Wars and ConflictsÌý permalink
What Do You Think About War ?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by Luke (U2430257) on Wednesday, 9th November 2005
wirte what you think war is about
-
Message 2
Posted by Lt_Henson (U2436367) on Wednesday, 9th November 2005
fighting for freedom.
one country is always fighting for it's own freedom...
unless its a civil war... -
Message 3
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Wednesday, 9th November 2005
People can say they fight for ideals, for political or social change, they fight for their country, their leader, even because they just have to.
I went to war and fought for the men around me; my friends. I fought to keep them alive, I fought to keep myself alive.
War itself is terrible. Personally, I never noticed when in the field, only afterwards. When in combat, your training and instincts to stay alive take over.
War is killing because you're told to do so, it's keeping others alive as you're told to do so, it's to do nothing and watch as evil things happen - Because you're told to do so.
War is sitting on your arse waiting for someone who doesn't know what they're talking about to tell you to go and put your life on the line.
War holds for bad memories and good memories, good friends and good friends who are no longer here.
War is hell for the loved ones of those in the battle.
War is nothing you’ll see at a movie.
War is having people ask you to tell them of your experiences when you either want to forget them, or can’t get over the point that it isn’t the glory shown in a Holywood Film they think it is.
War is getting stabbed in the back by politicians.
Well, that's a little bit of what war is to me. -
Message 4
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Wednesday, 9th November 2005
To coin a phrase or two, "Mud, Blood and Poppycock", "Politics by other means", and an evil, if sometimes a necessary one.
Ordinary people doing extraordinary things, whether great or grotesque.
The hammer that forges the future on the anvil of the past. -
Message 5
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 9th November 2005
I have some nerve giving my opinion on war after a warrior like Mani. So from a non combatant’s point of view I would say WAR!! Is imposing your country's rejected political will on another by force of arms.
Cheerz -
Message 6
Posted by Sabre-Wulf (U2142937) on Thursday, 10th November 2005
War is sitting on your arse waiting for someone who doesn't know what they're talking about to tell you to go and put your life on the line.
Ìý
First let me say I have the utmost respect for anyone who has served in defence of their country. I would have liked to, but a serious injury I sustained at University ruled me out on fitness grounds.
My question here Mani is does your comment relate to politicians or officers? Or equally to both? -
Message 7
Posted by DaveMBA (U1360771) on Thursday, 10th November 2005
The quote from Clausewitz is that "war is the extension of policy by other means". It was the sport of kings, became a national event and then they dropped A-bombs on Japan. At that stage, we decided at least to restrict ourselves to limited warfare in an 18th century sense.
Wars are in fact almost always fought over resources - once it was just land and cash, then it included control of trade and finally, WW2 and Gulf Wars 1&2 over resources in the ground - oil. So, war is the manifestation of greed by force. Thus it was outlaws in 1926, although that of course, does not stop anyone fighting in self-defence (Art 41 of the UN Charter). Howveer, "preemptive self defence" was ruled illegal by the Nuremburg Tribunals as it is a cover for aggression - whatever the neo-cons might think. -
Message 8
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Thursday, 10th November 2005
Hi Sabre wolf,
It is both, but to a lesser extent officers.
Much like DL, my respect for officers was, how can I say? Not what it could have been.
Too many officers I came across thought they kew too much when they didn't. They disregarded the opinions or advice of their more experiences NCO's. -
Message 9
Posted by Elistan (U1872011) on Thursday, 10th November 2005
I would just like to say that as historians we have a tendency to see war within the cause and effect of the historical narrative, but Mani's post has humbled me and my admiration, as one of the generation that did not have to go to war thanks to the efforts of people like you, is unbounded.
Cheers for your insight
Elistan -
Message 10
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Thursday, 10th November 2005
Mani,
The finest post I have read on this board in a long long time.
Agreed with every last painful word.
People can say they fight for ideals, for political or social change, they fight for their country, their leader, even because they just have to.
I went to war and fought for the men around me; my friends. I fought to keep them alive, I fought to keep myself alive.
War itself is terrible. Personally, I never noticed when in the field, only afterwards. When in combat, your training and instincts to stay alive take over.
