Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Prime Minister to reveal WW1 Centenary Plans


dannyboy1807

Recommended Posts

a falacy as us all being ginger, porridge eating, haggis hunting, skinflint, alcoholic kilt wearers.

No !? Must tell my German friends I've been feeding them the wrong impression then! :P:whistle:

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No !? Must tell my German friends I've been feeding them the wrong impression then! :P:whistle:

Jim

Hows about "Haw Adolph, tell the Oompah band tae shut it, get the badetuch aff ma gartenleige, sit doon on yer Lederhosen clad arsch, get yer hauns aff the Sauerkraut laden Bratwurst and get this intae yer blonde kopf, sterotypes are bad right!"

Now where did I put my Dudelsacke. :whistle:

Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seumas Milne is a rather confused young man who is not sure what we should do really. He uses the centenary plans as a platform to rant about colonialism and that we should not 'prettify' the war but at the same time says we should commemorate. Let him state what he feels should be a proper form of commemoration before sounding off about any proposals. We on here are not happy with what might be a wrong approach to the period 2014 to 2018 but we do not base that on some political idealism of the War's causation but on what will be right and proper for the memories of those who fought in the conflict.

By the way Sam, do you realise that the Germans call sales weeks Schottische Wochen! :P

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it is the extreme right-wing who have persistently miss-represented the Great War. Duplicitous Tories like Churchill led the way, backed up by right wing swine like Basil Liddell Hart and of course Fuller the fascist!

Their trail of slime passed on through the appalling Alan Clark before it reached Joan Littlewood who merely fired the bullets loaded by the others.

Can we dump the school boy politics and monochrome right/left viewpoints or at least tuck them away on Skindles?

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Guardian reader I read Seamus Milne's article on Wednesday. I sent a letters to the editor reply. Today they published three responses - none correcting his misinterpretations. This is what I sent them.....

"Seamus Milne is right to say that David Cameron should not use the 2012 Centenary as an excuse to play the 'national card'. But unfortunately most of his emotive article is littered with distortions of the history of the First World War. He believes that we not threatened in August 1914 unlike 1940. So was the real possibility of the German High Seas Fleet on the Channel not a threat to our national security? He says it was not a war for liberation. but the British Army fought in France and Belgium for that very reason because France and Belgium had been occupied by an aggressor. He refers to the socialist and poets who called it right. But Owen and Sassoon were never against the war but highlighted the horror of it through their own experience. Most socialists across Europe supported their own country's involvement. The Labour Party joined the Government in the second half of the war. He notes the 'despicable folly of the generals' but fails to explain that there was little alternative to the novel experience of large scale industrial warfare. In this way he subscribes to the 'lions led by donkeys' myth that no serious historians of the conflict would subscribe to today. In fact Haig and his generals were according to one such historian 'lions led by tigers' in the triumph of the Battle of the Hundred Days in 1918 which ended the war but is rarely acknowledged through the lens of two dominant words - 'Somme' and 'Passchendaele'. He cites the view of Harry Patch. Many others were proud of their service including the huge crowds that turned out in London and Edinburgh on the day of Haig's funeral. Seamus Milne should read Charles Carrington rather than Lenin and Hobsbawm. Those who came back did not believe that they had survived a futile, imperialist war and neither did the million men who came forward to join Kitchener's Army by January 1915 see that war as folly. Seamus Milne needs to do some serious reading before he pontificates on the subject in the future".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He refers to the socialist and poets who called it right. But Owen and Sassoon were never against the war but highlighted the horror of it through their own experience.

Sorry Alan, but Sassoon's letter to the Times printed 31st July 1917 seems to contradict you.

"I am making this statement as an act of wilful defiance of military authority, because I believe the war is being deliberately prolonged by those who have the power to end it.

I am a soldier, convinced that I am acting on behalf of soldiers. I believe that this war, upon which I entered as a war of defence and liberation has now become a war of aggression and conquest. I believe that the purposes for which I and my fellow soldiers entered upon this war should have been so clearly stated as to have made it impossible to change them, and that, had this been done, the objects witch actuated us would now be attainable by negotiation.

I have seen and endured the suffering of the troops, and I can no longer be a party to prolong these sufferings for ends which I believe to be evil and unjust. I am not protesting against the conduct of the war, but against the political errors and insincerity's for which the fighting men are being sacrificed.

On behalf of those who are suffering now I make this protest against the deception which is being practised on them; also I believe that I may help to destroy the callous complacence with which the majority of those at home regard the continuance of agonies which they do not share, and which they have not sufficient imagination to realise."

Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The WFA statement that Jeremy links to is a proper response. I'll be sending a copy to my unfortunately hypocritical MP. I'm sure he'll respond positively, but unfortunately he is not too good at following up his promises. Some others may be better, its worth a try.

Keith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent letter from the WFA linked by Jeremy, I think 8th August 1918 would be an excellent date for commemoration for 2 main reasons, the fact the attack was spearheaded by the 4th Army with it's Australian Corps, Canadian Corps and American contingent with a parallel French attack in the south and the reaction of Erich von Ludendorff.

Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Sam

You need to read Brian Bond ('Survivors of a Kind') and Jean Moorcroft Wilson (biographer) on Sassoon's declaration. It was basically incoherent, vague and impractical and not against the war per se. Bond argues that he was carried away by the company he was keeping in England after coming back with his Arras wound e.g. Lady Ottoline Morrell and co. And of course he was itching to get back to the war which he did in 1918. Bond "the politically naive and emotionally confused subaltern". He also went through much agonising doubt before allowing the statement to go public.

Later in Siegfried's Journey he wrote....

"I must add that in the light of the subsequent events it is difficult to believe that a Peace negotiated in 1917 would have been permanent. I share the general opinion that nothing on earth could have prevented a recurrence of Teutonic aggressiveness"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Letter from the WFA published in the Independent on 23.10.12 in the names of Peter Simkins, Gary Sheffield and John Bourne saying that we should also commemorate the battles that won the war , particularly the 100 Days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's get real about this. The war started on 2 August 1914. That is when the commemoration of the war will take place. Just because the British army turned up a couple of weeks later does not alter facts. Anyone want to delay the commemorations until 1917 because that is when the USA woke up?

In addition, commemorate whatever battles you want, but you can't alter the start of the war to suit the UK. After all, soldiers died after 11 November. Anyone for changing the date of Remembrance Day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The opening comment to this was a date of remberance for August 1914 ,so why keep on banging on about every other event concerning the UK in the war ,yes the 100 days was sucessfull ect but that was 1918 this is for 1914 do we suggest we have a one day fits all for the Great War ? i would hope that the 2014 event will kick off a period of events culminating in a day of rembreance in 2018 November 11th .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am intrigued concerning how Sassoon's declaration and his poetry will be cited during the centenary. My interest in the Great War was due to reading 'Memoirs of an Infantry Office' some five years ago. The book had a great impact on me. Both the horror and the excitement of war are conveyed.

Sassoon did get involved with the Peace Pledge Union around 1937-1939, even reading his poetry at their public meetings, but he let his membership subscription lapse as he could not support their stance once World War 2 had started

Regards

Michael Bully

Sorry Sam

You need to read Brian Bond ('Survivors of a Kind') and Jean Moorcroft Wilson (biographer) on Sassoon's declaration. It was basically incoherent, vague and impractical and not against the war per se. Bond argues that he was carried away by the company he was keeping in England after coming back with his Arras wound e.g. Lady Ottoline Morrell and co. And of course he was itching to get back to the war which he did in 1918. Bond "the politically naive and emotionally confused subaltern". He also went through much agonising doubt before allowing the statement to go public.

Later in Siegfried's Journey he wrote....

"I must add that in the light of the subsequent events it is difficult to believe that a Peace negotiated in 1917 would have been permanent. I share the general opinion that nothing on earth could have prevented a recurrence of Teutonic aggressiveness"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Came across this recent article Click on a local news site regarding Brookwood Military Cemetery's involvement in the centenary commemorations; not sure whether the 'confirmation' came from a private enquiry by the writer to Matt Morris at the CWGC or a press release ( there doesn't seem to be a trace of one on the CWGC website)

Out of idle curiosity I 'Googled' Dr Murrison (the Prime Minister’s special representative and coordinator for the commemorations to mark the centenary of World War One) and came across a letter of June 12th this year from him in connection with the centenary on the All-Party Parliamentary War Heritage Group website, which might be of interest (both the letter & the site).

NigelS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The opening comment to this was a date of remberance for August 1914 ,so why keep on banging on about every other event concerning the UK in the war ,yes the 100 days was sucessfull ect but that was 1918 this is for 1914 do we suggest we have a one day fits all for the Great War ? i would hope that the 2014 event will kick off a period of events culminating in a day of rembreance in 2018 November 11th .

I would tend to think you are right. I was in Ypres a couple of weeks ago, they have set up an 'Ypres Salient' road, lots of roadworks,

cleaning things up. They wouldn't do that for a one time event.

My guess is the powers that be will try to get the tourists out for the period 2014-2018.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...