Join the Labour Party and save your country!

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

For some related fun, have a gander here: https://twitter.com/giantpoppywatch

Poppy ice cream and pizzas are a personal fave.

Yes, those are crass attempts to cash in unless the makers are donating the proceeds to RBL. In which case they are just crass.

I think you might be mistaking that for some sort of representative sample, though.

pblakeney

Tangled Metal wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Mostly the navy though.

I've never seen the navy represented at remembrance events but I've never lived near a naval port. In fact air force too. Only army veterans where I've lived. So I can only comment on their use of flags. Experience based views expressed.

Shirley covered it. I thought the flag name had already been covered at length.
Plenty of navy presence at remembrances, and not just at ports by the way.

tangled_metal

Shirley Basso wrote:

union flag = land; jack at sea.

With Brexit it feels like we're at area. Drifting at the mercy of politics.

Seriously though it's the English language and for many years the distinction hasn't been held. Jack or flag? What is in common parlance is Jack. So whilst I'm aware of the distinction and correct use I feel it's still OK to use Jack on the land.

tangled_metal

PBlakeney wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Mostly the navy though.

I've never seen the navy represented at remembrance events but I've never lived near a naval port. In fact air force too. Only army veterans where I've lived. So I can only comment on their use of flags. Experience based views expressed.

Shirley covered it. I thought the flag name had already been covered at length.
Plenty of navy presence at remembrances, and not just at ports by the way.

Funny enough I've never seen the navy at the locations I've been remembering the fallen. I have no idea why other than I've lived close to the sea but nowhere with a large port or history of naval connection. Everywhere I've lived has had army representation. There's been RBL clubs but only army among the people using them.

I used to march with cubs and scouts on remembrance Sunday through the village they often had army veterans marching too. Possibly showing my age here (child of the 70s

shortfall

Interesting discussion about some of the themes raised above re Rembrance.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00011hq

Stevo_666

pinno

The remembrance poppy is steeped in history. In fact, it goes all the way back to 1915.
Long before misappropriation of the symbol.

It is entirely apt.

In Flanders Fields
BY JOHN MCCRAE

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie,
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

How dare the Politically Correct distort the symbolism that the Poppy represents.
By the same token, how dare the Nationalist Extremist use it.
I fail to see the difference between the two groups.

But either way, to abandon it as a symbol of remembrance is in itself an insult to the fallen and an insult to those who want to pay their respects.

There's huge deforestation globally.
War continues to maim and kill.
There are millions of male Muslims in Pakistan who want to kill a woman for Blasphemy.
More and more species are being put on the endangered list.
There's climate change.
Plastic pollution is causing environmental mayhem and to think the micro-plastics may be the principal cause of unheralded incidents of miscarriage and still born in Dolphins is abhorrent and sickening.

The PC bunch need to stop navel gazing and do something far more constructive.

tangled_metal

Stop it, stop it now! You're talking sense and it's not right on here.

rjsterry

Who are the PC Bunch? Are they like the Munch Bunch?

robert88

Tangled Metal wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

union flag = land; jack at sea.

With Brexit it feels like we're at area. Drifting at the mercy of politics.

Seriously though it's the English language and for many years the distinction hasn't been held. Jack or flag? What is in common parlance is Jack. So whilst I'm aware of the distinction and correct use I feel it's still OK to use Jack on the land.

A jack is a national (originally naval) flag flown from a short jackstaff at the bow of a vessel, while the ensign is flown on the stern. Jacks on bowsprits or foremasts appeared in the 17th century. The word "jack" is said to result from the signature Jacques of King James I in whose reign (1603–1625) the Union Jack was designed.[1] A country may have different jacks for different purposes, especially when (as in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands) the naval jack is forbidden to other vessels. The United Kingdom has an official civil jack; the Netherlands has several unofficial ones. In some countries, ships of other government institutions may fly the naval jack, e.g. the ships of the U.S. Coast Guard and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the case of the jack of the United States. Certain organs of the British government have their own departmental jacks. Commercial or pleasure craft may fly the flag of an administrative division (state, province, land) or municipality at the bow. Merchant ships may fly a house flag. Yachts may fly a club burgee or officer's flag or the owner's private signal at the bow. Practice may be regulated by law, custom, or personal judgment.

Working in shipping, I often noticed that foreign vessels used a red ensign as a courtesy flag in British waters with the single exception of vessels from the USSR which invariably used the Union Jack. The Commies were quite right, every one else was doing it wrong.

DeVlaeminck

rjsterry wrote:

I don't think it's a question of grieving (artificially or otherwise) for those in the military who have given their lives or were injured. It's about paying respect and awareness of what was given. As for display of the Union Flag, just because the likes of the EDL like waving it as well - for very different reasons - doesn't mean the rest of us should be embarrassed about it or allow those imbeciles to decide what our national flag stands for.

