"Nothing 'hallowed' about war " Topic
8 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the ACW Media Message Board
Areas of InterestAmerican Civil War
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile ArticleThis campaign game, begin in 2007, marches on at Gen Con!
|
Tango01 | 07 Mar 2015 10:54 p.m. PST |
"I am so sick of hearing people cry about "hallowed ground" I could scream. Everywhere a Union or Confederate soldier set his chamber pot is now declared "hallowed ground." Subscription Required An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety. Already a subscriber? Login Now .Login Screen Name or Email Password Forgot? Remember me on this computerLogin . Screen Name or Email Now I remember! .Need an account? Create one now. …Back Need an account? Create one now. . You must login to view the full content on this page. Screen Name or Email Password Forgot? Remember me on this computerLogin . Screen Name or Email Now I remember! .Need an account? Create one now. . You can't build a store because there may be a Minié ball somewhere in the ground. Housing developments get axed because some farmer once plowed up a rusty bayonet in that field. You can't construct a road because some soldier once fired a cannon from that spot. This is all getting absurd…" Full article here link Amicalement Armand |
Rebelyell2006 | 07 Mar 2015 11:54 p.m. PST |
The same argument used by ISIS to bulldoze ancient archaeological sites. |
Sobieski | 08 Mar 2015 3:50 a.m. PST |
There's a difference between "Something is here" and "Something happened here." |
KTravlos | 08 Mar 2015 4:05 a.m. PST |
well ISIS technically destroys them not because they do not think they are hallowed, but because they think they are craven. I do not condone ISIS just to be clear. I do not think the OP article makes that case, though it is still a bit poor in mind and writing. |
ochoin | 08 Mar 2015 5:21 a.m. PST |
The author of the piece is grand standing in my opinion. His arguments seem to be facades, presented in order to be controversial. I'm not American & don't feel the attachment to the ACW but I can recognise it is perfectly correct to acknowledge the sacrifice of BOTH sides in the conflict. There is great significance in the fact Americans pay respect to both Confederate & Union soldiers. I also think that although there is some veneration of military virtues (& there's nothing wrong with honouring bravery etc) the over riding concern is to honour the dead. |
Sobieski | 08 Mar 2015 7:57 a.m. PST |
Honour them on both sides? When people are trying to kill each other, they're unlikely to be right on both sides. And in case you've missed the last half-century, we're not accepting the Nuremberg defense these days. |
KTravlos | 08 Mar 2015 9:07 a.m. PST |
Sobieski 1) Civil Wars are a different story. Even from the time of the Thirty Years Tyrants rule in Athens, polities tend to prefer to move on and part of that is reconciliation. I am not saying that the reconciliation of the North and South on the backs of African-Americans was a moral thing, but reconciliation is a human need. It was the case after the ECW. If you want to see what happens to a country that refuses the process of reconciliation, just study greek history in the last 40, if not 100 years. 2) Now you go to Germany and desecrate some war graves of WWII soldiers and you tell me how easy you get away with it? People might not honor Geobels, Himmler etc, but they still give funery rights and the protection to resting places to German WWII dead in general. 3) Who exactly was right or wrong between Queen Anne and Louis XIV so as to pass judgement on the honor of their soldiers? |
jaxenro | 16 Mar 2015 12:01 p.m. PST |
Read Henry V scene I it covers it far better than the author of this article. Just as the ruler is not responsible for the individual sins of the soldiers he employs nor are all the soldiers responsible for all the causes they fight for. The decision to go to war might or might not be just but the soldiers are only responsible for their actions in that war. A man can be a just warrior in an unjust cause if he is fighting for home and family, just as another can be an unjust warrior for a just cause if he acts dishonorably |
|