Searching \ for '[OT][WOT] ANZAC Day - April 25th' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=
Search entire site for: '[WOT] ANZAC Day - April 25th'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT][WOT] ANZAC Day - April 25th'
2005\04\24@192258 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
Measured in terms of the people who observe it with some degree of
feeling, today is arguably New Zealand's most holy day. Also, I
imagine, Australia's. This morning many thousands of New Zealanders
gathered together before dawn to remember events that happened on the
other side of the world 90 years ago. And many more will read and
listen again to the accounts of what they are already familiar with,
and
watch ceremonies on TV broadcast from far away.

Unlike some other national holidays, this one always occurs on the
actual date. Essentially all shops are closed by law for the morning -
it takes a lot to keep a Kiwi away from shopping. There are bugles and
prayers and incantations that are by now burned into the national
psyche* - and a select group of people over 80 years old have a
special place,
because the last of the group of even more select even older people
finally died a few years ago.

For those outside New Zealand who are interested in finding out what
it's all about, some fascinating reading can be obtained by searching
the web for terms such as below. Numbers are the number of Google
Strikes


739,000        Gallipoli
118,000        Gallipoli 1915
   1,360        "Johnny Turk" - few but interesting (note two n's)
   5,540        "Chunuk Bair" - Especially special to NZ
58,300         ANZACS - good cross section
12,700         Gallipoli "Winston Churchill" - with good reason


Russell McMahon
April 25th
________________________________


* " ...They shall not grow old, as we grow old; age shall not weary
them, nor the years condemn, at the going down of the sun and in the
morning we will remember them. ... "


2005\04\24@232416 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
On Apr 24, 2005, at 4:22 PM, Russell McMahon wrote:
>
> Unlike some other national holidays, this one always occurs on the
> actual date.

Good for you.  The US moved OUR "memorial day" to a nearby monday...

> 739,000        Gallipoli

http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/matilda.html

"And now every April I sit on my porch
  And I watch the parade pass before me
And I watch my old comrades, how proudly they march
  Reliving old dreams of past glory
And the old men march slowly, all bent, stiff and sore
  The forgotten heroes from a forgotten war
And the young people ask, "What are they marching for?"
  And I ask myself the same question
And the band plays Waltzing Matilda
  And the old men answer to the call
But year after year their numbers get fewer
  Some day no one will march there at all"

So how's public opinion down under WRT fighting in questionable wars?
When Bogle gets performed around here, there's usually at least one
person
with a rejoinder to the effect that of course it is good, meaningful,
and
heroic to die horribly for a questionable cause.  And that was before
our
current set of battles...

BillW

2005\04\25@041223 by p.cousens

flavicon
I for one am considering posting satanic festival dates/links

So lets make a deal we should stick to the rules

NO RELIGION ON THE LIST

 PC


> {Original Message removed}

2005\04\25@045432 by Michael Davidson

flavicon
face
> I for one am considering posting satanic festival dates/links
>
> So lets make a deal we should stick to the rules
>
> NO RELIGION ON THE LIST

My humour / sarcasm detector is failing to pick up anything here, so
I'm presuming you were being serious in this post (Well the "No religon
on the list bit").

The only reference to anything remotely religious I can find in
Russell's post was the word "holy" and "prayers". Holy in this post
would be with the meaning "venerated as or as if sacred".

So I'm going to presume you're under the impression ANZAC day is some
Australian/New Zealand religious holiday. And uh... it's not. ANZAC is
an acronym for "Australian and New Zealand Army Corps". ANZAC day is a
day of thanks / remembrance for those who serve(d) in the armed forces
in Australia/New Zealand. However there are also ceremonies at
Gallipoli. It stems from April 25th 1915 when 17,000 ANZACs landed on Z
-beach on the Gallipoli Peninsular as part of a combined offensive to
secure the Dardanelles Straits for a naval assault on Constantinople.
It resulted in a loss of ~2,000 ANZACs on the first day and ~10,000 by
the end of the Gallipoli campaign.