War is killing because you're told to do so, it's keeping others alive as you're told to do so, it's to do nothing and watch as evil things happen - Because you're told to do so.
War is sitting on your arse waiting for someone who doesn't know what they're talking about to tell you to go and put your life on the line.
War holds for bad memories and good memories, good friends and good friends who are no longer here.
War is hell for the loved ones of those in the battle.
War is nothing you’ll see at a movie.
War is having people ask you to tell them of your experiences when you either want to forget them, or can’t get over the point that it isn’t the glory shown in a Holywood Film they think it is.
War is getting stabbed in the back by politicians.
Well, that's a little bit of what war is to me.Ìý
Masses of respect.
DL -
Message 11
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Thursday, 10th November 2005
Once again Mani,
Spot on. I think a Mani Fan Club is needed today!!!
Hi Sabre wolf,
It is both, but to a lesser extent officers.
Much like DL, my respect for officers was, how can I say? Not what it could have been.
Too many officers I came across thought they kew too much when they didn't. They disregarded the opinions or advice of their more experiences NCO's.Ìý
You got it with regards to my feelings towards officers. In 10 years service I can only recall a couple of officers I would say I respect totally, and surprising one of them was a "one-pip wonder", a raw 2nd Lt straight out of Sandhurst, and the bloke was a legend. He was exceedingly brave, and didn't even know it, and a born leader. There really weren't many who earned respect. NCOs and WOs, now I could reel off a list as long as your arm, but then the truth is, and always has been, the NCOs run the British Army, the officers just make things more difficult.
Cheers
DL -
Message 12
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 11th November 2005
DL,
Please! I'm a para, I'm arrogant enough! It's a bad idea to give praise!
"NCOs run the British Army, the officers just make things more difficult."
100% spot on! Ask any squadie who he wants to be near in combat, who he wants to have his orders from, he has three stripes! -
Message 13
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Friday, 11th November 2005
Oh yeah good point Mani!
Still nothing to feel arrogant about jumping out of a perfectly serviceable aircraft!!!!!
Total insanity.
As we always used to say in 1st Armd Div, it doesn't matter how fit they are, 30 tons of armour will still squish em!!
he he he
Still, bloody good post though.
Cheers
DL -
Message 14
Posted by the_other (U2402568) on Saturday, 12th November 2005
war created by fat old farts fought with young men
a big lie -
Message 15
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Monday, 14th November 2005
What is a big lie?
-
Message 16
Posted by ixora05 (U2484484) on Monday, 14th November 2005
what war is about--I don't know because I'm lucky enough to have been born after it happened to my country from 1942 to 1945. I've only gotten a glimpse of what it would have been like for those who suffered through WWI, WWII, the Gulf War, the Vietnam and Korea Wars, the Iraq war.
I'd like to share a poem my friend wrote:
"Quiet midnight on Christmas Eve,
the murk of dark, soft starlight slew.
When dragon's fire breaks the peace-
gunshots ring out, straight and true.
Mindless soldiers bravely charge,
surging forth, strong dogs of war.
Raging battle, Death's betrothed,
they silence voices evermore.
Men stand up where bodies lie,
drone warriors, they wait to die.
In the face of bullets fly,
bravely resolute-boys don't cry.
Corpses pile up by the dozen;
tag counters' nerves wear thin.
Live to die the Commander doesn't;
He's already dead-
dead within."
think that sums it up really well. the idealist in me knows that war may have been necessary but she can't help thinking that it's still wrong. Husbands, brothers, fathers, sons dying for their country. mothers losing children, children losing parents, families destroyed and entire countries brought to their knees. I know why it happens. doesn't mean I have to like it. -
Message 17
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Monday, 14th November 2005
Hi ixora05,
"Husbands, brothers, fathers, sons dying for their country" I think that's the point, it isn't about that anymore. Most of the conflict I saw was not about my country, it was about 'peace keeping' in other countries or trying to prevent a tin pot dictator invading another country.
For us the Wars the Sasoon and Owen describe are long gone. -
Message 18
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Monday, 14th November 2005
Hi ixora05,
"Husbands, brothers, fathers, sons dying for their country" I think that's the point, it isn't about that anymore. Most of the conflict I saw was not about my country, it was about 'peace keeping' in other countries or trying to prevent a tin pot dictator invading another country.
