The 11th Hour of the 11th Day of the 11th Month

[luckydog71]

To every person who laid their life on the line and went to war to defend my freedoms, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Thank you for giving up years of your life to ensure that I could enjoy mine.

Thank you for sacrificing some of your goals and dreams so I could realize mine.

Thank you for your bravery. Thank you for your courage. Thank for your service to your country.

It is not possible for me to ever repay you for what you did for me.

Most of you I will never see and many of you died before I was even born.

What I can do is wear my poppy and in my own small way say thank you.

What I can do is ensure the generation behind me, does not forget what you have given the world.

Lest we forget.


Thank you Dad.

 

[DDawGG]

To every person who laid their life on the line and went to war to defend my freedoms, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Thank you for giving up years of your life to ensure that I could enjoy mine.

Thank you for sacrificing some of your goals and dreams so I could realize mine.

Thank you for your bravery. Thank you for your courage. Thank for your service to your country.

It is not possible for me to ever repay you for what you did for me.

Most of you I will never see and many of you died before I was even born.

What I can do is wear my poppy and in my own small way say thank you.

What I can do is ensure the generation behind me, does not forget what you have given the world.

Lest we forget.


Thank you Dad.

Well said LD

Thank you Dad......



Tomorrow morning my father (a WW2 Vet), my mother, myself and 2 sons are going to the cenptaph to pay our respects to those who gave everything for my freedom.

This will be the first time as an adult that I have spent November 11th with my father.

I am SO looking forard to this.

 

[dirtydan]

To every person who laid their life on the line and went to war to defend my freedoms, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Thank you for giving up years of your life to ensure that I could enjoy mine.

Thank you for sacrificing some of your goals and dreams so I could realize mine.

Thank you for your bravery. Thank you for your courage. Thank for your service to your country.

It is not possible for me to ever repay you for what you did for me.

Most of you I will never see and many of you died before I was even born.

What I can do is wear my poppy and in my own small way say thank you.

What I can do is ensure the generation behind me, does not forget what you have given the world.

Lest we forget.


Thank you Dad.

Nice post LD.

Are there poppies woren in the US? Gees I always thought poppies were a British Commonwealth thing.

 

[Sonny]

My mother was a young woman in occupied Europe during WW II. My father was a soldier who, together with others like him from Canada and other countries, helped free her country and the rest of Europe from the Nazis. So many brave young heroes died to preserve freedom, and they certainly deserve our thanks and few moments of remembrance.

 

[westwoody]

Don't forget that there are men and women serving today, far from home and in very dangerous places. Many will come home with horrible wounds, or missing a limb, or their sight. Some will not come home. And they don't do it for a lot of money. Think about them and their families when you are gloating over your latest overpriced meal at Joe Fortes, or bragging about how much your car cost.

 

[luckydog71]

Nice post LD.

Are there poppies woren in the US? Gees I always thought poppies were a British Commonwealth thing.

You can get a poppy in the US, but they are not common. It is very unusual to see anyone actually wear a poppy.

A very large percentage of our population has served in the Armed Forces and most of them have been in combat. You would think we would revere Veterans Day and Memorial Day much more than we do.

You would be hard pressed to find an American that knows poppies came from Flanders field or the significant of the 11th hour of the 11 day of the 11 month.

I get my poppy from Canada and I spend a week answering the question “What is that red thing on your shirt”.

Here is a link that will give you a lot of information.

http://www.legion.ca/asp/docs/rempoppy/allabout_e.asp

 

[mick_eight]

Don't forget that there are men and women serving today, far from home and in very dangerous places. Many will come home with horrible wounds, or missing a limb, or their sight. Some will not come home. And they don't do it for a lot of money. Think about them and their families when you are gloating over your latest overpriced meal at Joe Fortes, or bragging about how much your car cost.

Amen to that. Well said Woody

 

[Jodie]

The Soldier

It is the soldier, not the reporter,
who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the soldier, not the poet,
who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the soldier, not the campus organizer,
who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.

It is the soldier, not the lawyer,
who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the soldier,
who salutes the flag,
who serves under the flag,
and whose coffin is draped by the flag,
who allows the protester to burn the flag.

By Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, USMC



Tomorrow's service is going to bear particular significance as we pay tribute to those who have fought and sacrificed their lives so that the Afghani people can perchance someday enjoy the same freedoms we are so blessed to have here in Canada. There are going to be a lot of uniformed young men and women mourning their fallen comrades along with the vets.

I only hope that the war protesters will have enough respect for the courageous and selfless deceased, and for the solemnity of the occasion to refrain from using the event as a platform to push their political agenda.

 

[georgebushmoron]

I give thanks to those who fought, especially those who gave their lives for the mistakes of others. I tried to enlist once, but was rejected outright during the interview process. Perhaps that was the best thing for the country, as I would not have been capable as these valiant others of service. We owe our lives to them.

 

[ezsmile]

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

John McCrae

 

[dirtydan]

With all due respect to the padre, his poem is very insulting to the common person as it is condensending. Freedom of expression, freedom to demonstrate, fair trials, etc, was not given to the people by the soldier. It was the politicians and it is the people that practice all of those things that truly keep those freedoms alive. None of them were handed to us by soldiers.

 

[mick_eight]

With all due respect to the padre, his poem is very insulting to the common person as it is condensending. Freedom of expression, freedom to demonstrate, fair trials, etc, was not given to the people by the soldier. It was the politicians and it is the people that practice all of those things that truly keep those freedoms alive. None of them were handed to us by soldiers.

How many of those would you have had if Hitler had of won. If your parents were Jews , gypsies, labour leaders , disabled, you wouldn't even be here. A truly inane statement. Read some history.

 

[high-speed]

The cruel war was over -- oh, the triumph was so sweet!
We watched the troops returning, through our tears;
There was triumph, triumph, triumph down the scarlet glittering street,
And you scarce could hear the music for the cheers.
And you scarce could see the house-tops for the flags that flew between;
The bells were pealing madly to the sky;
And everyone was shouting for the Soldiers of the Queen,
And the glory of an age was passing by.

And then there came a shadow, swift and sudden, dark and drear;
The bells were silent, not an echo stirred.
The flags were drooping sullenly, the men forgot to cheer;
We waited, and we never spoke a word.
The sky grew darker, darker, till from out the gloomy rack
There came a voice that checked the heart with dread:
"Tear down, tear down your bunting now, and hang up sable black;
They are coming -- it's the Army of the Dead."

They were coming, they were coming, gaunt and ghastly, sad and slow;
They were coming, all the crimson wrecks of pride;
With faces seared, and cheeks red smeared, and haunting eyes of woe,
And clotted holes the khaki couldn't hide.
Oh, the clammy brow of anguish! the livid, foam-flecked lips!
The reeling ranks of ruin swept along!
The limb that trailed, the hand that failed, the bloody finger tips!
And oh, the dreary rhythm of their song!

"They left us on the veldt-side, but we felt we couldn't stop
On this, our England's crowning festal day;
We're the men of Magersfontein, we're the men of Spion Kop,
Colenso -- we're the men who had to pay.
We're the men who paid the blood-price. Shall the grave be all our gain?
You owe us. Long and heavy is the score.
Then cheer us for our glory now, and cheer us for our pain,
And cheer us as ye never cheered before."

The folks were white and stricken, and each tongue seemed weighted with lead;
Each heart was clutched in hollow hand of ice;
And every eye was staring at the horror of the dead,
The pity of the men who paid the price.
They were come, were come to mock us, in the first flush of our peace;
Through writhing lips their teeth were all agleam;
They were coming in their thousands -- oh, would they never cease!
I closed my eyes, and then -- it was a dream.

There was triumph, triumph, triumph down the scarlet gleaming street;
The town was mad; a man was like a boy.
A thousand flags were flaming where the sky and city meet;
A thousand bells were thundering the joy.
There was music, mirth and sunshine; but some eyes shone with regret;
And while we stun with cheers our homing braves,
O God, in Thy great mercy, let us nevermore forget
The graves they left behind, the bitter graves.

Robert Service

 

[dirtydan]

How many of those would you have had if Hitler had of won. If your parents were Jews , gypsies, labour leaders , disabled, you wouldn't even be here. A truly inane statement. Read some history.

