For Glory

NightFlyer · Post by **NightFlyer** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 11:33 am

Some war quotes that stick in my head:

Except For Ending Slavery, Fascism, Nazism and Communism, War Has Never Solved Anything.

Paraphrase from a Jap sailor watching a sea battle: "It's the devil inside that makes us enjoy watching it, but we hate it when it happens to us".

Heroes are those guys that get other people killed.

You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.

War is not always a choice, Nazi’s kicking in your door, retards flying planes into buildings, but I agree with the others that say once in it, keeping your buddies alive is what matters the most.

So when is the patch out [:D]

DuckofTindalos · Post by **DuckofTindalos** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:17 pm

Come on, say it with me:

When it's done!
When it's done!
When it's done!
When it's done!
When it's done!

ckammp · Post by **ckammp** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 12:42 pm

When I was a young man, I joined the Army, dreaming, I'll admit, of 'Glory" in battle. Soon after I re-enlisted, an 'incident' arose, and the Army was sent off to war. Still eager, how secetly glad I was when my unit received deployment orders.
Fun? How quickly the days turned tedious, and dull. I didn't know if it was Monday or Friday; they were all the same anyways. So was the food.
Glory? Hearing the explosion, seeing the result, realizing just how many body bags were needed for what, moments before, had been a squad of men...
 
Today, years later, I have my medals, but I also have my memories.
 
Today, years later, for 'fun & glory', I play wargames. But I can't play any 'modern-era' games, they're still too real for me. So I stick to WWII and earlier, events far away from my personal memories.
 
 

jolly_pillager · Post by **jolly_pillager** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 2:07 pm

Of course there is glory in war....just as there is pain, suffering, tragedy, triumph, victory, defeat, and yes, even fun.

Glory is just the esteem of others.

A good example would be the Charge of the Light Brigade...glorious and tragic...and really MORE glorius BECAUSE it's so tragic. Those guys were doomed, knew it, and yet went in anyways. Courage, discipline and dedication to that level is glorious. It also helps that Tennyson wrote his poem about it...it's hard to win acclaim if no one hears about your actions.

By contrast, the Charge of the Heavy Brigade is not so glorious...it was successful, happened the same day, and was more militarily sound, yet it does not grab the imagination in the same way.

All that said, I myself would have wanted nothing to do with riding into the Valley of Death that day....I would like to think that I would have gone in with the rest of the unit had I been there, but I am not 100% certain.

jolly_pillager · Post by **jolly_pillager** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 2:11 pm

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Well . . . as one who has not served in a military, I wish to ask this very humbly: is the service of those who sacrifice for the sake of great causes like the defeat of fascism, or the emancipation of American slaves not glorious?

Indeed, it seems to me that the loyalty and devotion to voluntarily be willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice for "ones people," virtually no matter what the cause of those people, might arguably be the most virtuous, the most "glorious" of human actions? Killer angels?

There are as many motivations as there are people, and wars are often started for reasons beyond simple desire to steal your neighbor's wealth.

Often those causes are pretext's to gain control, power, resources, political influence ect or to deny ones financial enemy of gaining any of those.

Nations don't fight wars to save people from slavery, torture, fascism or communism or whatever.. nations simply don't care that much about other people's suffering. "Their" suffering however enables the own nation to gain one of the above advantages through war.. or to prevent the competitor nation of gaining any of those advantages.

If we cared about peoples suffering, then we would not allow 1 Million Afrikaans to get massacred in Africa for a few decades ago.. or all the other suffering going on around in the world, at locations of less political and financial value.

The world is about money, and all wars is either directly or indirectly about money.

Fighting to "save" someone is good for national pride, troop morale and political effects, but it has no bearing on reality whatsoever.

P.Hausser · Post by **P.Hausser** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 3:31 pm

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

There are times when one should fight a preemptive war. Germany going into Czechoslovakia is a perfect example of when nations of the world should have attacked and attacked violently and aggressively. When Rome tried to bribe and pacify the Huns is another example of a war that should not have been avoided. History is rife with examples like these where the failure to act cost far more in the end than immediate action would have.

In my Opinion that would qualified as a defective war. As I say above, War to defend your self or someone else.

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

To date, since the US became the most powerful nation on earth after WWII, our borders have remained the same.

But still you have used the power to maintain control over important territory (I.E. Panama) or to secure important resource areas (I.E. Iraq)...
I do not think you need to use military control to gain power and control, financial power is far more effective
(you can read about this in several books, I.E "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" by a former agent or in several other books).