Michael Davidson

--
Fortune:

"No self-respecting fish would want to be wrapped in that kind of
paper."
               -- Mike Royko on the Chicago Sun-Times after it was
                  taken over by Rupert Murdoch


2005\04\25@050233 by Alan B. Pearce
face picon face
>I for one am considering posting satanic festival dates/links
>
>So lets make a deal we should stick to the rules
>
>NO RELIGION ON THE LIST

Anzac Day is not a religious festival. It is the New Zealand and Australian
equivalent to the UK's Remembrance Day, in memory of fallen soldiers. If you
had read Russell's and Bills contributions properly, you would have realised
this.

Alan (another Kiwi)

2005\04\25@052657 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>I for one am considering posting satanic festival dates/links

If such are especially meaningful above almost any other ceremonial
event in your nations's year then that may be a good idea. Are you in
Haiti?

> So lets make a deal we should stick to the rules
> NO RELIGION ON THE LIST

The subset of the rules, as enumerated above, have been stuck to.
The word "holy" has a wider meaning than that which you currently
ascribe to it.

AND

It seems unlikely that you even skimmed past the first line or two.
A shame, as you MAY have found it interesting.

May I suggest that you google on

       "winston churchill" gallipoli

as suggested for an interesting and, obviously in this instance,
informative read.


       RM





2005\04\25@053914 by Hulatt, Jon

picon face
It's interesting. Whilst I still have tremendous respect and gratitude
to Churchill(*) for his leadership in the war, the more you read on the
subject the more you realise that he was not the perfect leader that
many think he was. He was stubborn and obstinate, and too often
interfered directly with the plans of the armed forces (particularly the
navies).

(*) it goes without saying that I also have tremendous respect for
those that fought and gave their lives in the wars

> {Original Message removed}

2005\04\25@054206 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> Measured in terms of the people who observe it with some degree of
>> feeling, today is arguably New Zealand's most holy day. Also, I
>> imagine, Australia's.

To clear up a misunderstanding for those who read OT but don't follow
links -

ANZAC day commemorates the Allied forces campaign in Turkey in WW1
when thousands of British and NZ and Australian and Turkish (and
other) troops died in an attempt to implement or prevent a plan
proposed by Winston Churchill.

The aim was to capture the gun positions along the Turkish held
Dardanelles in order to open up the sea route to Russia and thereby
open a line of supply behind the Germans.

The campaign failed miserably. BUT came within a whisker of
succeeding, but the attackers never knew this at the time. If it had
succeeded it would almost certainly have substantially changed the
course of WW1. This was our WW1 equivalent of the D-Day landings, but
for various reasons, we failed where the D-Day landings succeeded.

Each year NZers and Australians and others visit the landing grounds
and cemeteries and are welcomed by their friends and one time enemies
the Turks.

It's an EXTREMELY special day for us.



       Russell McMahon




2005\04\25@071613 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> It's interesting. Whilst I still have tremendous respect and
> gratitude
> to Churchill(*) for his leadership in the war, the more you read on
> the
> subject the more you realise that he was not the perfect leader that
> many think he was. He was stubborn and obstinate, and too often
> interfered directly with the plans of the armed forces (particularly
> the
> navies).

Indeed. Churchill was always interfering in a wide range of things. He
had many good ideas and many more that were less than good. He was a
great annoyance to many who had to work under him.

BUT

He was the right man in the right place at the right time. He had the
ability to appeal to and rally the populace. He did a good job as
frontman against the common enemy. He was intelligent and insightful
(and opiniated and idiosyncratic). Overall he did a superb job as
leader during WW2. His earlier disasters helped pave the way for his
later successes. He also had his fair share of disasters in WW2. In
grateful thanks for what he had done for them the British public
turfed him out of office immediately after WW2. He regained power
quite some years later.

For current NZers I think the current closest equivalent to Churchill
is John Banks (!) But Churchill had a higher IQ.

FWIW Churchill lost most of his money in the stock market crash and
made his fortune subsequently with his writing.

> (*) it goes without saying that I also have tremendous respect for
> those that fought and gave their lives in the wars

I also. On *all* sides. It would however be a good idea if everyone
did a bit less of it :-(. War is a lose-lose situation for the
soldiers. I have visited the major German cemetery in Ypres and it is
a moving experience. The walls of the entrance way are covered in fine
print with the names of dead German teenagers who fought and died for
their country. These provided examples for Hitler to use to encourage
the Hitler Youth in WW2. The Turks at Gallipoli included many locals
who were fighting not only for their country but also for their homes.
The origins of WW1 are complex and in large part do not reflect
honourably on most involved. WW2 arose in large part because the
injustices on both sides from WW1 led to great injustices being
inflicted on Germany & provided fertile ground for Hitler's ideas.
Hitler was a genius & a true patriot but also a man driven by his own
distorted vision which increasingly with time departed from reality.
The injustices inflicted on the populace of the invaded countries*,
while severe, were arguably no greater than those which towards the
end were inflicted on the Germans by both the allies terror policies
and Hitler himself. Hitler at the end sought to destroy the German
people (!). [Hard reputable documentary evidence of this exists].
   * Jewish holocaust is outside this statement.

