|
|
Post by frankiegth on Nov 8, 2009 14:24:53 GMT
Do you wear one?
I always do despite the fact it bares the name of a man who should have been shot for war crimes against his own army.
|
|
|
|
Post by DazaB_WCFC on Nov 8, 2009 14:30:32 GMT
I do, despite not being a Kettering fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by robotsmfc on Nov 8, 2009 15:28:15 GMT
I do, although I wear it in remembrance of all the dead, not just specific countries' soldiers.
I'm also not sure if the British Legion recognise those shot for cowardice in the First World War in their poppy appeal since the MoD has still not offered any pardon.
|
|
|
|
Post by thevicar on Nov 9, 2009 9:42:33 GMT
I do until I lose it in the park trying to get my 2 year old daughter down from the slide which she charged up and then lost her nerve  I wear one in remembrance of the those who have been sacrificed for our country and her allies and others who have been sacrificed by their nations prevailing insanity. I can't bring myself to care particularly about some people who have died during war (both from our own nation and others). There are also particular people who I remember and prayed for on Sunday. |
|
|
|
Post by amberaleman on Nov 9, 2009 12:48:32 GMT
I gave up poppy-wearing over twenty years ago, because it came to feel like an empty gesture. I don't need an artificial flower on my lapel in order to be aware of the men and women who have died in combat zones. There are enough grim stories emerging from Afghanistan to keep that in mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by ambersalamander on Nov 9, 2009 13:01:10 GMT
I wear one to show that I care about those who have lost loved ones unnecessarily, for a cause I do not believe in. It's funny, but there you go - I do not believe we should be having wars in this day and age. I bought a poppy the other day, and a random lady came zooming up to me in the street to thank me for wearing it and to say it was nice to see someone of my age (well, she said "young people" but I don't really feel like a young person any more) wearing one  |
|
|
|
Post by J Esaj PRA on Nov 9, 2009 21:20:16 GMT
...for a cause I do not believe in. You don't believe in the freedom that allows you to enjoy your life as you currently do? Odd. I'm not wearing one this year to irritate the growing number of 'poppy nazis' that seem to have sprung up. I'm still chucking change in the collection boxes though, not that you get much change these days. |
|
|
|
Post by robotsmfc on Nov 9, 2009 21:44:10 GMT
If I may put my historian hat on for a minute...
The First World War never even flirted with threatening British freedom.
Nazi Germany never planned to be at war with the UK in 1939, let alone invade the British Isles.
No war since then has even come close.
The whole myth of "pride in our forefathers who defended our freedom" is an invention by nationalists to push the agende of turning Remembrance Day into a celebration of the state rather than a ceremony of remembrance for the fallen.
That's why I think the Menin Gate ceremony (held every day) in Ypres/Ieper is much more poignant and moving than any trumped-up, overblown, once-a-year British ceremony.
|
|
|
|
Post by loy PRA on Nov 9, 2009 22:42:21 GMT
I gave up poppy-wearing over twenty years ago, because it came to feel like an empty gesture. I don't need an artificial flower on my lapel in order to be aware of the men and women who have died in combat zones. There are enough grim stories emerging from Afghanistan to keep that in mind. I hate this self righteous postmodern way of thinking. A poppy is a symbol of unity that the vast majority country can identify with, or at least respect that so many lost their lives for their country. If you think that's an empty gesture than I suggest you have a strong word with yourself. I wear one to show that I care about those who have lost loved ones unnecessarily, for a cause I do not believe in. It's funny, but there you go - I do not believe we should be having wars in this day and age. I bought a poppy the other day, and a random lady came zooming up to me in the street to thank me for wearing it and to say it was nice to see someone of my age (well, she said "young people" but I don't really feel like a young person any more) wearing one The Poppy Appeal isn't a pro war organisation. Regardless of whether you agree with war or not it's very much part of the human condition and we have and continue have lots of wars. People will inevitably die in those wars and I don't think the recognition that there's a cause, ideal or principle bigger than oneself is such a crazy idea regardless of the motives for said war, I see it as a sign of nobility. If I may put my historian hat on for a minute... The First World War never even flirted with threatening British freedom. Nazi Germany never planned to be at war with the UK in 1939, let alone invade the British Isles. No war since then has even come close. The whole myth of "pride in our forefathers who defended our freedom" is an invention by nationalists to push the agende of turning Remembrance Day into a celebration of the state rather than a ceremony of remembrance for the fallen. |
|
|
|
Post by amberaleman on Nov 9, 2009 22:55:45 GMT
I gave up poppy-wearing over twenty years ago, because it came to feel like an empty gesture. I don't need an artificial flower on my lapel in order to be aware of the men and women who have died in combat zones. There are enough grim stories emerging from Afghanistan to keep that in mind. I hate this self righteous postmodern way of thinking. A poppy is a symbol of unity that the vast majority country can identify with, or at least respect that so many lost their lives for their country. If you think that's an empty gesture than I suggest you have a strong word with yourself. . Try reading my post again, Loy. I said I felt - not thought - it was an empty gesture. It was a personal reaction, and no comment on what others do. If you feel the need to make accusations of self-righteousness, perhaps it's you who needs to have "a strong word with yourself". |
|
|
|
Post by J Esaj PRA on Nov 9, 2009 23:16:39 GMT