Jim D Burns · Post by **Jim D Burns** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 3:59 pm

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser
But still you have used the power to maintain control over important territory (I.E. Panama)

Well we backed a bloodless revolution that lead to Panamanian independence from Columbia. The new Panamanian government then sold us the rights to construct the canal and leased us the canal for something like 100 years. But in the end we peacefully gave up those rights and gave the canal to Panama. Not a bad deal for Panama, they get the money up front and in the end they get the canal too, doesn’t sound like the US trying to maintain anything to me.

It’s pretty obvious that a bloodless revolution that lead to freedom for Panamanians is a good thing. I doubt it could have been purely orchestrated by the US in such a short period of time, it’s something they wanted and we simply lent them our naval presence to dissuade the Columbians from resisting the revolution.

In the end the world gained a major naval thoroughfare that has probably saved thousands of lives of sailors who would have perished in the storms that rage almost year round down along the Straits of Magellan. Not to mention the huge boon to world commerce the canal has been and is still today.

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser
or to secure important resource areas (I.E. Iraq)...

Not going to touch this other than to say its pretty obvious Iraq was a mistake. Had we gone in with ill intentions as you try and imply we did, our government would have made up the WMDs for the worlds media to photograph. And the price of oil in the US has skyrocketed, so I don’t think we gained much benefit there.

So it wasn't nefarious reasons that lead us into Iraq, it was simply just ineptitude by all the worlds intelligence agencies. Remember, everyone said he had the WMDs, not just the US.

Now all we are trying to do is leave it in a condition that doesn't lead to mass genocide the way our pullout of Vietnam lead to 2+ million deaths when the power vacuum left behind there allowed the thugs to take over.

Jim

P.Hausser · Post by **P.Hausser** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:01 pm

Central Blue · Post by **Central Blue** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:20 pm

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser
Glory is never to be the one who causes a war.

The ones who fight in any war as the attacker I despise, I really despise them and everything they belive in. I think this is mostly because they usually have no idea why they are doing it, and it is never because of the reason that they have been told by their government. Often I think they don't Evan care about the reason, they just see it as a adventure.

They go out to kill people from and in another country, because that is it what their politicians have told them to do.

Glory is to defend your own country, or another country. There is no glory in attacking someone.

This is a bunch of self-righteous nonsense. There are times when one should fight a preemptive war. Germany going into Czechoslovakia is a perfect example of when nations of the world should have attacked and attacked violently and aggressively. When Rome tried to bribe and pacify the Huns is another example of a war that should not have been avoided. History is rife with examples like these where the failure to act cost far more in the end than immediate action would have.

The notion that all wars are fought for money and power is simply a ruse you tell yourself to justify your pacifist tendencies. Some wars, usually the worst of them, are fought for nothing more than pure hatred and a desire to impose ones will over another group of people. Then there are the religious wars, these have been some of the bloodiest in history and are the cause of a lot of the hatreds that exist in the world today.

Every single great power in history that has ever been in a position of total military dominance over the rest of the world the way America is today, has used that power to conquer and subjugated the less powerful nations around them. To date, since the US became the most powerful nation on earth after WWII, our borders have remained the same.

Sure we fight wars to impose our will on others, but usually (emphasis on usually) we at least try and do the right thing by those we conquer. We don’t always get it right, but we are the first nation in history to at least try.

That said, I wouldn’t say glory is the right word for many of the wars fought in the past 200 years or so, but definitely honor is appropriate. Many of the wars fought have been honorable wars, and many were worse than they should have been because of the blind posturing of pacifists who think like you and refuse to confront the true nature of man.

Some wars need to be fought, it’s that simple. Making grand pronouncements that anyone who attacks anyone else is and must be evil is simply sticking your head in the sand and avoiding the reality that the world is. Like it or not some people need to be killed and some nations need to be destroyed because of the people who run them. That’s just the way the world is and always has been.

Jim

I am in general agreement with your post. And I particularly like the distinction you make between honor and glory.

When I think of glory I am reminded of Julia Ward Howe's song, which was about the "coming of the Lord" rather than Bull Run or Wilson's Creek.

Jim D Burns · Post by **Jim D Burns** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:21 pm

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser
When it comes to execute power, assassinations and controll.. using or abusing power to gain massive financial advantages :

Every nation on earth tries to work towards its own self interests. It’s natural, everyone does it. Just because the US is currently the most dominant and therefore probably the most influential and successful at it, does not make the US an evil empire. I could compile an equally long list for every nation on earth; it doesn’t prove anything other than its human nature to promote your own self interests.

What matters is what we as a nation do with the power we have. And as I’ve said before, we are the most just nation in history as to what we’ve done with that power thus far.