After WW2 the allies started again with reprisals that would have led
to more of the same. Somewhere along the line they became more
enlightened - arguably as a result of having to counter Stalin's
'interesting' approach to life.

It seems there's aplace for war, but I wish we'd manage to need less
of it. Donovan's "Universal Soldier" comes to mind.


       RM

2005\04\25@073132 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
now I know its fairly pointless but I am fairly pissed off at this comment.
I am an Australian. The fact the person said this without even bothering to
read it implies a disrespect for the people who died for my freedom, and
odds are
indirectly his own, I'll tolerate pretty much anything except that. The
references
to Satanism well I find difficult to reply to in a polite manner.

on a more logical note how does this guy know that Russell wasn't referring
to a
satanistic festival anyway?



> {Original Message removed}

2005\04\25@075140 by Hulatt, Jon

picon face

{Quote hidden}

absolutely. the vast majority of germans were innocent too; they were
only doing what they were told to do by an evil minority. And of course,
it would be unrealistic to assume that the conduct of all the allied
soldiers and officers was always "moral" anyway. war is definately a
lose-lose situation. it's very sad.

2005\04\25@080652 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> Anzac Day is not a religious festival. It is the New Zealand and
> Australian equivalent to the UK's Remembrance Day, in memory of fallen
> soldiers.

But we don't want to hear about Remembrance Day, the US Memorial Day, or
other similar holidays on this list either.


*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\04\25@080840 by olin_piclist

face picon face
Russell McMahon wrote:
> If such are especially meaningful above almost any other ceremonial
> event in your nations's year then that may be a good idea.

Not really.

*****************************************************************
Embed Inc, embedded system specialists in Littleton Massachusetts
(978) 742-9014, http://www.embedinc.com

2005\04\25@083106 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> now I know its fairly pointless but I am fairly pissed off at this
> comment.
> I am an Australian. The fact the person said this without even
> bothering to
> read it implies a disrespect for the people who died for my freedom,
> and
> odds are indirectly his own, I'll tolerate pretty much anything
> except that.

STOP. Please. By trying to be "artistic" I've caused problems.

I believe that he didn't mean disrespect for anything that's of value
to us, because he didn't read far enough down to tell. It's partially
my fault for not spelling it out - which I did purposefully. It wasn't
meant to be a troll on my part, but it was meant to be interesting
enough to attract people to have a look at what is a very special
occasion for us. I would have thought that the mention of Winston
Churchill would have been enough of a hint that something military was
going on, but I don't think he read that far. On the other side of the
ledger, it's generally a good idea that, if you are going to complain
about a post, then you first make sure that it says what you think it
does. Peter failed to do this.

Jake's comment about "died for my freedom" (which I agree with)
probably needs a little explaining to many people here. Our troops
were committed in support of the British Empire of the time and the
war against Germany. Nobody knew where the troops would be used. We
were at no risk from Turkey per se but the action was a part of the
greater whole that was WW1. As in any such event nobody was perfect
but I am personally happy that our country did the right thing, way
back then, in committing troops as they did. A decision to fight any
war is an agonising one (or should be). This "war to end all wars" was
less well defined in morality than eg WW2 but, when you consider that
the vast majority of it was fought against Germany but IN Belgium and
France it gives things some perspective. Turkey made the unfortunate
choice of siding with Germany. And were prompted to do so in large
part by insensitive action by the UK just prior to hostilities
commencing. And Winston Churchill was the prime instigator of the
insensitivity. (He effectively commandeered two cruisers being made
for the Turks, that the Turks had paid for by public subsription and
denied them compensation. Not a clever act.)

> The references to Satanism well I find difficult to reply to in a
> polite manner.