Unfortunately it's hard to get away from the drip feed of Remembrance Sunday reinforcing a certain image of Britain. We have members of the Royal Family wheeled out, on Sunday we had a public school educated Chief of Staff on BBC making the case for more defence spending, we have endless images of soldiers portrayed as heroes, I could go on but this is the general picture we are getting more and more every year. It's a Britain of hierarchy, nationalism and where doing your duty is what a hero does.

Ours is not to reason why - that seems still very much the case - do we really get much about the sheer futility of war.

rick_chasey

Fairly sure you guys ought to see my postion is not pariticularly politically correct, judging by this thread.

I do like how Brits only ever recite poetry in November. Why is that?

If you can’t see a hierarchy of war death remembrance as being uncomfortable for some, then I’d hazard a guess that your worldview is quite Anglo-centric. Nothing really ought to be above criticism and this is included.

I think the lessons learned argument is rather overplayed, given how those in power led the U.K. to Iraq, and, over the pond, how the US continued its involvement in Vietnam long after they knew it was an unwinnable attritional war. There are countless other examples. Those lessons are not ever “learned” in the same way financial markets will never not crash from time to time. Each time “it’s different”.

There might be a lesson learned in the value of a unified Europe, but those seem to be lost in the many circles too, judging by the war rhetoric coming out of parts of the U.K. re-Brexit.

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

Who are the PC Bunch? Are they like the Munch Bunch?

I guess it depends how you 'self-identify', to coin a phrase sometimes attributed to the PC

robert88

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I don't think it's a question of grieving (artificially or otherwise) for those in the military who have given their lives or were injured. It's about paying respect and awareness of what was given. As for display of the Union Flag, just because the likes of the EDL like waving it as well - for very different reasons - doesn't mean the rest of us should be embarrassed about it or allow those imbeciles to decide what our national flag stands for.

Unfortunately it's hard to get away from the drip feed of Remembrance Sunday reinforcing a certain image of Britain. We have members of the Royal Family wheeled out, on Sunday we had a public school educated Chief of Staff on BBC making the case for more defence spending, we have endless images of soldiers portrayed as heroes, I could go on but this is the general picture we are getting more and more every year. It's a Britain of hierarchy, nationalism and where doing your duty is what a hero does.

Ours is not to reason why - that seems still very much the case - do we really get much about the sheer futility of war.

I am glad you said that! When I said something like it to the wife she told me I was cynical. Is it coincidence that we have this remembrance culture now that those who actually were involved are nearly all dead and gone? I think they had a better grip on reality than we have.

rjsterry

DeVlaeminck wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

I don't think it's a question of grieving (artificially or otherwise) for those in the military who have given their lives or were injured. It's about paying respect and awareness of what was given. As for display of the Union Flag, just because the likes of the EDL like waving it as well - for very different reasons - doesn't mean the rest of us should be embarrassed about it or allow those imbeciles to decide what our national flag stands for.

Unfortunately it's hard to get away from the drip feed of Remembrance Sunday reinforcing a certain image of Britain. We have members of the Royal Family wheeled out, on Sunday we had a public school educated Chief of Staff on BBC making the case for more defence spending, we have endless images of soldiers portrayed as heroes, I could go on but this is the general picture we are getting more and more every year. It's a Britain of hierarchy, nationalism and where doing your duty is what a hero does.

Ours is not to reason why - that seems still very much the case - do we really get much about the sheer futility of war.

I thought Sunday's interview with a 97-year-old RAF veteran said what needed to be said in about 3 minutes. He joined the RAF as a 16-year-old apprentice and somehow survived two tours of bombing raids over Europe when the losses were 55% each raid*. He made it very clear that he considered himself lucky rather than heroic and he was there (having travelled from San Diego) to remember friends and others who were not as lucky. As for the royal family, seeing as the Queen is the head of the state the armed forces serve, it would be a bit odd, not to say disrespectful, if they weren't there.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

Fairly sure you guys ought to see my postion is not pariticularly politically correct, judging by this thread.

I do like how Brits only ever recite poetry in November. Why is that?

If you can’t see a hierarchy of war death remembrance as being uncomfortable for some, then I’d hazard a guess that your worldview is quite Anglo-centric. Nothing really ought to be above criticism and this is included.

I think the lessons learned argument is rather overplayed, given how those in power led the U.K. to Iraq, and, over the pond, how the US continued its involvement in Vietnam long after they knew it was an unwinnable attritional war. There are countless other examples. Those lessons are not ever “learned” in the same way financial markets will never not crash from time to time. Each time “it’s different”.

There might be a lesson learned in the value of a unified Europe, but those seem to be lost in the many circles too, judging by the war rhetoric coming out of parts of the U.K. re-Brexit.

