WWI, was No-Man's Land

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 Nov 14 - 05:46 PM

Is levity appropriate on such an issue?

Of course it is. Did you watch Blackadder?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 05:09 AM

Just a sit com.
No message, just for fun.
We are discussing the tragedy.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 05:23 AM

"Tony Robinson was at a First World Memorial in Belgium when he met a group of teenage British schoolkids and decided to have some fun with them.

Most of them recognised him from TV's Time Team or Blackadder and he recalls: "I was winding them up and saying, 'It's not nearly as interesting as whether you're going to buy a beer or have a snog on the back of the coach, is it?'

"And they told me, 'No, this is really important. These people are the reason that we have the lives we have now.'

"And I just found that very touching and important because if you can start to get the fact that people sacrificed their lives in order to protect our way of life then that means our way of life is of value." "

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 06:41 AM

Oh, gosh. So they must have been well led then?

Just out of interest, I haven't read a single post from anyone that says anything different about being proud of or grateful for the sacrifice. Stop trying to malign people using dead soldiers as a weapon. It is rather sick.

it is the insistence by you and other fools that somehow it was noble and executed correctly that means we fail to do the fallen the greatest honour.

Learn from and try not to repeat what whey endured.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw, no General Melchett
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 06:42 AM

Sure, a sitcom and a bloody funny one at that, but anyone who thinks that the end of the final episode had no message wasn't watching the same programme as I was. I will shut up about Blackadder now for fear of Teribus accusing me that it's where I get all my historical knowledge from. Anyway, don't be silly, Keith.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 07:34 AM

Musket, you have also argued that the men who fought were tricked or too moronic to know what it was all about, and that their sacrifice was futile and pointless anyway.
If you are now distancing yourself from that, good.

On the leadership, you make lots of assertions, but I quote historians.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 07:39 AM

One of the BBC's "ten leading historians"

Haig, however, was no technophobe. He encouraged the development of advanced weaponry such as tanks, machine guns and aircraft. He, like Rawlinson and a host of other commanders at all levels in the BEF, learned from experience. The result was that by 1918 the British army was second to none in its modernity and military ability. It was led by men who, if not military geniuses, were at least thoroughly competent commanders. The victory in 1918 was the payoff. The 'lions led by donkeys' tag should be dismissed for what it is - a misleading caricature.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 07:46 AM

You know, when the stonemasons chiselled in "Lest we forget'" they didn't mean we shouldn't forget how well everybody did...
🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴🐴

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 10:16 AM

The inscription was to keep alive their memory and the sacrifice they made.
Not as dupes. They knew what they were doing and why.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 10:16 AM

The inscription was to keep alive their memory and the sacrifice they made.
Not as dupes. They knew what they were doing and why.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Nov 14 - 05:51 PM

Oh, God, not yet ANOTHER appearance of the Keith and Terribus WWI Bullshit Revue - deja vu all over again.

Talk about the "undead".....

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 03:50 AM

Who were "they"?

Many first hand accounts suggest otherwise.

You know, it is rather funny to see you use the word "sacrifice" without thinking of the irony of your stance.

Still trying to get me thrown off Mudcat so you can spread your shit unchallenged?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 05:12 AM

More unsupported assertion and abuse from Musket.
You have to make stuff up because you know nothing about it.
Just 60s class war agitprop.

I quote the historians.
That is the "shit" I "spread."
The facts.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 05:24 AM

Re. Sacrifice, a soldier's view.

"Falklands War veteran Simon Weston has told ITV News people must keep the legacy of the First World War alive and remember those that fought "didn't just sacrifice their life - they sacrificed their future." "

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 08:29 AM

Falklands War - now that was a war to remember.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 08:42 AM