He thought (I think) that I was waxing all religious (has been known
to happen :-) ) and was trying (I think) to make the point that one
man's religion is another man's anathema. I think he did that quite
well ;-).

> on a more logical note how does this guy know that Russell wasn't
> referring
> to a satanistic festival anyway?

He didn't. But he didn't realise that I wasn't referring to an
expressly Christian one. I mentioned prayers being said (which is
entirely true) and used the term "holy" (which is extremely
appropriate) and he drew incorrect conclusions.

I'm sorry that I caused such a solemn occasion to be the cause of any
aggro.

I think a certain amount of mumbled apologies all round is in order.
Nobody meant to offend excessively but things got a bit out of hand.
I'll mumble first :-). Peter ?


       Russell

2005\04\25@093029 by Mike Hord

picon face
I'm just going to snip all of this, because I don't want to
comment on any one thing, but rather just to say that
I am very glad to see this post.  I flipped my desk
calendar today.  "Huh, ANZAC Day.  I wonder what that
is, exactly.  Maybe I should look it up.  No, I bet
Russell will post on it." ;-)

I'm curious what those who have a better historical
grasp than I think of the movie about this topic, with
Mel Gibson?

Mike H.

2005\04\25@093804 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> Anzac Day is not a religious festival. It is the New Zealand and
>> Australian equivalent to the UK's Remembrance Day, in memory of
>> fallen
>> soldiers.

> But we don't want to hear about Remembrance Day, the US Memorial
> Day, or
> other similar holidays on this list either.

In fact it ranks at top equal (of course), for us, with whatever US
day of memory is top of your list. And I imagine that whether "we"
want to hear about what the historical basis is for ANZAC Day varies
quite widely indeed amongst the OTers. I doubt that you can speak for
the rest.

Speaking entirely for myself, if US memorial day is just "a holiday"
to you, as you seem to imply, then I may well not want to hear about
it either. If it happened to be the top day of remembrance for the US
then I may well be interested in knowing why.


       RM

2005\04\25@093805 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
It may be NZ only Google that's doing this, but I just noticed that
the Google log has the l as a flagstaff with an Anzac flag. (ie it
could be either an Australian or a NZ flag as they have cunningly
concealed the small differences). (Australians seem to see one more
star than we do when they look at the Southern Cross)(and we
apparently see red ones).


           RM

2005\04\25@095542 by p.cousens

flavicon
{Quote hidden}

I was commenting on the religious content

However now I'm upset

Just because it's respected in your country does that mean that no one
else can object
What if I were German, or any other nationality that suffered losses on
the other side?

What if I were Muslim?

ANZAC Day - April 25th
DOES ANYONE THINK THE PICLIST IS THE PLACE FOR THIS?
 
 PC


2005\04\25@101742 by Mike Hord

picon face
> Speaking entirely for myself, if US memorial day is just "a holiday"
> to you, as you seem to imply, then I may well not want to hear about
> it either. If it happened to be the top day of remembrance for the US
> then I may well be interested in knowing why.

Several points:

First, in the US, both Memorial Day and Veteran's Day (nee
Armistice Day)(AKA Remembrance Day elsewhere on  Earth)
have NO specific meaning in the US- i.e., the general association
is with a 3-day weekend as opposed to any actual meaning (for
many; I imagine for veterans and military service members the
experience is rather different).  This is from the POV of a rather
young man; I'm 26, and I can't say I remember being instructed
upon the origin of either event at any point during my schooling.
In fact, I had to look up the origin of Memorial Day: post Civil
War remembrance of the fallen, as opposed to one particular
event.

Second, I suspect the fact that the average American barely
has knowledge of any such events may have to do with our
fairly bloody history; I daresay Gallipoli was probably the
first time that many ANZAC soldiers died at one time.
Compare that with, say, the battle of Gettysburg during our
Civil War where 50000 died (all of whom were, by definition,
American), and you'll start to see why casualty numbers have
such a low impact in the headlines today.

Third, no real effort is made in the US today to educate the
public as to the "true" history of such events(whatever that is).
I doubt more
than a scant handful of Americans not actively learning about
the event in a history class could give a date to even so
infamous an event as the bombing of Pearl Harbor, let alone
more specific information such as approximate number
killed or significance to our overall involvement in the war.

All in all, Russell, you should know that the US has NO
such thing- as late, of course, a certain day in the early
autumn has acquired a level of reverence, but we'll see where
that is in 90 years.

