• WW1 war memorial in Singapore the cenotaph gets vandalised
    84 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40421992]They knew what they were getting into. By enlisting, you are validating the generals and saying that you're fine with whatever they do. The soldiers are just as guilty as the generals of the crimes they commit.[/QUOTE] The Battalion Commander, the Brigadier General, the Joints Chiefs of Staff and the Supreme Commander does not have the responsibility of the Captain that committed the My Lai Massacre. You cannot just put the [b]entire chain of command[/b] responsible for a subordinate's misactions. That's like blaming grandparents for their grandson being a murderer or a druggy.
[QUOTE=ksenior;40416475]I don't even understand what it is. "Democracy" What's that have to do with it?[/QUOTE] Maybe they just learned that word in class that day
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40421201]So we should just blindly sign up to fight to the death? How do you think said dictators GOT their armies? Once again, look at Nazi Germany. Tons of kids signed up in the army so they could serve for their country against what they were told were enemies. Then, all the other countries do the exact same thing and a bunch of people get killed. The winning side of WW1 and WW2 are thought of as glorious and heroic (as shown by the outrage over this vandalism) while no one could give a flying fuck about the dead German and Japanese soldiers who were just following orders. Meanwhile, if no one had supported Hitler from the beginning and have been willing to die for him, the war wouldn't have happened in the first place[/QUOTE] Germans did not sign to support their desire to create a 1000-year Reich. Their homeland was being bombed on a day-to-day basis and they have enemies coming in on their borders. They were signing to actually [b]defend[/b] their homes. They may have joined at first because of what they thought they were doing was the best of intentions, German soldiers on the Eastern Front saw communism as the world's worst threat and they had harbored grudges against the French which roots go all the way back to the Napoleonic Era. The League of Nations tried to pacify the Germans after the First World War and they did it wrong, that was why in the next generation, Germans would believe what they are doing is trying to recover their 'greatness' that they had prior to the First World War. Don't just generalize an entire generation of Germans thinking that they were so blinded by ideals and ideology that they threw their lives away for some mad man, shit, a good number of the Wehrmacht didn't even have Hitler at the center of their hearts when it came to fighting.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;40422391]Germans did not sign to support their desire to create a 1000-year Reich. Their homeland was being bombed on a day-to-day basis and they have enemies coming in on their borders. They were signing to actually [b]defend[/b] their homes. They may have joined at first because of what they thought they were doing was the best of intentions, German soldiers on the Eastern Front saw communism as the world's worst threat and they had harbored grudges against the French which roots go all the way back to the Napoleonic Era. The League of Nations tried to pacify the Germans after the First World War and they did it wrong, that was why in the next generation, Germans would believe what they are doing is trying to recover their 'greatness' that they had prior to the First World War. Don't just generalize an entire generation of Germans thinking that they were so blinded by ideals and ideology that they threw their lives away for some mad man, shit, a good number of the Wehrmacht didn't even have Hitler at the center of their hearts when it came to fighting.[/QUOTE] Exactly, that's what I'm trying to say. It's funny how "defending my country" can turn into full on invasion of other countries real quick
[QUOTE=Sableye;40421219][B]its a memorial in singapore, in english, be thankful they even got the grammer right when they put it up...[/B] i think though this is kinda disrespectful, the vandles clearly did not know anything about WW1 history, the very reason why their country/citystate is free and self governing under a democratic republic is because of WW1[/QUOTE] Singapore's first language is English so something won't be right if they got the grammar wrong Also WW1? Shouldn't it be WW2?
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40421992]They knew what they were getting into. By enlisting, you are validating the generals and saying that you're fine with whatever they do. The soldiers are just as guilty as the generals of the crimes they commit.[/QUOTE] For some people going to the army was the only way to escape poverty.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;40422391]Germans did not sign to support their desire to create a 1000-year Reich. Their homeland was being bombed on a day-to-day basis and they have enemies coming in on their borders. They were signing to actually [b]defend[/b] their homes. They may have joined at first because of what they thought they were doing was the best of intentions, German soldiers on the Eastern Front saw communism as the world's worst threat and they had harbored grudges against the French which roots go all the way back to the Napoleonic Era. The League of Nations tried to pacify the Germans after the First World War and they did it wrong, that was why in the next generation, Germans would believe what they are doing is trying to recover their 'greatness' that they had prior to the First World War. [B] Don't just generalize an entire generation of Germans thinking that they were so blinded by ideals and ideology that they threw their lives away for some mad man, shit, a good number of the Wehrmacht didn't even have Hitler at the center of their hearts when it came to fighting.[/B][/QUOTE] That's what I was saying a few posts up, and then ericsson comes up and suddenly says that's that's what he was saying too..?
