance, and if these gestures glorified war in any way. Their responses were very clear. There is no glory in war. Anybody who has been through war would not wish it upon anyone else. Their message is that we should learn from their experience and promote peace.
From: Borrioboola-Gha | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