Actually I have read a great of history and that is how I derived my statement. Those who cling to pop history usually don't look much prior to WW2. So if my assumption about your statement is correct then maybe you should be the one doing some reading of history?

The ideas of freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and so on were around long, long before Hitler set in motion the world's most destructful conflict. And it wasn't the commanders of the vast victorious armies that said unto the masses here's some free speech and here's some freedom to demonstrate. These ideas had finally reached the point that they were in vogue. More so with memories of the end of WW1 still verey fresh in people's minds and the great hopes that were dashed and dreadful emptiness that followed the years to come. The politicians were bound not to have a repeat.

 

[expedition]

Actually I have read a great of history and that is how I derived my statement. Those who cling to pop history usually don't look much prior to WW2. So if my assumption about your statement is correct then maybe you should be the one doing some reading of history?

The ideas of freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and so on were around long, long before Hitler set in motion the world's most destructful conflict. And it wasn't the commanders of the vast victorious armies that said unto the masses here's some free speech and here's some freedom to demonstrate. These ideas had finally reached the point that they were in vogue. More so with memories of the end of WW1 still verey fresh in people's minds and the great hopes that were dashed and dreadful emptiness that followed the years to come. The politicians were bound not to have a repeat.

I think it helps to look at that poem in terms of the modern "citizen soldier" rather than in terms of the proffessional warrior. In which case the soldier mentioned is the willingness of the average citizen to vounteer to serve, to sacrifice, to protect those freedoms and ideals. It is this sacrifice of the average man, the "soldier" that "gave" the ability to practice those freedoms and ideals.

I do not find the poem offensive or insulting to the common person because, certainly in Canadian experience, the soldier IS the common person.

 

[mick_eight]

Actually I have read a great of history and that is how I derived my statement. Those who cling to pop history usually don't look much prior to WW2. So if my assumption about your statement is correct then maybe you should be the one doing some reading of history?

The ideas of freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and so on were around long, long before Hitler set in motion the world's most destructful conflict. And it wasn't the commanders of the vast victorious armies that said unto the masses here's some free speech and here's some freedom to demonstrate. These ideas had finally reached the point that they were in vogue. More so with memories of the end of WW1 still verey fresh in people's minds and the great hopes that were dashed and dreadful emptiness that followed the years to come. The politicians were bound not to have a repeat.

I know as much history as you ,or maybe more. What I said was hitlers goal was to conquer the world, no one said the freedoms weren't there before. What I said was if he won the war they would not be there anymore. And it was the soldier and airman and navy and marines that stopped it. And if you knew history as much as you say, you would know that The first world war would not have happened if Bismark had not ran the press. He ran the press and fed lies to the people. Read the book about Queen Victoria's daughter that married the crown prince, you may find information you never knew before. Oh but I guess you have, but forgot what it said because it doesn't fit your reading of history.

 

[dirtydan]

I know as much history as you ,or maybe more. What I said was hitlers goal was to conquer the world, no one said the freedoms weren't there before.

Then you are mistaken. Hitler's goal was never to conquer the world. At best it was the vague notion of Lebensraum (sp?). Germany never had the capacity to conquer the world, even with its Axis partners. Conquering most of Europe, Germany was most capable of as history shows us. However its military machine lacked the ability to project power far from Europe in terms of invading other continents such as the Americas. Even with the invasion of the USSR the goals how far to go were always vague. And one might point to the U-boat campaign as projecting power, but its aim was to support the conquering of Europe, not the world. The German war machine built by the Nazis wasn't really designed for a long drawn out conflict, but rather series of short campaigns with sufficient time between to rebuild and reorganize. The concept of Hitler wanting to conquer the world is one of those silly things out of pop history.

What I said was if he won the war they would not be there anymore. And it was the soldier and airman and navy and marines that stopped it. And if you knew history as much as you say, you would know that The first world war would not have happened if Bismark had not ran the press. He ran the press and fed lies to the people. Read the book about Queen Victoria's daughter that married the crown prince, you may find information you never knew before. Oh but I guess you have, but forgot what it said because it doesn't fit your reading of history.

Would that book be "Dreadnought"? If so then I have read it. WW1 is not exactly my strongest subject, as I have read much more about WW2 and the Cold War. But since WW1 leads up to others one does learn something of it.