""A man walks into a small local pub on the outskirts of Southampton.
As usual, all the locals stop drinking and stare at him.
He is wearing a long black coat, and a scarf wrapped tight around his neck.
He goes up to the bar, and in a very faint, rasping voice orders a pint of beer.
No one talks to him.
He drinks his pint in silence then leaves.
.
The next night, he comes in at the same time, wearing the same coat and scarf.
He goes up to the bar, and in a very faint, rasping voice orders a pint of beer.
As the barman is pouring the pint he notices behind the scarf is a scar across the man's neck.
No one talks to him, as he drinks his pint in silence, then leaves.
.
On the third night, the same routine takes place, but the barman is intrigued by the scar on his neck, so, just before the man finishes his pint, the barman asks where he got it. In the same faint, rasping voice that he had ordered his pint with, the man replies "Falklands War". He finishes his pint and leaves.
.
As soon as he goes out the door, the barman says to all the locals "We shouldn't treat this man like that. He fought in the Falklands, and yet we're just ignoring him. He has a battle scar on his neck, he can hardly speak, yet we're ignoring him, after all he did for our country. I think to make up for it, we should have a whip-round for him, and if he's in tomorrow night, we'll give him the money as a thank you for fighting, and an apology for being so rude to a war hero."
So, that's what they do, and because they are all feeling so guilty about the way they ignored him, they raised £750, from just 30 of them.
.
The next night he turned up at the bar, and initially no one spoke to him.
They let him get his pint in silence.
As he was getting to the end of the pint, the barman said to him "I told the lads about your story, how you fought in the Falklands War, so we had a collection for you, and we'd like to give you this £750. We're sorry for treating you so badly, and thanks for all you've done for Britain."
.
The man smiled a broad smile, and as he finished his pint, he headed for the door, and as he did so, he turned to them all and said "mucho gracias", and left.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 08:43 AM

Is it possible to die and not lose your future?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 08:49 AM

No, and they were young men.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: GUEST,gillymor
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 09:04 AM

The loss of your future is the most prominent feature of death to the deceased, the gentleman's statement seems redundant and hyperbolic.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 09:29 AM

And, then there was the allied help to the WW2 French resistance in the village of Nouvion. The quality of the German leadership was questionable, noted by this clip of General Von Klinkerhoffen.



'Allo, 'Allo 

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 10:50 AM

Yes gillymore.
The quote was of someone who as a young soldier was terribly burned and disfigured, and saw many friends die.

I think he was trying to express the enormity of it.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 10:55 AM

Thanks Ed.
Perhaps Steve will tell us what historical message we should take from that production.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 11:10 AM

What the flying fuck has any of that to do with your stance that they were well led and aware? The only conclusion from that is that such huge numbers of casualties were planned in advance and deemed appropriate.

You should hang your head in shame with your fawning over blunders, indifference and callous disregard for their men.

As we both agree. Sacrifice. The difference being I use the word to mean sacrifice.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 11:48 AM

I think we know what the word means.
Here it is expressed in other words.
epitaph in the Kohima Allied war cemetery.

When you go home, tell them of us and say
For their tomorrow, we gave our today.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 11:57 AM

What is the historical message one should take from the revision of historical events, particularly the increasingly discredited account written recently by Max Hastings?

The problem as ever is selective quoting of selective accounts. Those involved were quite comfortable with the true accounts at the time, and the sanitisation of mistakes, political v military arguments and disregard for the welfare of their charges grew in popularity as first hand accounts died out.

The influence of the military and their friends in the armaments industry make one rather sceptical, especially when so forcefully defended even here on Mudcat, using circular arguments and quoting of those whose publications are circumspect in the first place.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 12:40 PM

Keith's hero Max also seems pretty supportive of the Ukip and their agenda.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 01:09 PM

Looking again to the top of the thread, I find it now starts with a post of mine, in reply to a previous one which appears to have vanished, along with all the others which preceded mine.

What has happened here, exactly?

≈M≈

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 02:15 PM

I don't know, but three posts in, you were agreeing with me. Then Keith called me, so presumably you, a liar and a loser.

Funny old world.

😎

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 03:39 PM

Hastings is no hero of mine.
He is just one of the many historians whose findings I have quoted.

"What is the historical message one should take from the revision of historical events, particularly the increasingly discredited account written recently by Max Hastings?"

I think you have made that up Guest.
His views on the issues we have discussed are very similar to all the other historians and are not at all discredited.

I confidently predict that you can produce nothing in support of that strange claim.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 04:06 PM

Musket, what are you claiming that the people and soldiers were not "aware" of?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 04:11 PM

Daily Mirror on day 1

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwone/mirror01_01.shtml

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 04:56 PM

all the other historians

Oh, Jesus, not THIS ridiculous crap yet one more time!

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 04:58 PM

Greg, all the main UK parties are now concurring with UKIP policy,
especially regarding unregulated immigration.

Mr Cameron promised to cut immigration figures to "the tens of thousands, from the hundreds of thousands", but has failed miserably, as EU rules determine that our borders should be open to allow "free movement of labour".
As UKIP say, the only way of controlling entry through our borders, is by removing ourselves from the EU; a large number of the electorate realised this some time ago and now all the main parties are running to catch up with public opinion.

"Free movement of labour", is code for "making our country competitive in the global economy", which was the Blairite mantra. Both are code for cheap labour, and a generation of UK citizens parked on ever diminishing and soul destroying benefits.