For us the Wars the Sasoon and Owen describe are long gone.
Ìý
To add to Mani's post, in previous wars, it was a matter of soldier against soldier, tank against tank, plane against plane. Nowadays, the lines are so blurred in modern war that it becomes impossible to tell combatant from civilian, enemy from friend. Unfortunately, war is not a romantic occupation, it is merely "Politics by other means". Nasty means at that.
Excellent poem though!
Cheers
DL -
Message 19
Posted by casper551 (U2495779) on Monday, 14th November 2005
Mani are you sure You were an ex Para all the para's I have ever met couldnt write !! I am a ex marine. However I believe what you said is very true having served in the gulf twice kosovo and 2 tours of ulster I can honestly say I did my duty but prefered it when it was peace keeping. War is not glamourous people dont get shot then continue to fight they scream in pain writhing crying for help. there is no glory you do your duty and try and keep those you are responsible for alive.
-
Message 20
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Tuesday, 15th November 2005
Hi Casper...
What? A slimey who can use a computer? Which Para taught you how to do that?
Well, there's a growing band of us that served in all three of those theatres, DL also served in the Gulf NI and The Balkans....
My only problem with the 'peace keeping' in the Balkans was the absolute farce that it became.
The old adage 'Please don't shoot those civilians, or we'll be forced to ask you again' was so true there. -
Message 21
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Tuesday, 15th November 2005
Casper,
Welcome to the boards! I'm not sure whether to run for cover having a marine and a para in the same thread, there may be trouble ahead.......
Best behaviour please gentlemen!!!
Wonder if we'll get any ex-Rodneys on here at some point? That could be amusing! On second thoughts, do they know how to use a computer!!!!
Agreed as ever on the "peacekeeping" ops in the Balkans Mani, to use a bit of yank-speak, it was totally FUBAR. IMO the only thing we learned is that Yugo cars are great fun to drive Warriors over!
Just out of interest did anyone catch the programme on the Somme on C4 last night? Now that was a seriously bad war to be involved in.
Cheers
DL -
Message 22
Posted by drscheng (U1743542) on Tuesday, 15th November 2005
As far as I am concerned, war is about exploiting foreign economies to distract attention from national problems: take, for example, a high rate of inflation.
The prices are sky-high, all efforts to bring down inflation have backfired. In brief: the fight against inflation appears to be doomed to failure. Wage increases are no longer in line with inflation, the poor cannot afford to satisfy the most basic needs.
Undeniably, the prospect of a war and its successful outcome appear to be a solution to all these problems:
numerous companies rejoice at the very thought of all the money to be made, the government is able to introduce new measures to tackle unemployment. For the Army is, obviously, in constant need of reinforcement troops.
Apart from that, war is about inflicting a humiliating defeat on the enemy I guess: only if the enemy recognises one's superiority, be it in terms of material and supplies or in terms of international support, is there any chance whatsoever of a lasting peace whose rules can be dictated by the party having emerged victorious in the war.
Likewise, it goes without saying that every war is about unnecessary violence, death and decay, bloodshed and cruelty - for a war does not know any rules at all. -
Message 23
Posted by casper551 (U2495779) on Thursday, 17th November 2005
True Mani the PEACEKEEPING was a farce crap rules of engagment. would have been different if they had Oil though!!!
-
Message 24
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Friday, 18th November 2005
Caspar,
You got that right, it may well look like a cynical viewpoint, but I really do bslieve that if there was a big fat oilfield in the mountains of Bosnia, then it would have not been UNPROFOR who rolled into Vitez, it would have been 1st Armd Div and a US division plus a few more.
Sad but true....
DL -
Message 25
Posted by LittleHill (U3038272) on Monday, 30th January 2006
I think Wars happen when three vital things are needed, they are:
1- Terriotory( land ).
2- Water ( Supplies ).
3- Rule, For example , when Hitler said that germany will "RULE" europe for a thousand years, that is one kind of rule, another kind of rule can be to supplie and protect thier citizens Army and land. -
Message 26
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Tuesday, 31st January 2006
War is the only vocation where you can rape anyone you want; kill anyone you want; steal anything you can carry, drink as much as you want, and still go home, be given a whole chest full of medals, have two national holidays named for you, and be considered a hero by all your mates.
