On the 85th Armistice day, I remember with honour the memory of:
- Military casualties of the First World War
- Military casualties of the Second World War
- Casualties of conscripted labour in the Second World War (such as the “Bevin Boys” conscripted to work in coal mines in the UK, who had a casualty rate higher than most active service units)
- Casualties of the Second World War among the fire service, ARP, ambulance service and similar, many of whom were conscientious objectors to the war itself
- Military casualties of the Falklands War
In their own ways, all of these people gave their lives in protecting the lives and liberty of Britons, for which we owe them the most profound thanks.
I also remember with the deepest sympathy and pity the men and women of our armed forces who gave their lives in the other military operations which the United Kingdom has carried out in the last century. They died for the most part in the service of dishonourable missions which were forced on them by governments which we elected, so we bear them an equally heavy debt, though much less glorious and more shameful.
This is the nearest I can come to a pacifist’s response to this day; I long since gave up wearing a white poppy in remembrance of the conscientious objectors in my own family, simply becaused it caused so much offence. I wholeheartedly apologise for any offence caused by this statement, without withdrawing any of it.
{ 14 comments }
Chris Brooke 11.11.03 at 5:48 pm
“Bevin boys”.
Nye Bevan.
Ernie Bevin.
[corrected, thank you – dd]
Jake of 8bitjoystick.com 11.11.03 at 5:55 pm
what about the poor bastards who died in Oil War 1 and 2?
A Canadian 11.11.03 at 7:02 pm
Why would that cause offence? I thought it was touching. I too am remembering all those who gave their lives so that I and others like me could live.
zack lynch 11.11.03 at 8:21 pm
It would be valuable to put up numbers to give people some perspective on the world’s current situation. Just a thought.
a cosmopolitan 11.11.03 at 8:24 pm
“all of these people gave their lives in protecting the lives and liberty of Britons, for which we owe them the most profound thanks.”
Why do you limit your sympathy only to those who defended British liberties? Why can’t you extend your sympathy to those who died for the liberty of other peoples? Why do you erect such moral boundaries?
Just wondering…
dsquared 11.11.03 at 9:26 pm
Because I’m British. I don’t feel pride or shame for the actions of other countries, just as I don’t try to bring up other people’s children.
Mac Thomason 11.11.03 at 9:58 pm
Whatever you think about the latest war, the first Gulf War and the Afghan war two years ago were undoubtedly justified.
dsquared 11.11.03 at 10:09 pm
I don’t, on either count, but to be honest I don’t see much point in having an argument about it today. Sorry.
drapetomaniac 11.11.03 at 10:48 pm
Why can’t you extend your sympathy to those who died for the liberty of other peoples?
Is Veteran’s Day to honor “those who died for liberty”, in which case the list is surely as composed of civilians as of soldiers?
Or is it composed of Veterans of the military, in which case it…includes those who died for otherwise than in the cause of liberty?
Harry 11.11.03 at 11:01 pm
Drapetomaniac has just explained to my why I can’t stand the designation ‘Veteran’s Day’. Rememberance Day is what it is. Unlike Daniel I think today of soldiers (and civilians) of many countries, but like him, while I feel regret for those who died in pursuit of unjust wars, I feel gratitude to, and honor, those who died — and those who fought and did not die — in pursuit of just wars.
One of the many differences between US and UK is that in the UK we mark our rememberance with the individual, demur, wearing of a poppy. In the US its the public, in your face, display of the American flag.
ajay 11.12.03 at 10:08 am
1. You mentioned the Bevin Boys. What about the other British civilian casualties – for example, the Blitz dead? They were conscripted as surely as the soldiers, but conscripted not by our own side, but by the enemy’s decision to bomb civilian targets.
2. Less forgivably, you forgot the Merchant Navy. I didn’t know about the high casualties among the miners, but casualty rates among merchant seamen were around the same as those among the Royal Marine Commandos. I don’t need to go into why their campaign was the only one we could not afford to lose.
3. I’m intrigued that you say that most other dead servicemen died on “dishonourable missions.” After the world wars, the bloodiest war we fought in the last hundred years was in Korea: a war of defence against aggression by a peculiarly unpleasant dictatorship, authorised as such by the UN and fought by an international coalition. Korea was a bloody stalemate, but not, I think, dishonourable.
a cosmopolitan 11.12.03 at 12:35 pm
Because I’m British. I don’t feel pride or shame for the actions of other countries, just as I don’t try to bring up other people’s children.
Daniel, I hope you will never happen to live in a oppressive dictatorship (or, for that matter, never to grow up as a child in a brutal, dysfunctional family) because nobody would be out there to help you.
Nobody is saying you should intervene all the time, yet if you share a minimum standard of universal moral codes with others, you should be prepared to help others out of their misery.
marc 11.13.03 at 4:02 am
Although I don’t agree with your pacifism, I can respect it, and I read this statement sympathetically as ‘pacifist’s response to this day’
I wonder, however, if it wouldn’t violate your priciples to recognize that even if you believe that the vetrans and dead of other wars fought “in the service of dishonourable missions which were forced on them by governments,” in many cases they truely believed that they were fighting, and sacrificing, for the defense, and advance, of human liberty. You can vehemently disagree with the effects of their actions, but please try to respect their motives.
I also find it odd that you place the Falklands conflict as more honorable than, say, UN peacekeeping missions.
David 11.13.03 at 3:20 pm
Armistice Day for me is much more connected to peace than to notions of a supreme sacrifice. It is the day and time that all the warring forces – German, Austro-Hungarian, Turkish, British, French, Somali, Canadian, Indian, Italian, US, New Zealanders – stopped fighting.
And all the people caught up in the violence – the seamen, ditchdiggers, firefighters, pacifists, nurses, munitions workers, refugees, mothers, lovers and families – were released from their agony of fear, deprivation and waiting as well.
We think of the dead for themselves, but also for the folly of war. For the waste and futility and destruction of the human spirit.
And in many ways, it was a moment that happened because the German Armed Forces had enough. They went home and they couldn’t be stopped.
Armistice Day is such a big, overarching idea. Its about the embrace of peace and a celebration of sanity and humanity.
Comments on this entry are closed.