While Bismarck was a key figure in the rise of powerful and unified Germany, and it was never his goal to create the situation that led to WW1. For the most part Germany and Britain had been more or less allies rather than enemies with a mutual distrust of France. Britain quite frankly was content to have Germany as a powerful counter to France in terms of land power. Only when Germany began its massive expansion of its navy did things change between the two. Britain realized it could no longer afford to have a navy that was just as strong or more so than the 2nd and 3rd largest navies. So its alliegences shifted away from Germany towards France by the early years of the 20th century.

Also while Kaiser Wilhelm II, a grandson of Queen Victoria, wanted a mighty Germany he did not want a massive European conflict to breakout. In fact he did what he could to put a stop to the machinations in the summer of 1914, in part trying to use the family connections the major European monarchies had to the late Queen Victoria. With that said, to lay most of the blame on Germany for the Great War, as it has been, was a mistake. This is not say Germany wasn't to blame, as blame needs to be share among all the Great Powers involved.

Keep in mind this most important point: no army, navy, or air force goes to war without them being sent by the politicians. Militaries win/lose wars, they do not grant freedoms. The impetous for granting freedoms is assisted by the outcome of a war, but in the end it is power of government that bestows them to society. I put to you again that the hollowness of the Allied victory over Germany and the Central Powers with the desire to avoid it again was a the driving force for the freedoms our society has today.

WW2 was NOT fought for freedom, democracy, justice and what ever else, it was fought to protect the power (the world order) of the the countries that were the Allies. There many opportunities in the 1930's to curb the ambitions of Nazi Germany, but these ambitions did not necessarily impede on the influences of the Great Powers. Together with memories of the carnage of WW1, the Great Powers were willing to allow Germany to throw its weight around Europe by what was then the popular policy of appeasement. Only when Hitler was clearly a threat did Britain and France (the US still deep in its isolationist mood) begin to move towards putting a stop to Nazi Germany. Well into the summer of 1939 the British and French were negotiating with the USSR for an alliance against Germany. These talks failed, largely because of Stalin's paranoia, and in turn the USSR quickly made its non-agression pact with Germany, mostly to buy some time before the inevitable conflict between the two.

 

[dirtydan]

I know as much history as you ,or maybe more. What I said was hitlers goal was to conquer the world, no one said the freedoms weren't there before.

Then you are mistaken. Hitler's goal was never to conquer the world. At best it was the vague notion of Lebensraum (sp?). Germany never had the capacity to conquer the world, even with its Axis partners. Conquering most of Europe, Germany was most capable of as history shows us. However its military machine lacked the ability to project power far from Europe in terms of invading other continents such as the Americas. Even with the invasion of the USSR the goals how far to go were always vague. And one might point to the U-boat campaign as projecting power, but its aim was to support the conquering of Europe, not the world. The German war machine built by the Nazis wasn't really designed for a long drawn out conflict, but rather series of short campaigns with sufficient time between to rebuild and reorganize. The concept of Hitler wanting to conquer the world is one of those silly things out of pop history.

What I said was if he won the war they would not be there anymore. And it was the soldier and airman and navy and marines that stopped it. And if you knew history as much as you say, you would know that The first world war would not have happened if Bismark had not ran the press. He ran the press and fed lies to the people. Read the book about Queen Victoria's daughter that married the crown prince, you may find information you never knew before. Oh but I guess you have, but forgot what it said because it doesn't fit your reading of history.

Would that book be "Dreadnought"? If so then I have read it. WW1 is not exactly my strongest subject, as I have read much more about WW2 and the Cold War. But since WW1 leads up to others one does learn something of it.

While Bismarck was a key figure in the rise of powerful and unified Germany, and it was never his goal to create the situation that led to WW1. For the most part Germany and Britain had been more or less allies rather than enemies with a mutual distrust of France. Britain quite frankly was content to have Germany as a powerful counter to France in terms of land power. Bismarck's policies served up something suitable to British policy. Only when Germany began its massive expansion of its navy did things change between the two. Britain realized it could no longer afford to have a navy that was just as strong or more so than the 2nd and 3rd largest navies. So its alliegences shifted away from Germany towards France by the early years of the 20th century.