Mike H.

2005\04\25@102912 by Mike Hord

picon face
> I was commenting on the religious content

Which I missed.

> However now I'm upset

!

> Just because it's respected in your country does that mean that no one
> else can object
> What if I were German, or any other nationality that suffered losses on
> the other side?
> What if I were Muslim?

Again, if you had read further than the briefest of scans into the material,
you'd have learned that the Turks who died fighting these men consider
them to be heroes as surely as though they were their own sons.  I find
that admirable and quite rare, and more worthy of comment than
perhaps any other aspect of this.

> ANZAC Day - April 25th
> DOES ANYONE THINK THE PICLIST IS THE PLACE FOR THIS?

Under [EE], [PIC], [BUY], [AD], [SX], [AVR], no.  Under [OT], quite.

The thing I appreciate more than anything else about the PICList is its
multinational nature.  I consider it my best link to the greater world
outside my "door", so to speak.

Consider this:  if at some point in the history of your nation, 10% of
its population was abroad, literally on the other side of globe, fighting
in a war which had NO direct involvement on your life (no one was
bombing your cities, torpedoing your cruise ships, etc.), and 10%
of those fighting (1% (!) of your nation) were killed in a single event,
would you want it forgotten a scant 90 years later?

For an American, consider it this way:  Imagine that one day, at
9 a.m., ever single WalMart in the nation simultaneously exploded,
killing all inside.  That's approximately the scale of percentile
population loss being discussed here.

That's where Russell is coming from.  I only wish my country had
that sense of history and gratitude.

Mike H.

2005\04\25@105916 by p.cousens

flavicon


{Quote hidden}

So without being threatened you attack another country and kill how many
people?


(no one was
{Quote hidden}

> --

2005\04\25@110131 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Just because it's respected in your country does that mean that no
> one
> else can object

No problems with people objecting.
I certainly didn't mean to upset you or anyone else over this.
The problem was that you misunderstood what I wrote - I could easily
have been clearer. I wrote it the way I did to interest people. If
you'd read through it you would probably have realised that it was not
about religion. If you had googled on any of the word combinations I
suggested you would have immediately found out what it was about. I
had thought that mention of Winston Churchill would provide a large
clue to many people.

> What if I were German, or any other nationality that suffered losses
> on
> the other side?

The GREAT thing about the ANZAC day commemorations is that the Turks
share the event with us. Thousands of people from NZ and Australia go
to Turkey each year to visit the site. They are welcomed as friends.
Out of a meeting as enemies has come an opportunity for greater
understanding.
Also, the German people and British people and NZers and Australians
and others together celebrate and remember the things that happened in
both world wars. The great thing there is that we have together
learned something from the experience.

> What if I were Muslim?

Many (not all by any means) of the Turks are Muslim. Some of those who
celebrate the memory with us *are* Muslim.  We celebrate this memory
together, as friends.

> ANZAC Day - April 25th
> DOES ANYONE THINK THE PICLIST IS THE PLACE FOR THIS?

Please be a little careful here. Remember that your original objection
was that (you thought) the post was about religion. It wasn't. I'm
sorry that I gave you that impression.That has now been cleared up.
The post was labelled OT and also fwiw WOT as an extra warning. OT
gets all sorts of interesting things on it (currently NZ Police
viewing porn, instructions on how to do drugs in blue light, and how
to make a fire using a chocolate bar and a coke can)(none of which, I
may add, I have commented on :-) ). I would hope that you would agree
that interesting information on a day of great national significance
to Australians, NZers, Turks (and also UKites, Canadians and more)
would rank above some of these other OT topics.

Several other people have already said that they are pleased to have
seen comment on this subject. So, yes. Some think this is an OK place
for it. The nature of OT here is that people can take or leave it as
they wish. As long as it's not offensive, as described in the FAQ, it
has a greater or lesser place.


       Russell McMahon

2005\04\25@134733 by Bradley Ferguson

picon face
On 4/25/05, Mike Hord <EraseMEmike.hordspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTgmail.com> wrote:
> For an American, consider it this way:  Imagine that one day, at
> 9 a.m., ever single WalMart in the nation simultaneously exploded,
> killing all inside.  That's approximately the scale of percentile
> population loss being discussed here.