-
Message 27
Posted by Mark (U2073932) on Tuesday, 31st January 2006
Bringing out the very best and very worst people. E.g. Sack of Badajoz in 1812 (rape, theft, murder, drunken chaos). Monte Cassino 1944 - German troops helping British stretcher bearers carry allied wounded back to allied lines safely.
-
Message 28
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Tuesday, 31st January 2006
Refer you to the Donovan song of the 60s. The Universal Soldier.
-
Message 29
Posted by Nielsen (U3014399) on Wednesday, 1st February 2006
My one time of serious soldiering was doing a tour of duty as one of the UN peace keepers in Cyprus in early 1975, and though we sat between the lines, most of the time was the best of, when nobody shot and fa happened, then you knew that noone, innocent or not, was being killed!
As all squaddies we were supposed to keep peace just by showing our presence, and otherwise do what we were told.
I believe I may add one little bit of agony to Mani's and DL's: those worse than know-all-officers was the attitude of civilian headquarters back home, who told us in detail what we were supposed to do, think, drink and feel, and then listen to them moan that our actual doings were ruining the country, so they had to send down innumeral bean-counters in order to check that we didn't sel all those rolls of toilet-paper and what not that they seemed to miss in their inventories. -
Message 30
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Wednesday, 1st February 2006
Neilsen-the-Dane: When men have been in combat. When they have killed and seen their "Mates" killed, I can understand why "massacres occur." They feel the "Enemy" is now theirs. Plus, every country goes to great lengths to make the other side horrible people. My favorate statement from the 1950s was: "As a good Christian it was my duty to go out and kill a commie for Christ."
-
Message 31
Posted by Nielsen (U3014399) on Wednesday, 1st February 2006
re jesw1962.
I can't possibly know if you've ever seen mates killed or wounded, and I don't want to know!!
I've seen some results,they are terryfying enough!
I now know, why a serving soldier will see no troubles in taking boots off a dead mate and leaving holed ones - think of Maslows Pyramids - we're talking survival, mate!
And not just of the fittest, but of anyone who might!
Aw forgit it! -
Message 32
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
Neilsen-the-Dane: I have seen men killed. I have killed. Once they found out I was a good shot, I became a sniper. If you got within 1,600 meters of me, you were dead. At 600 meters or less I would ask if they wanted a head or body shot. I know men who claimed they killed at 3,000 meters.
That is why I say that war is the only vocation where you can commit the most horrible attroticities and be considered a hero. I too saw, in fact participated in, helping women and children. I helped wounded enemy and did some nice things. But I ask this question: "If I robbed a bank of $1,000,000 and then set about helping the poor, homeless, sick, would I get to keep the money?" -
Message 33
Posted by Nielsen (U3014399) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
jesw1962. I have not killed - I have not shot back, we were not allowed to by the Rules-of-Engagement.
I offer my respect to you for having been part in an operation that saved lives.
Personally I lay no claim to anything else than having been there, and by that perhaps been part in aiding someone escape the results of war.
You are quite right in pointing out that war can be a vocation, and then - I believe - warriors become dangerous to society.
But what of politicians who become addicted to sending soldiers out - are they not dangerous?
As to your question, whether you kept the million for yourself or you spent it on relief for the poor, homeless and sick, I still believe that judicial systems would say that you were a robber and should pay every single penny back.
The powers-that-be never saw Robin-Hood characters as anything but menaces to society. -
Message 34
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
Nielsen-the-Dane: I agree completely. The same person who can be a killer one day can do incredablly nice things the next.
I fully support the idea of politicians who send people off to war should be held accountable. If their decision can be shown to have been for personal gain, they should be placed in prison.