If I may put my historian hat on for a minute... There's no need - I was thinking of right now. |
|
|
|
Post by robotsmfc on Nov 9, 2009 23:45:21 GMT
If you find suppose that is a myth that the lost generation didn't defend our freedom then you should hang your head. The young lads who fought in the First World War certainly was a lost generation - but they certainly didn't defend our freedom. Not that it makes their deaths any less of a sacrifice; it merely makes that sacrifice appear to be somewhat gratuitous. Many RAF and Royal Navy servicemen lost their lives in the defence of British airspace and shipping, but the land forces weren't defending Britain directly in Egypt, Italy, France or Germany (etc). That is not to say, however, that fighting the Nazis wasn't a worthy cause, but it's a stretch of the concept to consider bombing Dresden into the ground or capturing Rome as defending Britain in the same way as the liberation of Strasbourg was an act of self-defence for France. The point I'm making is that it a fair case could be made for British [commercial] interests rather than British freedoms being the main underlying reasons behind most wars British soldiers have died in since about 1651, or in England even arguably as far back as 1066. Why should I hang my head in shame for having this contrary view to the hysterical national touchiness about certain wars? Anyone who dares suggest that any aspect of the Second World War (in particular) was slightly unneccessary is normally treading on very thin ice so I'm not surprised by the reaction at all. Just because you study history does not give you free reign to be pompous about the eternal sacrifice many men made believing their families would suffer as a consequence of either war. No it doesn't, so it's a good thing that I wasn't being pompous about it. Suggesting that their deaths didn't contribute to the defence of their nation, whether they thought it would or not, isn't belittling their loss. Whether I feel that they died in vain or not doesn't change the fact that their lives were taken from them and I wear a poppy to show my respect for that. Also, despite the fact Germany didn't want war in with Britain in 1939 and Britain sure went a long way to accommodating the Nazi government before conflict, but the Germans were well noted as having a contigency of defeating the Royal Navy and using the ships as floating prisons to ship Jews to madagascar and that was a blueprint before war had even broke out. Yet for all their blueprints about the defeat of Britain, Hitler was on the verge of attacking his ministers who had convinced him that Britain would not declare war in September 1939 when they actually did. We could toss little bits of evidence like that back and forth forever and still the only person who would ever be in the know would be Hitler himself. Personally I'm not sure Hitler ever did have attacking the British Empire in mind, at least not immediately. The general attitude in Germany (and amongst right wingers in the UK) was that Britain could look after her empire and wouldn't be too bothered about Germany 'looking after' Europe. It wasn't the British way of war to interfere in Europe, or so they thought. Interesting historical controversy anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by robotsmfc on Nov 9, 2009 23:48:53 GMT
There's no need - I was thinking of right now. Oh, I see. I don't think British servicemen anywhere in the world at the moment are fighting for Sal's liberal freedoms. Perhaps allegedly fighting for the concept of liberal freedoms in general, but only as a secondary factor. |
|
|
|
Post by J Esaj PRA on Nov 10, 2009 11:33:56 GMT
I don't think British servicemen anywhere in the world at the moment are fighting for Sal's liberal freedoms. Perhaps allegedly fighting for the concept of liberal freedoms in general, but only as a secondary factor. Who mentioned "liberal freedoms"? I said "enjoy your life". |
|
|
|
Post by ambersalamander on Nov 10, 2009 13:09:56 GMT
I think Jase and Loy may both have misunderstood my post somewhat The cause I do not believe in is neither poppy-wearing (or I wouldn't do it) nor campaigning for freedom. The cause I do not believe in is war - people being forced to murder other people in order to obtain, in their eyes, said freedom or whatever. I have never believed that war is the answer to any of the problems of humankind, and I don't suppose I ever shall. Belief that war is, as Loy said, "very much part of the human condition," will sadly perpetuate its existence for a long time to come. I don't believe it is part of the human condition. Yes, all animals fight, whether it's over territory, food resources, mates or beliefs. But the point I wanted to make was that it makes me sad that in this day and age that we are not civilised enough as a species to resolve these issues without killing one another. Yes, we will continue to have wars, because there are still people in the world who actually believe that it's OK to kill other people in order to get what they want. Now don't get me wrong - I'm not deliberately downplaying the years and sometimes centuries of suffering that civilisations have gone through that leads to war as the only way they can find of resolving it. I just think that humanity needs to find other ways of settling these issues. War is barbaric, no matter how you look at it: not only members of the forces who fight long and hard for their cause are killed, but thousands of innocent bystanders are also slaughtered just because they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I guess that's why I wear a poppy - and I am perfectly well aware that the Poppy Appeal isn't a pro-war organisation, or I wouldn't even think of wearing one - I wear it to show support for the individuals, families and groups of people whose lives are destroyed by war, very often unnecessarily in my eyes. I think Loy sums it up here: And I couldn't agree more - hence wearing a poppy, or campaigning for Amnesty International, or whatever else I find myself doing. But I think we will always differ on our opinions of war itself. |
|