We unfortunately are afflicted by a capitalist economic system and
UKIP are like all the rest, tools of the system, but appear to reject the worst excesses of "globalism".

I am a socialist, a socialist who is a member of the Scottish National Party.......Time for another of your excruciatingly witty jokes "Musket 1" ?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 05:15 PM

[Hastings]is just one of the many historians whose findings I have quoted.

Not quite. You've quoted internet soundbites purportting to be his "findings".

You see, you've simply not read any of his works or, for that mantter, any works of the totality of other historians you constantly refer to.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw three-for-ten-quid-merlot sociali
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 06:06 PM

Akenaton, you are a crazy, mixed-up man. You are no more a socialist than I am the bloody Queen of Sheba.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 06:38 PM

""Deference

When Haile Selassie I was crowned Emperor, the King of England, who at that time was regarded by many as the most powerful man in the world because of the size of the British Empire, was unable to attend. However, he sent the Duke of Gloucester to represent him.

The Duke of Gloucester bowed to Haile Selassie on meeting him. Many Rastafarians believe that this revealed that the new Ethiopian Emperor was more important than the most important man in the world.""

Shaw lineage to Queen of Sheba via Haile Selassie (part of the puzzle that Steve Shaw is Queen of Sheba, reincarnated):

""Many Rastafarians trace Haile Selassie's lineage back to King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. They believe that the Queen of Sheba's visit to King Solomon found in the Book of Kings (1 Kings 10:1-13) provides further proof of the divinity of Haile Selassie I.

Rastafarians believe that King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba had sex during the visit, which led to the conception of a child who was in the same line of descendents as Haile Selassie I.""

Rasta-Shaw hotel in Jamaica, coincidence? Unlikely.

Shaw Resort Rasta Resort Hotel in of Sheba. They believe that the Queen of Sheba's visit to King Solomon found in the Book of Kings (1 Kings 10:1-13) provides further proof of the divinity of Haile Selassie I.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 07:05 PM

Only a 3* Shaw hotel in Rasta-land?

Well, maybe not seen as such, to the Queen of Shaw(eba)?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 14 - 07:09 PM

The evidence mounts:


Shaws "Little Sheba" 

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 02:19 AM

Musket - 28 Nov 14 - 11:37 AM

1: "How many men sent over the top, knowing they would be running into gun positions?

In the situation all armies fighting on the "western front" found themselves in from late 1914 onward I would say that the answer to that idiotic question was blatantly obvious - ALL OF THEM - The only point of difference was the belief in the effectiveness of the planning and preparation done prior to any attack, the tactics employed and the ability to assemble and mount your attack without giving forewarning to your enemy. Demonstration of how lessons were learned - strong points in the German lines that had held out for two weeks in 1916, in 1917 and 1918 were overrun in under two hours. The British Army and its commanders DID learn, they did adapt, tactics were evolved - more so in the British and Commonwealth Armies than in any other army fighting at that time - something that can be easily proved and demonstrated - to say in general that the British Army was poorly or badly led throughout the course of the First World War is a travesty that flies in the face of fact.

2: Have you ever read how governments allowed themselves to get Europe into this situation?

Yes, at great length. The more import question however would have been - HAVE YOU? On indications obvious from your input to any thread on the subject of the First World War the answer would appear to be that you are totally clueless on the subject.

3: Any idea how many assurances idiotic military leaders gave politicians on all sides over their solution to diplomatic problems?

This should prove interesting. Tell us Musket what assurances did Britain's military leaders give the British Government that led to war? When did any military leader in Great Britain ever usurp the sovereignty of Parliament and impose solutions on the elected leadership of Great Britain over any political process or diplomatic effort?

4: Any idea how much this was about empires in the interest of those who then led their men to slaughter?

Certainly for Great Britain the war was fought out of self-interest for the preservation of the nation and her empire and that is why men and women from all over Great Britain and throughout her empire fought and supported the war effort. They fought for a common cause with a single will and a single purpose - and that Musket despite all those easily exploded myths that you cling so dearly to you will find no mutinies in any British or Commonwealth army in the field from 1914 to 1918, you will find no anti-war or anti-government strikes or riots among the civilian population that were evident in practically every other combatant nation.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 02:37 AM

Happy to oblige, worm.

I look forward to seeing you as a SNP member rallying round your new leader. In her first speech outside parliament she reinforced her two priorities.

1. Tackling inequality.
2. Attracting inward investment and business friendly.

Still, being a socialist, you can accommodate all that eh?