If you are English, then an Anglo-centric world view is fairly unavoidable. That doesn't mean you can't see other points of view. I'm not suggesting Remembrance Day is beyond criticism - the fact that it's taken 100 years to invite the German president over for the ceremony is pretty shameful, as is the general omission of the part the various nations colonial troops played, not to mention Turkey getting barely a mention, but I think suggesting that the thing should be abandoned because a few EDL idiots have tried to make all about them is an over-reaction.

rick_chasey

You can see the The hierarchy of death issue, can’t you?

If I die in uniform with a gun in my hand I get my name in stone and the nation will (mostly) stop every year to recognise my death.

If I die in the same war without a uniform or gun I don’t.

There’s some level of glory in one and not the other, no?

That’s why it gets appropriated by bellicose movements.

tangled_metal

So because you don't remember some you should not remember those that you do remember? Why not flip it and make a change to remembering all who die in wars? Don't throw the baby out with the water. Buy a white and red poppy!

Until the change happens to turn this day into what suits your view do what you want. Personally I don't do anything on the day but in the lead up to it I think about the matter more times than I do in the whole of the year outside this past week. It's the individual actually thinking about the sacrifice and deaths of war that I think is important. Perhaps of enough think about it and talk about it there might be a way to make a change and end it happening again. Unlikely we're most a belligerent ape at heart IMHO but you can always hope your better.

rjsterry

Rick Chasey wrote:

You can see the The hierarchy of death issue, can’t you?

If I die in uniform with a gun in my hand I get my name in stone and the nation will (mostly) stop every year to recognise my death.

If I die in the same war without a uniform of gun I don’t.

There’s some level of glory in one and not the other, no?

That’s why it gets appropriated by bellicose movements.

I grew up in Bristol; there were still bomb-damaged derelict buildings standing in the city centre in the 1980s. In the centre of Bristol is a large park with two ruined churches in the middle. The park is where the oldest part of the city was flattened in the Blitz; the two ruined churches are kept as a memorial. Coventry has its cathedral and there are similar ruined churches in central London. Civilian deaths in the world wars are certainly marked differently - civilians don't go in for parades and uniforms much - but I'm not sure they are treated with less respect.

pblakeney

DeVlaeminck wrote:

It's a Britain of hierarchy, nationalism and where doing your duty is what a hero does.

I see things differently. I see an older generation who did as they were told, right or wrong. A middle generation that questioned things and came to conclusions, right or wrong. A younger generation that does as it damn well pleases, right or wrong.
I'm not saying that one generation is right or wrong, but attitudes have definitely changed.

DeVlaeminck

PBlakeney wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

It's a Britain of hierarchy, nationalism and where doing your duty is what a hero does.

I see things differently. I see an older generation who did as they were told, right or wrong. A middle generation that questioned things and came to conclusions, right or wrong. A younger generation that does as it damn well pleases, right or wrong.
I'm not saying that one generation is right or wrong, but attitudes have definitely changed.

The WW1 soldiers were mostly conscripts and had the threat of the firing squad if they thought about taking the boat home. I'm not sure that generation did as they were told so much as didn't have much choice.

Outside of war there was real poverty and terrible working conditions, of those that volunteered for war it was often as much a way of escaping the life they had as enthusiasm for the fight.

Of course I don't deny there would have been many enthused with nationalistic fervour and they could have had multiple motivations to fight but if it had been left to those who felt a sense of duty we'd have run out of manpower. I remember recruiting offices being busy when the Falklands War kicked off so there will always be those who heed the call but I suspect even 100 years ago plenty more would rather have given it a miss.

pblakeney

DeVlaeminck wrote:

I remember recruiting offices being busy when the Falklands War kicked off so there will always be those who heed the call but I suspect even 100 years ago plenty more would rather have given it a miss.

Try asking those who volunteered before they were conscripted. Too late for WWI but they still did it for WWII when WWI was fresh in the mind. My Dad still takes everything politicians say as the truth. :shock:

surrey_commuter

PBlakeney wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

I remember recruiting offices being busy when the Falklands War kicked off so there will always be those who heed the call but I suspect even 100 years ago plenty more would rather have given it a miss.

Try asking those who volunteered before they were conscripted. Too late for WWI but they still did it for WWII when WWI was fresh in the mind. My Dad still takes everything politicians say as the truth. :shock:

but by WW2 politicians had a far greater respect for human life, even if this was because they suspected that the general population would rebel if asked to make a similar sacrifice. This is what remembrance and never again means to me.

There are many horrific stats about casualties in WW1 but a new one to me was that more allied soldiers died on the morning of Nov 11th than died on D-Day.

That tells me that our lords and masters had a newly discovered respect for human life and if they are reminded of that once a year by people wearing a poppy then it is worth doing.