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;40422361]The Battalion Commander, the Brigadier General, the Joints Chiefs of Staff and the Supreme Commander does not have the responsibility of the Captain that committed the My Lai Massacre. You cannot just put the [b]entire chain of command[/b] responsible for a subordinate's misactions. That's like blaming grandparents for their grandson being a murderer or a druggy.[/QUOTE] You're misinterpreting me, I said that because people defend the troops since "it's the politicians and higher ups that send them to war", when it's the soldiers who actually carry out the acts. Maybe I should have said politicians Edit: automeeeerge
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40422500]Exactly, that's what I'm trying to say. It's funny how "defending my country" can turn into full on invasion of other countries real quick[/QUOTE] Yeah and that has been the modus operandi for civilizations throughout the entirety of Human history. You cannot deter aggressors by simply halting them at the gates of your town. You eliminate the source of the threat so that it would never occur again. Look at the Chinese and the Xiongnu nomads, New World Colonists and Natives, Greeks and Persians. All of those civilizations either just halted the invasions and did nothing beyond their borders or pushed beyond their borders and gave enemy chase.
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40422549]You're misinterpreting me, I said that because people defend the troops since "it's the politicians and higher ups that send them to war", when it's the soldiers who actually carry out the acts. Maybe I should have said politicians Edit: automeeeerge[/QUOTE] Just so you know, I'm not defending the soldiers that committed massacres in wars, like My Lai, or at Dachau.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;40422567]Yeah and that has been the modus operandi for civilizations throughout the entirety of Human history. You cannot deter aggressors by simply halting them at the gates of your town. You eliminate the source of the threat so that it would never occur again. Look at the Chinese and the Xiongnu nomads, New World Colonists and Natives, Greeks and Persians. All of those civilizations either just halted the invasions and did nothing beyond their borders or pushed beyond their borders and gave enemy chase.[/QUOTE] You realize you're defending genocide right? The New World Colonists butchered the natives, just as the Nazi war machine butchered millions of people (Jews specifically). You're trying to idealize them? You don't think that maybe we should look at what they did as barbaric and inhumane, and absolutely avoid committing such atrocities?
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40422655]You realize you're defending genocide right? The New World Colonists butchered the natives, just as the Nazi war machine butchered millions of people (Jews specifically). You're trying to idealize them? You don't think that maybe we should look at what they did as barbaric and inhumane, and absolutely avoid committing such atrocities?[/QUOTE] I never put in 'genocide' into 'invading other countries.' I don't really recall the US sending FEMA Concentration camps into Iraq.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;40422710]I never put in 'genocide' into 'invading other countries.' I don't really recall the US sending FEMA Concentration camps into Iraq.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]You cannot deter aggressors by simply halting them at the gates of your town. You eliminate the source of the threat so that it would never occur again. [/QUOTE] Eliminate the source IE slaughter absolutely everyone so they can't fight back. And you're saying it's just a coincidence that the examples you listed the are textbook examples of genocide? Also Guantanamo Bay
[QUOTE=Ericson666;40422777]Eliminate the source IE slaughter absolutely everyone so they can't fight back. And you're saying it's just a coincidence that the examples you listed the are textbook examples of genocide?[/QUOTE] You eliminate their military capability and change their leadership. The US smashes the Iraq Army that was once a powerhouse of the Middle East and Saddam & Sons are no longer a threat to any Kurd or Mid-Eastern neighbor. The Allies invade Germany, smashed their military, decimated their industrial capacity and destroyed their leadership and they pacified them so that they are now a leading European power. Japan's military gets smashed, their leadership becomes changed and the US re-aimed their industrial capabilities to something more practical. Now Japan is a leading technological nation. You destroy their military capabilities and leadership, Alexander the Great won 'hearts and minds' by spreading propaganda throughout Persian territory, his