I was going to make the comment that your analogy should use an event
that would be mourned, but then I thought it better to stay out of it.
;-)

> That's where Russell is coming from.  I only wish my country had
> that sense of history and gratitude.

I agree with this, though.  Memorial day for the vast majority of
Americans means a three day weekend where gas prices hit a record high
because everyone has to drive somewhere.  Miniature American flags
might come into the mix at some point.  There will probably be a run
on "magnetic ribbons" this year, too.

Bradley

2005\04\25@191147 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> So without being threatened you attack another country and kill how
> many
> people?


You need to read some history of WW1 before you start making
statements like that. No war is easily justified OR explained in every
aspect after the event and it is good to have some idea of what is/was
involved if you wish to make judgements about it. The aim was to save
innocent lives. War is not always very fair on the small scale and
often enough not on the large scale either :-(.

A VERY short VERY simplified summary which only gives you the vaguest
picture is that Germany was at war with much of the rest of Europe.
(Note that Germany is NOW a valued friend of most of the countries
that were at war with it then.) Germany invaded other countries and
the main fighting occurred in very bogged down conditions in trenches
in Belgium and France . Not in Germany. For reasons which seemed good
to them at the time (and which they probably latter greatly regretted)
Turkey sided with Germany. The "allied" forces sought to bypass the
bogged down trench warfare and open lines of supply to Russia at
Germany's rear. The Turks, quite reasonably in the circumstances,
blocked the obvious line of access. By siding with the Germans the
Turks identified with their aims and actions and promoted and
supported their activities.

The actions of the Germans were seen as a threat to the peace and
freedom for most of the people of Europe. They were, but the situation
was of course more complex than that. If you had been a Belgian or a
Frenchman at the time you would have had little trouble understanding
this perspective.

The countries of the British Empire made their farmers and accountants
and office workers and factory workers and fathers in general
available to serve as troops for employment by Britain as Britain saw
fit. It "just so happened" that a large proportion of the "ANZAC"
troops were sent to fight the Turks so that the British could bypass
the Germans so that the French and Belgian farmers could get their
countries back and get on with their lives.

A ***KEY*** thing to note is that all of the combatants are to a
greater or lesser extent on good terms or good friends now. It took
another major war after WW1 to get to this stage.

FWIW, Erwin Rommel in WW2 rated NZ soldiers as the top soldiers he
fought against. If you don't know who Erwin Rommel was I suggest you
either Google to find more about him or just ignore this piece of
information.




           Russell McMahon

2005\04\25@232038 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
> First, in the US, both Memorial Day and Veteran's Day (nee
> Armistice Day)(AKA Remembrance Day elsewhere on  Earth)
> have NO specific meaning in the US- i.e., the general association
> is with a 3-day weekend as opposed to any actual meaning (for
> many; I imagine for veterans and military service members the
> experience is rather different).  This is from the POV of a rather
> young man; I'm 26, and I can't say I remember being instructed
> upon the origin of either event at any point during my schooling.
> In fact, I had to look up the origin of Memorial Day: post Civil
> War remembrance of the fallen, as opposed to one particular
> event.

On December 7, a middle aged English teacher asked her class of American
teenagers what was the significance of the date.  I can only imagine now
what she must have felt when, after thirty seconds of silence, she finally
got a response from a recent immigrant - "Pearl Harbor attack".

Cherish your history.

Vitaliy

2005\04\26@032613 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
"there is nothing religious about ANZAC day"
simple enough for you?

nobody complained about the thanksgiving messages or 4th of july messages
that invariably get posted OT is the right place for it, and I for one
thaught russells post was quite well done, being informative and rational.
if you dont like it delete it.
if your going to respond to it read it first.

you'll offend fewer people that way.



> {Original Message removed}

2005\04\26@081011 by R. I. Nelson

picon face
part 0 44 bytes
his is a multi-part message in MIME format.
part 1 718 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed (decoded 7bit)


>I was commenting on the religious content
>
>However now I'm upset
>
>Just because it's respected in your country does that mean that no one
>else can object
>What if I were German, or any other nationality that suffered losses on
>the other side?
>
>What if I were Muslim?
>
>ANZAC Day - April 25th
>DOES ANYONE THINK THE PICLIST IS THE PLACE FOR THIS?
>  
>  PC
>
>
>  
>
I find it interesting reading. IMHO if it bothers you DO NOT READ IT.
I think thats one of the great uses of message filters.