TheBigBean

PBlakeney wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

I remember recruiting offices being busy when the Falklands War kicked off so there will always be those who heed the call but I suspect even 100 years ago plenty more would rather have given it a miss.

Try asking those who volunteered before they were conscripted. Too late for WWI but they still did it for WWII when WWI was fresh in the mind. My Dad still takes everything politicians say as the truth. :shock:

I believe one of the advantages of volunteering in the second world war was that you got to pick the force you entered.

robert88

I've often wondered why we never celebrate the 8th May 1945 in the UK. It's an important date across the Channel but no one seems to notice in the UK.

I suppose there was always the chance of being sent to the Pacific to fight the Japs but then we don't celebrate VJ day either. (not that dropping 2 atomic bombs is much to celebrate - Maybe that's the answer? )

rjsterry

Robert88 wrote:

I've often wondered why we never celebrate the 8th May 1945 in the UK. It's an important date across the Channel but no one seems to notice in the UK.

I suppose there was always the chance of being sent to the Pacific to fight the Japs but then we don't celebrate VJ day either. (not that dropping 2 atomic bombs is much to celebrate - Maybe that's the answer? )

VE and VJ days were both celebrated in quite a big way in 2015.

ballysmate

rjsterry wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Fairly sure you guys ought to see my postion is not pariticularly politically correct, judging by this thread.

I do like how Brits only ever recite poetry in November. Why is that?

If you can’t see a hierarchy of war death remembrance as being uncomfortable for some, then I’d hazard a guess that your worldview is quite Anglo-centric. Nothing really ought to be above criticism and this is included.

I think the lessons learned argument is rather overplayed, given how those in power led the U.K. to Iraq, and, over the pond, how the US continued its involvement in Vietnam long after they knew it was an unwinnable attritional war. There are countless other examples. Those lessons are not ever “learned” in the same way financial markets will never not crash from time to time. Each time “it’s different”.

There might be a lesson learned in the value of a unified Europe, but those seem to be lost in the many circles too, judging by the war rhetoric coming out of parts of the U.K. re-Brexit.

If you are English, then an Anglo-centric world view is fairly unavoidable. That doesn't mean you can't see other points of view. I'm not suggesting Remembrance Day is beyond criticism - the fact that it's taken 100 years to invite the German president over for the ceremony is pretty shameful, as is the general omission of the part the various nations colonial troops played, not to mention Turkey getting barely a mention, but I think suggesting that the thing should be abandoned because a few EDL idiots have tried to make all about them is an over-reaction.

The whole point of Remembrance Day in the UK is to pay tribute to those from the UK who died in service. Countries around the world hold similar events to honour their fallen, it is not just a UK thing. If you would take the trouble to look at any of the war memorials, up and down the country, you will see them inscribed with the names of local people who were killed in the wars.So of course it's UK centric, including Scots, Welsh and Irish btw, not just English.
Why should the German President be invited previously? The whole event is to remember the war dead, not to make a point of apportioning blame or forgiveness. Should the HoS of Germany have to appear at the Ceremonies held throughout the allied countries on a rolling rota, as some sort of penance? Of course not.
Perhaps during this years commemorations, Turkey isn't mentioned so often in because it was joined with the Central Powers, fighting the Allies in WW! and pretty much remained neutral in WW2.

Vino'sGhost

theres nothing glorious about losing limbs to an ied.

theres nothing glorious about drowning in a flooded compartment in the pitch black and cold.

Nobody is glorifying those things by holding a service of remembrance Rick. I think you have some interesting ideas that ignore deliberately or otherwise the harsh realities that remembrance and respect are very different to glorification. Nor does remembering one group disadvantage another. thats just the politics of mediocrity.

As for the poppy, The queen wears one, do you look at her and really think shes promoting the national front?

robert88

rjsterry wrote:

Robert88 wrote:

I've often wondered why we never celebrate the 8th May 1945 in the UK. It's an important date across the Channel but no one seems to notice in the UK.

I suppose there was always the chance of being sent to the Pacific to fight the Japs but then we don't celebrate VJ day either. (not that dropping 2 atomic bombs is much to celebrate - Maybe that's the answer? )

VE and VJ days were both celebrated in quite a big way in 2015.

3 years ago?

I guess that means the next one will be 2025.

rjsterry

Robert88 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Robert88 wrote:

I've often wondered why we never celebrate the 8th May 1945 in the UK. It's an important date across the Channel but no one seems to notice in the UK.

I suppose there was always the chance of being sent to the Pacific to fight the Japs but then we don't celebrate VJ day either. (not that dropping 2 atomic bombs is much to celebrate - Maybe that's the answer? )

VE and VJ days were both celebrated in quite a big way in 2015.

3 years ago?

I guess that means the next one will be 2025.

80th anniversary, yes. I'd imagine if you were stationed in Malaya and ended up in a Japanese PoW camp, VJ Day would have some significance.