Keith. Anything else to confidently predict?
😂

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 03:22 AM

Don't know, honestly, why you all go on with this sterile activity of arguing with Musket [or 'the Muskets']. He knows what he knows, dash-it-all, and does not want to be confused with facts. I have pretty well given up trying to contradict or engage with him; not thru anger as once before, but simply from the most acutely ballsaching boredom with his endless animadversions and interminable jeremiads. Why don't you all do the same, and leave him to his favourite posture of being, as Kingsley Amis so well put it, part of the massed choir of half a million voices crying in the wilderness.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 03:26 AM

Still, BTW, can't make out what has happened to the beginning of this thread, which starts in medias res with an answer of mine to a now non-existent question which I find oddly disorienting.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 03:46 AM

One thing at a time gang, Independence first, then we can tackle the problem of REAL inequality.....(hint) It has nothing to do with the "marriage rights" of homosexuals.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 05:22 AM

Greg, I provided actual quotes of actual historians with links so they could be seen in the context of the original article.

No one has found a single living historian who disagrees in over a year of this debate.
Nor will they.
In particular Greg, YOU have produced no contribution at all.

Musket, you said awareness was an issue, so tell us what they were unaware of.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 05:57 AM

Err.. According to The SNP it has. They introduced it.

Mind you, you aren't really a member are you? You haven't really met Alex Salmond have you? He never told you his equality speke was a ruse to get power, did he?

By the way, we voted against independence. Lovely to think my vote helped settle that small matter.

OK everybody who keeps defending Akenaton. I assume you defend that disgusting comment jus there too eh?

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 06:27 AM

Not one to cut and paste as a rule, I leave that to shallow people with nothing original to offer, but for the sake of Akenaton, I thought I'd offer this recent press release from SNP, The Scottish National Party, of which he claims to be part of;

SNP MSP welcomes Pride Glasgow
Sat, 19/07/2014 - 08:48
Speaking ahead of the Gay Pride Parade and Main Event in Glasgow today, James Dornan, SNP MSP for Glasgow Cathcart said:

"This is a great day for Scotland; this is the first annual Gay Pride Parade and Main Event in Glasgow since the Scottish Parliament voted for the equal marriage bill earlier this year - it is a celebration of the success the LGBT Community in Scotland and the journey we have all made as a country.

"Scotland has set out a clear intention to be seen as a world leader in equality, and that is a message that will be even more visible with a Yes vote and independence."

ENDS


Mind you, note that he said this before we voted, and made it quite clear that it would still be the case had we been stupid enough to vote for independence.

They say that bigotry is a sign of confusion. In this wannabe Egyptian specimen, we have an excellent case study. As ever, a link to this page has been sent to the membership email for SNP together with his name etc. I doubt he is a member all the same, but SNP deserve not to be associated with people they rightly shun.

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 07:20 AM

As ever, we give our thanks to a fellow Mudcatter who PM'd us this snippet from Akenaton, to give us a laugh. it is rather appropriate given his dig yesterday on this thread about the quality of those who support the warmongers.

it is from a thread called "are facts shite"

Just survived, (by the skin of my teeth),a small altercation with Teribus over debating styles,see (Blair on Channel 4).It has got me thinkin.
Teribus carries about his person,a large book of facts, which he uses to batter people into submission. Im sure most of you have suffered this unpleasant experience at some time or other.
Teribus believes that this book can cause him to win any argument, on any subject large or small. I on the other hand believe that these "facts" or statistics (grain quotas, unemployment figures,infant mortality rates ,(it goes on ad nauseum)have almost always been engineered by politicians of all persuasions, to shine as good a light as possible on their devious shenanigans.so when I write here I like to think for myself and let my own opinions come through, no matter how stupid they may seem to others.
I have always admired the effort and time which Teribus expends on creating his diatribes, even if they may be a bit pedantic at times.
Teribus of course thinks me a wooly minded wanker,butis not completely correct in that assumption,as I only become "Wooly minded" in the Scottish Blackface sheep shagging season....Any facts/opinions on debating styles would be very welcome....Ake
PS..funnily enough,Teribus is one of the strongest supporters of a war that was based on no facts at all,and entirely on the opinions of cretins...Ake

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 07:30 AM

""Those who wish to appear wise among fools, among the wise seem foolish.""
Quintilian, De Institutione Oratoria

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Ed T
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 07:33 AM

What's more foolish than posting 300?
:)

Subject: RE: WWI, was No-Man's Land
From: Musket
Date: 01 Dec 14 - 07:34 AM

"He wrapped himself in quotations- as a beggar would enfold himself in the purple of Emperors."
-- Kipling

Touche Ed.