Also while Kaiser Wilhelm II, a grandson of Queen Victoria, wanted a mighty Germany he did not want a massive European conflict to breakout. In fact he did what he could to put a stop to the machinations in the summer of 1914, in part trying to use the family connections the major European monarchies had to the late Queen Victoria. With that said, to lay most of the blame on Germany for the Great War, as it has been, was a mistake. This is not say Germany wasn't to blame, as blame needs to be share among all the Great Powers involved.

Keep in mind this most important point: no army, navy, or air force goes to war without them being sent by the politicians. Militaries win/lose wars, they do not grant freedoms. The impetous for granting freedoms is assisted by the outcome of a war, but in the end it is power of government that bestows them to society. I put to you again that the hollowness of the Allied victory over Germany and the Central Powers with the desire to avoid it again was a the driving force for the freedoms our society has today.

WW2 was NOT fought for freedom, democracy, justice and what ever else, it was fought to protect the power (the world order) of the the countries that were the Allies. There many opportunities in the 1930's to curb the ambitions of Nazi Germany, but these ambitions did not necessarily impede on the influences of the Great Powers. Together with memories of the carnage of WW1, the Great Powers were willing to allow Germany to throw its weight around Europe by what was then the popular policy of appeasement. Only when Hitler was clearly a threat did Britain and France (the US still deep in its isolationist mood) begin to move towards putting a stop to Nazi Germany. Well into the summer of 1939 the British and French were negotiating with the USSR for an alliance against Germany. These talks failed, largely because of Stalin's paranoia, and in turn the USSR quickly made its non-agression pact with Germany, mostly to buy some time before the inevitable conflict between the two.

 

[dirtydan]

I think it helps to look at that poem in terms of the modern "citizen soldier" rather than in terms of the proffessional warrior. In which case the soldier mentioned is the willingness of the average citizen to vounteer to serve, to sacrifice, to protect those freedoms and ideals. It is this sacrifice of the average man, the "soldier" that "gave" the ability to practice those freedoms and ideals.

I do not find the poem offensive or insulting to the common person because, certainly in Canadian experience, the soldier IS the common person.

Nice post, but I still find the poem offensive. To me it reeks of arrogance. It's blind to the obvious that these men and women do not fight unless the politicians send them to do so. As crass and cold as it may be, the bottom line is troops are only tools for attempting to achieve policy goals, which are set by the politicians. When troops are not seen as policy tools but as humans then the concept of war becomes more and more dispicable.

Using the two world wars as examples, neither were fought for freedom, democracy, justice and anything else. They were fought to protect the influences of the major nations. The use of propaganda in creating the notions of what we were fighting for is the reason why we are to think both wars (or either one of them) were fought for freedom, democracy and justice. How eager would you be to fight as a volunteer or as a conscript if the government told you over and over again that it was for keeping Britain, France, the US, and the USSR as the strongest countries in the world? And as I stated elsewhere the deep feelings of disappointment in what became the Inter-War period also provide the fuel for the politicians to grant many of the freedoms we have come to enjoy today. In fact the politicians that enacted these freedoms were of political parties that a generation or two previously would have fought tooth and nail against them, as it would have been seen as impeding on the order of things. To placate the population after another horrendous war these things were granted over time.

 

[mick_eight]

No the book is not dreadnought, The book is " uncommon woman" Its seems to me you have just read the mainstream books as your diatrade plainly shows. Try and read some of the ones that don't make the best sellars lists or the history 101 courses. And in the book " the rise and fall of the third reich" hitler states many times that he wants to conquer the world. Was 1400 pages too long for that one for you. I have heard all the arguements you state , but they don't hold up to a in depth review. Bismark was without a doubt a master maniptulator who had the king hoodwinked about the intentions of the people, france, and half of europe. I feel witout bismarks evil intentions WW1 would not have happened. And that is more then just my opinion. Queen Vicky felt the same way ,she hated bismark and blamed him for most of europes troubles at the time. Her father in law would not listen to his son because he felt because of his disabilities, he was weak,and he listened to bismark instead. Rather then just reading every day books and high school texts it would be beneficial to dig a little deeper. And I know I can't spell , but I can read real good