That doesn’t mean our government is any less capable of the evils any other government as done in the past. It’s just that our form of government makes politicians accountable to the will of the people, so their natural tendencies towards tyranny are held in check. At least they have been so far, but I fear things are going to change in that regard very soon.

Do you think Stalin, Hitler or Mao would have ever gotten away with murdering over 150 million people combined had their forms of government made them accountable to the people? I have no doubt at all that most German people during WWII were honest hard working decent people. But their form of government dictated that the wrath of the free world needed to be unleashed upon them. It was tragic and horrible, but it was also honorable and just.

The world should thank its lucky stars that the US and their form of democracy and not the Soviet Union and their Communism won the cold war. I mean here we are in the modern era and China murders thousands of its own people as the world watches at Tiananmen Square and the world does nothing about it. We still do business with China and no one wants or tries to hold them to account for the massacre.

Some day China will be the most powerful nation on earth, they’re well on their way to becoming so. I hope I’m dead when that occurs. Your list of US government atrocities will be a joke to people compared to what China is capable of doing once it holds sway over the world.

Jim

P.Hausser · Post by **P.Hausser** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:28 pm

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

Every nation on earth tries to work towards its own self interests. It’s natural, everyone does it. Just because the US is currently the most dominant and therefore probably the most influential and successful at it, does not make the US an evil empire. I could compile an equally long list for every nation on earth; it doesn’t prove anything other than its human nature to promote your own self interests.

Is it killing cooperate owners in South and Central Africa because they don't agree on the price who is human nature or is it to be "its own self interests" ? To me, some of those things has nothing to do with the glory and values that you all talk about. (Read the articcles above for sources).

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

The world should thank its lucky stars that the US and their form democracy and not the Soviet Union and their Communism won the cold war.

Sure, I agree with that. But to me the only difference between your empire and any other empire is that you elect your Hirohito.

Jim D Burns · Post by **Jim D Burns** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:33 pm

ORIGINAL: P.Hausser
(Read the articcles above for sources).

Laughter…

I’m not saying most or even all of what you linked might not be true. But I NEVER ever read wiki as source for anything. I highly recommend you find alternate source material if you actually want anyone to read it or take it seriously.

It’s wiki I’m laughing at, not you. Please don’t take offense.

Jim

pmelheck1 · Post by **pmelheck1** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:41 pm

While having served 20 years in the military I do have an opinion that would offend our self-righteous anti-American zealots out there I do think this thread has turned to political and needs to be locked.

rogueusmc · Post by **rogueusmc** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:59 pm

That's what is wrong with our world today...too afraid of offending someone. No matter what is said, SOMEONE will be offended by it...and SOMEONE else will be offended if you don't say it.

Some have offended me and dishonored those that went before me (and those who have come after me) by saying that war is never excusable and that soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who follow orders are mindless minions that don't know any better. They weren't worried about offending me when they said what they said. Turn about is fair play.

Socrates once said that it is an intelligent mind that can entertain debate on a thought without accepting it. You can make any statement you like to anyone as long as tact and the proper respect due a fellow human being is shown.

Semper Fidelis,
Lee

rogueusmc · Post by **rogueusmc** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:08 pm

...but I do agree that this has become a political discussion which is against the spirit of this forum and needs to be discontinued.

War is usually the result of politics gone wrong but the politics usually give way to war. When politics tries to coexist with war, the desired result is not achieved to satisfaction if achieved at all.

When a debate about war doesn't go as one wants it to, alot of folks bring politics into it because there is always something to argue about there.

pmelheck1 · Post by **pmelheck1** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:33 pm

I have no problems offending our little flag waving slogan spewing mindless drones of anti-Americanism having seen more than a few overseas and here at home.  But if I recall it's against forum policy and decor to discuss politics in a other than historic role it played in the forum topic the pacific war in this case.

rogueusmc · Post by **rogueusmc** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:38 pm

No argument here brother.

pmelheck1 · Post by **pmelheck1** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:42 pm

As to glory in battle.  To me this is something that comes after the battle.  I remember Lots of boredom and a touch of fear (being in a combat zone).  The mindset of youth was funny.  100 men would be told 99 are going to die and all 100 looking at each other thinking everyone else is going to die.  In some of the stuff I was in I wasn't so much concerned with glory as not screwing up and ending up a foot note in history.  I was good at what I did but stuff does happen.

Knavey · Post by **Knavey** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 5:54 pm

IBTL [;)]

pmelheck1 · Post by **pmelheck1** » Sun Nov 22, 2009 6:39 pm

Something else to discuss for you civil war buffs out there...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l__6mnRk1_w

For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory

RE: For Glory