BTW the us has Memorial Day and veterans day.  I think Memorial day is
more for all loved ones who have passed away.




part 2 391 bytes content-type:text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8;
(decoded 7bit)

begin:vcard
fn:Robert I. Nelson
n:Nelson;Robert I.
org:RIN Designs
adr:;;P.O. BOX 373;RIPON;WI;54971;USA
email;internet:rindesignsspamspam_OUTcharter.net
tel;work:1-(920)-229-7152
tel;home:1-(920)-748-7443
note;quoted-printable:Custom design and building of small electro mechanical devices.=0D=0A=
       AUTOCAD work ver2002
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard



part 3 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(decoded 7bit)

2005\04\26@223926 by Bob Ammerman

picon face
>
>> That's where Russell is coming from.  I only wish my country had
>> that sense of history and gratitude.
>
> I agree with this, though.  Memorial day for the vast majority of
> Americans means a three day weekend where gas prices hit a record high
> because everyone has to drive somewhere.  Miniature American flags
> might come into the mix at some point.  There will probably be a run
> on "magnetic ribbons" this year, too.
>
> Bradley

For this American, Memorial Day is much more than a three day weekend. We
take our children to the local parade every year (most years they are in it:
either as a Scout, or in a band). We proudly fly our flag (which actually
flies every good weather day at our house). On Memorial Day, we also often
visit gravesites of my father and my wife's father, both veterans (tho' they
did not die in service).

Bob Ammerman
RAm Systems


2005\04\27@005242 by p.cousens

flavicon
Rated top soldiers in? compassion, killing people, doing what they were
told by superiors (that's another question),
God fearing or what?

> FEW, Erwin Rommel in WW2 rated NZ soldiers as the top soldiers he
> fought against. If you don't know who Erwin Rommel was I suggest you
> either Google to find more about him or just ignore this piece of
> information.
>
>
>
>
>             Russell McMahon
>
> --

2005\04\27@012940 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
Top soldiers in terms of being soldiers and doing what soldiers do.

Stop desecrating the memory of the sacrifices made in the past,
if you want to get on your high horse about something pick something
where your actions have at least some hope of doing something other than
pissing off entire nations.

Would you rather Hitler be allowed to finish what he started?
I'm sure the French,Russians,English,Polish,Belgans,etc and
the "minority groups" may take issue with view.

@Russell : As I heard it was us Ausies he said that about ;->

> {Original Message removed}

2005\04\27@044917 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Rated top soldiers in?

*IF* you are actually reading and thinking about the answers that
people are giving to your questions then there may be some point to
all this. If you are just asking more without any real thoughtthen
it's a pretty pointless exercise. I don't know which is true - I hope
that it's the former.

Bear in mindf that you are dealing with matters that are of great
importance to some people here. You don't have to hold them to be
equally important, as long as you respect what others think and feel.

Re you rquestion. I'm not aware that Rommel gave the basis for his
opinion. But he gave us some clues. IF you are aware of Rommel and
hold him in high esteeem in all areas of soldierly activity, as many
people do, then you may place some value on his opinion. As soldiers
go he would have been one of the best. ALL soldiers have the potential
job of killing people at some stage or other. If you find that
unquestionably unnacceptable (and it's entirely understandable that
some people do) then nothing else will improve on that. I'm not
personally very comfortable with the idea of anyone killing anyone,
but I consider that sometimes people need to stand against a great
evil. Unfortunately, too often you get people on two sides opposing
each other and BOTH sides think they are standing against a great
evil. It's often hard to see the other sides viewpoint.

If you don't know Rommel then you may wish to acquaint yourself with
him a little IF you want to ask more questions about him or his
opinion.

> compassion, killing people, doing what they were
> told by superiors (that's another question),
> God fearing or what?

All these things in various measure.
NZ soldiers were by no means mummy's boys but were slightly less
unruly, and were slightly more organised than their antipodean cousins
the Ozzies but not as tied to authority as eg the English. I think
Rommel thought they got it about right. Rommel was brave beyond
measure and a man of honour and duty but also of compassion, common
sense and more. He was ultimatly killed by his own superiors for
opposing Hitler.



`    Russell McMahon

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...