As far as the million dollars; you response is correct. My point was that even if soldiers do some good, they are esentially evil. The fact they are necessary doesn't change that in any way. There should be no pride in invading and occupying another country. -
Message 35
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
A funny story about the use of a firearm and being a member of the armed forces (Well two) one. A friend of mine was a M. P. he was escorting a very dangerous prisoner through York railwat station. As the man had nothing to loose, my friend was armed, carrying the .445 Webley. The prioner bolted for it, and my friend pulled out this hand cannon. "Stop or I shoot," He yelled, "Stop or I shoot." The prisoner didn't so he pointed the gun up into the air and pulled the trigger. For those who don't know it. York Railway Station has a glass roof. The prioner stopped, my friend found himeslf surrounded by falling glass, and placed on a charge for discharging a firearm in a public place. The other, as Duty Officer in Ulster, he was called out one night as one of his men had developed (According to the man who called him) A servere nose bleed. It wasn't the M. P. had tried to commit suicide by placing his pistol in his mouth and pulling the trigger the bullet had exited through the roof of his skull without touching the brain or opitic nerves. Goes to show it is true what they say about M. P,s
Fred
Oh, 1600 Metres What were you using .50 Barret, or I believe some units used the Boys Anti Tank converted to .50. I was a Lee Enfield man myself. Good (Without scope) up to 1000 mtres. -
Message 36
Posted by jesw1962 (U1726423) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
Winchester Model 75, scope, spotter, and all hand loads.
-
Message 37
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
That will get the job done. Has anybody seen this new series on Sky. "Over there." Following a company of U S Troops out in the Gulf. A sort of up dated Tour of Duty.
Fred -
Message 38
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
Fred,
SMLE, wonderful rifle, couldn't get more accurate. -
Message 39
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 2nd February 2006
I had a special. It was a number 4, but made in England. Most 4s were made in Canada, but this one. English rose wood. Parker Hale sights. I put 17 shots in a two inch group at 300 yards. It was the nearest thing to love until I met my wife.
-
Message 40
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
Snipers...
Scary people... -
Message 41
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
DL,
Snipers... Very shady, not to be trusted.... -
Message 42
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
It's Friday, can everyone just stop being evil OK?
Snipers.
Definitely not to be trusted, but to be treated to a rapid burst with Mr Rarden. -
Message 43
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
The sniper fought a lonely war, but is to be respected. He could alter the outcome of a battle with one shot. If caught he was likely to be shot out of hand. His job was to kill, or wound the officers the Senior N C O the radio man. Wounding was better. It took more men to move a wounded man, and the sight of your comrade screaming slowed you done faster than seeing him lying there dead. I have introduced the sniper into the story I am writing. In this case he his Scots, and he and his brothers learned their trade in the Highlands hunting, as did the first British snipers of the Great war. I take my hat off (But not my steel helmet) to those men, and in Russia women. There was a line from I think the American Civil war, when a general said. Don't be stupid they couldn't hit anything at this......
Fred -
Message 44
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
Fred,
You're right, the Scots (Although it was generally Game Keepers rather than just hunters) were the only ones who matched and overtook the Germans at Sniping. It was they that introduced the Gilly suit... -
Message 45
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
"It's Friday, can everyone just stop being evil OK?"
I can't, Friday means Red wine, red is the colour of the devil, I drink the devils' tipple. -
Message 46
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
Oh dear.
Never mind. I appear to have offended more people today, so I think I'll be joining you in a bottle or two of red stuff later...
Cheers
-
Message 47
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
In the story, Robert and his brothers are Gillys on the local estate . What brand wine?? My wife wants to know. When we visit our friend, she seems to have a Self Filling Glass set. Every time you put your glass down, it seems to fill itself up. I must find her supplier
-
Message 48
Posted by Mani (U1821129) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
Fred, tonight a nice '98 Pomerol or a Chateauneuf du Pape.
-
Message 49
Posted by DL (U1683040) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
Tonight I will be swilling some Turning Leaf Cabernet Sauvignon. Californian cheap stuff I know, but I like the taste of it!
I could do with some of those glasses, if you track them down please let us know!!
Going back to snipers, they still wear Ghillie suits don't they? Never really seen any in action (other than drunk Serbs, and they missed-obviously as I am still here!!). -
Message 50
Posted by Nielsen (U3014399) on Friday, 3rd February 2006
Hello Fred,
Do you think you could find me such a set?
Personally I do - at the moment - prefer a nice Italian red, called Borgo Thaulero, 2003, made from Montepulciano grapes, somewhere in the Abruzzo area. Rather nice I think.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.