Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

HALF A LEAGUE, HALF A LEAGUE ONWARD...

Discussion in 'World War 2 Hobbies' started by aquist, May 20, 2004.

  1. aquist

    aquist recruit

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    THE HISTORY Channel recently had a special debunking the jaundiced jingoistic viw of the Charge of the Light Brigade, that the real heroes were the Turkish Infantry who bore the brunt of the fighting at Balaklava. It is strange how history one by one disavows the traditional views we have had of the Battle of the Little Big Horn . When I was child there was a large painting of Custers last stand, I can remember seeing the naked bodies of the soldiers with blue veins showing through their skin as they had been cruelly murdered and then mutilated by ""the Savages"" then along came little big man, and I found that I myself am part Indian!!and tennyson mislead us when he told us that""... into the valley of death rode the six hundred"". they charged the wrong guns, and they werent all killed... and on and on it goes...
     
  2. Greg Pitts

    Greg Pitts New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    DFW Texas
    via TanksinWW2
    I'm not sure I get your point. History is full of examples where one person's view differs from another. A prime example is the Bible.

    What is history? A fable we can agree upon.

    :smok:
     
  3. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Ask two historians a question and you will get three different answers!

    I would agree, though, that our view of historic events changes all the time - mostly depending on the socio-political state of our own country.

    For example, the Victorians had very definate views about history, almost all of which we now know (or believe) to be absolute rubbish.

    Custer was portrayed as a brave soldier fighting to protect the poor settlers from the savage barbaric indian - now he is seen (quite rightly) as a bloodthirsty simpleton.
     
  4. aquist

    aquist recruit

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Gregg I want you to know that I am showing great restraint not to comment on any Bible comments but of course you are right. My study of ww2 History and civil war (acw) and ww1 are almost a religious experience for me. and being a ww2 reenactor is almost like acting a bit part in the Passion.
     
  5. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Nice work in restraining yourself, Kreigspfarrer. Thank you for doing so. It keeps the place peaceful. :D

    Custer was actually the worst of his class in intelligence and tactical skill. He made the position of commander by showing courage (idiocy?) and endurance (definitely idiocy). :grin:
     
  6. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    I do know that, after taking command of the Michigan Brigade (cavalry), Custer was not 100% popular with his men, mainly because they suffered a lot of casualties while he led them. What made him tolerable in their eyes was the fact that whenever he ordered one of those reckless charges, he was *always* well out in front, leading them. But Custer was by no stretch of the imagination an intellectual soldier, and his reliance on what was known as "Custer's Luck" finally caught up to him at Little Bighorn.
     
  7. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    I did see that documentary. It was good, and the Turkish troops should get the credit they deserve, but I think they went too far in downplaying (or perhaps denigrating would be a better word) what the Light Brigade went through. The program said that less than 200 of the British were killed in the charge; this is indeed true, however, the narration failed to mention how many of the British soldiers were *wounded*, which would be a much higher number. The Light Brigade suffered something over 60% casualties at Balaklava, and it was not the fault of the troopers that they were led by incompetent officers at the higher levels. And it was definitely not the fault of the men of the Light Brigade that the contributions of the Turkish soldiers has been so long overlooked. I strongly feel that the points made by the documentary could have been made in a better manner.
     
  8. canambridge

    canambridge Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,649
    Likes Received:
    6
    via TanksinWW2
    I consistently have problems with revisionist history ALWAYS having to portray the Western world as evil and lecherous and the rest of the world as peace loving and sensitive. It almost always seems that the truth is never that clear.
    Before I get anyone worked up, this is not a defense of colonialism or a justification for the irradication of aboriginals.
     
  9. Castelot

    Castelot New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The eldest daugther of Church
    via TanksinWW2
    I agree with that.
     
  10. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    True, we weren't really any worse that anyone else, but we had the technology to beat everyone else, so we did.
    :cry:
     
  11. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Not an evil bunch, just a greedy bunch then. It's not that we are all evil, but Europeans definitely did some things that can't be made right or even argued in favour of. Consider the Conquistadores.
     
  12. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Absolute Power corrupts absolutely...
     
  13. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Very true, however I have to echo the sentiments of canambridge. I'm all in favour of revisiting and reanalysing history, that's what keeps it healthy and alive and aids greatly in debunking propaganda myths that are accepted as true at the time, but there seems to be creeping in an attitude that the west must somehow be wrong by default and to blame for everything.

    Yes, we attacked, destroyed, colonised, enslaved and built empires. We did so on the basis of greater wealth, better organisation and better technology. So did the Romans, so did the Egyptians, so did the Chinese. Other nations did equally well on the basis of more aggressive and/or more numerous warriors. Those nations that were conquered for the most part were not of course peaceloving utopian paradises, they simply fought from a disadvantage in one aspect or another and lost as a result.

    That's just mankind. It's what we do, it's what we've done for thousands of years and what we'll probably do for thousands of years more.
     
  14. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    *Applause* Nice post SimonR!
     
  15. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Hear, hear!!!
     
  16. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Hey Corp, another classic reply! :grin:
     
  17. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Well, of course it is, Roel; this is me, remember? My posts are *always* classics! :wink:
     
  18. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    You are the classic Corp! :grin:
     
  19. Castelot

    Castelot New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,413
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The eldest daugther of Church
    via TanksinWW2
    On the anti racism conference in Durban(South Africa) some years ago, african countries wanted the western countries to recognize slavery and slave trade as crimes against humanity(which it definately was), but forgot to ask the same from the arab countries that did absolutely the same.
     
  20. GP

    GP New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2


    After the passing of Abolition of the Slave Trade Act in 1807, British captains who were caught continuing the trade were fined £100 for every slave found on board. However, this law did not stop the British slave trade. If slave-ships were in danger of being captured by the British navy, captains often reduced the fines they had to pay by ordering the slaves to be thrown into the sea.

    Some people involved in the anti-slave trade campaign argued that the only way to end the suffering of the slaves was to make slavery illegal. A new Anti-Slavery Society was formed in 1823. Members included Thomas Clarkson, Henry Brougham, William Wilberforce, Thomas Fowell Buxton, Elizabeth Heyrick, Mary Lloyd, Jane Smeal, Elizabeth Pease and Anne Knight).

    Parliament passed the Slavery Abolition Act in 1833. This act gave all slaves in the British Empire their freedom. The British government paid compensation to the slave owners. The amount that the plantation owners received depended on the number of slaves that they had. For example, the Bishop of Exeter's 665 slaves resulted in him receiving £12,700.
     

Share This Page