The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Reflections on Anzac Day - why did we fight? > Comments

Reflections on Anzac Day - why did we fight? : Comments

By Brendon O'Connor, published 29/4/2008

It seems important to ask whether our forbearers fought for a just cause, or at least, a well justified cause.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. All
There seems to be some kind of undercurrent here, that Australia was somehow unique in its selfless contribution - because that is what it was - to the two major wars this century.

>>Did Australia commit itself to war in Europe in 1914 and 1939 simply because Britain declared war on Germany or did Australia have security concerns of its own? Or more bluntly, has Australia largely fought in other people’s wars and unnecessarily so?<<

Canada wasn't threatened directly either. Nor were India, New Zealand, South Africa or the United States.

But it is perfectly reasonable for involved parties to call for support from people with whom they share ideals and moralities. And it is perfectly reasonable for those countries, when called upon, to willingly commit themselves to a cause in which they believe, even though they are not in the firing line, and the commitment involves risk and pain.

Countries such as Ireland and Switzerland remained "neutral" in WWII because they didn't share the same moral values, preferring instead to take advantage of the sacrifice of others. They undoubtedly ended the war richer and unscathed, as would Australia had we avoided the conflict.

The article asks a couple of "why" questions, which become increasingly difficult to answer as the years pass. One that I would ask, though, is how would we justify our non-involvement to ourselves and our friends, both then and now?

How would we feel about ourselves if we had refused to respond to the call, and instead taken advantage of the impoverishment of other countries, as did Switzerland and Ireland?
Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 29 April 2008 7:05:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I arrived in Australia at the age of 10. I well remember my first Anzac Day at our local State School. It was a beautiful ceremony. Some of the older teachers wept openly.

Coming from a heavily bombed city, I naturally saw the whole thing as an affirmation of peace - as a condemnation of war. Perception is everything, I suppose. It took a few more episodes to teach me that Anzac Day is not exactly an anti-war demonstration.

Having "missed out" on Vietnam, I finally entered an RSL club for the first time in my early 40's, when work took me to NSW. I saw straight away that this was a place where ex-servicemen could meet kindred spirits. No need for explanation, the recognition of a shared past - a shared fate - a shared destiny, was written all over the old bloke's faces. Honestly, I never tired of, "We will remember them....."

....but it all came at such a terrible cost.

In order to bask in the comfort and understanding of their fellow travellers, the survivors were forced to conform to to the old meme that the wars were an inevitable facet of human nature (that they had sacrificed themselves to confront).

While this is palpably true, it struck me as odd therefore that RSLs are not hot beds of anarchy - howlingly anti-war, anti-empire, anti-war-profiteer, anti-mendacity, anti-conservatism.

I think it is a great shame that the RSL and it's old members are not in the forefront of flag-burnings, anti-weapons, anti-war demonstrations and anti-war songmanship.

- maybe Anzac Day has become just another way of propping up the same old, same old - the ultimate emotional blackmail.

- maybe we should give the Anzacs the reward for which they sacrificed - and begin dismantling a few sacred cows.
Posted by Chris Shaw, Carisbrook 3464, Tuesday, 29 April 2008 9:15:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We used to forget that thousands of Australian children killed, wounded or suffered in 1st world word, in the battlefields. According to international Convention on the Rights of the Child,“ a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years" We forgot "that childhood is entitled to special care and assistance,… that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding" and we send our children to the war! We ignored that ""the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection" and we encourage our children to go to war, we pushed them to the graveyards!
At least now, we must recognize our terrible mistakes and stop promoting the children soldiers. The persons who think that the youth was more mature then than now make a huge mistake. Modern youths are very mature and the parents and Authorities was totally irresponsible giving permissions to children for the war.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 9:31:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Marilyn

Another fact-free rant from Marilyn. For goodness sake Marilyn, at least attempt to provide some evidence for your blanket assertions.

As I pointed out in my last post, some of the young blokes who signed up for WW1 may have been adventure seekers. However, do you honestly believe that the blokes with families felt that way? Can you really pretend that all or even most of the 416,000 men out of a total population of 5 million were adventurists?

If you do, then please explain why, with full knowledge of the cost of war, 1,000,000 blokes voluntarily signed up for WW2 just on 20 years later? No one in 1939 was unaware of the massive cost to our country of the Great War.

Lets take another of your so-called facts “ More soldiers died of the pox, than of anything else”
Battle related deaths for Australians in WW1 were 53,000 versus 7,000 non battle deaths.
http://www.awm.gov.au/atwar/statistics/world_wars.asp
So much for your slander about STD

You say “They were not glorious heroes going to give their lives for anyone”.
That is irrelevant because giving their lives for others is exactly what many of them did. They were instrumental in winning the war and freeing the French and Belgians and others from the oppression of the dictatorships and the absolute monarchies.

The reason the so-called “peace movement” has so much trouble getting through to the mainstream is that people like Marilyn and SJF want to slag off the soldiers and their achievements. That’s why you’ll never be more than a fringe group of disaffected whingers.

Chris Shaw,

The veterans aren’t forced to conform to the old meme that the wars were an inevitable facet of human nature. Most veterans of WW1 and WW2 and Korea and many Vietnam Vets fully believe that the wars they fought were justified. Their belief in this is shared by the wider community. The reason you won’t find vets flag burning is because they value the flag as a powerful positive symbol.

Go spin your socialist nonsense elsewhere.
Posted by Paul.L, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 10:21:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul, take three minutes of your precious time and watch this to the end:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19832.htm

- then watch it again, to be sure.....
Posted by Chris Shaw, Carisbrook 3464, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 12:00:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
MARILYN

You realllly shot yourself in the foot this time.

"More soldiers died of the POX than....."

Paul L showed the silliness of that wild claim.

Then you said:

"War is never even remotely sensible and is always the total failure of imagination and commonsense"

and with this.. I AGREE... who has ever said war is 'sensible'?

Unnnnnfortunately for us, while WE might agree to this, there are those 'out there' for whom War is enjoyable, fun, and a pathway to power over others. The 'others' might include.....YOU!

Now.. if you truly feel you could have 'talked sense' into Adolph, then..by all means apply to join our diplomatic corps.. and volunteer to negotiate with Bin Ladin on behalf of the Yanks.

The world is not simple black and white when it comes to international conflicts, and your infantile claim denies the reality and presense of megalomaniacs who must....be fought.. with violence for the sake of our freedom.

BUT.. you have the last word on this, explain how 'negotiation' would have prevented WWII? Good grief.. Chamberlain did try... r u a fan of his?
Lets see.. how would you have explained the 'non sensical' nature of war to the Japanese militarists when they raped Nanking? or..denuded Korea of all trees? or 'black flagged' a section of Singapore and slaughtered everyone within it?

come.. tell us all how you would fix all that.. and please don't 'blame it on the West'.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Wednesday, 30 April 2008 1:57:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy