NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
The Great War
From: Peter Fogg
Date: 2006 Nov 12, 21:21 +1100
From: Peter Fogg
Date: 2006 Nov 12, 21:21 +1100
George wrote: 'But I must take issue, this Remembrance Day, with a comment [Wolfgang] made, as follows- "During the period of interest here, prior to the "Great War" (as I think they say in your part of "Old Europe", George) ..." Not any more, we don't, Wolfgang, I'm pleased to say, though in my younger days there may have been a few "old fogeys" that did. To us, it's World War 1. I suppose that for a time after its end, such a war might have been so exalted by its "victors", but no longer.' I had never realised the Great War was ever seen as 'great' in that sense. Although I may belong to a younger generation I grew up ever-reminded of this appelation, as pretty-well every small town in Australia (that are the size of villages in Europe) comes with its cenotaph centrally located, with the names of the locals who died in that conflict inscribed upon it. Often the same names are repeated; brothers and cousins, fathers and sons. Sometimes the dead of WWII and later conflicts have been added, but that in no way detracts from the sense I grew up with that this was a war Great in its destructive power. Great as in terrible. In terms of the percentage of its young men who failed to return from northern France and Belgium, Australia suffered more than the countries more closely involved. The effects are still felt, and form one important reason for a long slow decline in the population and viability of the interior, in contrast with the development of the USA. That generation of young men was never replaced in the many small centres that depended on them. At school I learned that the Great War was the first modern war, but since then I've decided that it can be better understood as the last of the old style of war; that of great armies lined up to decide the fate of nations according to how the battle is resolved. Since then all wars have been to some extent fought on other fronts, and have been to some extent guerilla wars. Victory in the old-fashioned sense of military might prevailing is, these days, almost irrelevant to the eventual outcome - as was shown in Vietnam, and now in Iraq. Those who cannot learn from their mistakes are indeed condemned to repeat them. I hasten to add here that this is not an exercise in America bashing, for the good reason that Australia has always had a bad (in my opinion) habit of inviting itself to other people's wars. The Boer War (now there was the first modern war), the Peking insurrection (one of the Chinese 'Opium Wars'), the Great War, WWII, Korea, various (Malaysian world) little remembered conflicts, Vietnam, the 1st Gulf War (George Bush I) and now, once again, Australian troops are in occupation of Iraq together with British and American forces (George Bush II). We invited ourselves to them all (and have unfortunately usually proved to be good soldiers) although participation in few if any of these conflicts has been to our long term advantage. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---