army of 50,000 hoplites didn't systematically stab any Persian subject that they saw. He expose the poor leadership of the Persians and decimated their armies which allowed him to take over the Persian Empire. The Persians once got their Empire up by invading others and established Satraps or governors to overlook the new territories and established a somewhat lenient rule over their new subjects. Genocide and systematic killing is another alternative but some past civilizations which included the Greeks, Persians and all the way up the US has gotten it right. Countries invading countries does not always end up with concentration summer camps for locals. Germany fucked up because they started pissing off their conquered populations. The League of Nations fucked up because they beat the defeated to the curb, the Qin Empire fucked up because they didn't bother going beyond the Great Wall.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;40422567]Yeah and that has been the modus operandi for civilizations throughout the entirety of Human history. [B]You cannot deter aggressors by simply halting them at the gates of your town. You eliminate the source of the threat so that it would never occur again.[/B] [B]Look at the[/B] Chinese and the Xiongnu nomads, [B]New World Colonists and Natives[/B], Greeks and Persians. [B]All of those civilizations either just halted the invasions and did nothing beyond their borders or pushed beyond their borders and gave enemy chase[/B].[/QUOTE] Care to elaborate on this part pls?
[I]This book is to be neither an accusation nor a confession, and least of all an adventure, for death is not an adventure to those who stand face to face with it. It will try simply to tell of a generation of men who, even though they may have escaped its shells, were destroyed by the war[/I] - Erich Maria Remarque. All Quiet on the Western Front.
Look how deep and edgy these teenage pricks are!~
[QUOTE=pvt.jenkins;40421366]I'm not going to try and justify any other wars, but lets talk about the war the memorial was actually for, World War 1 & 2, Now yes these conflict could've been completely avoided if no German, Japanese (actually a lot of Japanese got drafted, Germans too I think.) etc. people signed up, but things didn't go that way, and these Singaporeans signed up to defend there country, especially during WW2 when japan was at there "front door" (actually japan occupied singapore for quite some time) and this memorial albeit worded a bit oddly is just to commemorate those who died, I don't see anything wrong with that. Also if I remember correctly singapore didn't play a large role in WW1, they did in WW2 however.[/QUOTE] The Wehrmacht was comprised mostly of draftees. The SS on the other hand, was pretty much all sign ups. [editline]26th April 2013[/editline] Also, WWII was unavoidable. Even if Hitler had never come into power, Italy would invade Austria, Yugoslavia would go after some territories nearby, and France would try to absorb a destroyed Germany, likely conflicting with the growing Soviet Union.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;40436591]The Wehrmacht was comprised mostly of draftees. The SS on the other hand, was pretty much all sign ups. [editline]26th April 2013[/editline] Also, WWII was unavoidable. Even if Hitler had never come into power, Italy would invade Austria, Yugoslavia would go after some territories nearby, and France would try to absorb a destroyed Germany, likely conflicting with the growing Soviet Union.[/QUOTE] The SS (I assume you meant the Waffen-SS?) didn't integrate to military until like at a later stage (still they were never really officially part of the German Army). Most of them likely didn't join the SS to fight the War. Correct me if I am wrong.
I always know why these kinds of things are to be found disrespectful - except when I break it down it doesn't really make sense. Someone sprayed some red characters and lines onto a rock that through some convention represents and honors the dead on 1914-1918. It's just paint. It'll come off. The memorial still represents the same thing whether or not there's paint on it or not. Although I'm not a robot and fully understand why, unfortunately it's unlikely they'll be caught as vandalism is one of the harder crimes to hold someone accountable for.
read this singapore blog and understand why the "vandal" did this [url]http://thehearttruths.com/2013/04/26/vandalism-of-cenotaph-for-democracy/[/url]
[QUOTE=Swamplord;40422515]Singapore's first language is English so something won't be right if they got the grammar wrong Also WW1? Shouldn't it be WW2?[/QUOTE] It's both WW1 and WW2 memorial. The WW2 memorial part is right behind. It was added after the WW2 ended and the japanese left
Culprit got caught: [quote] Police on Saturday arrested a 32 year-old Singaporean in connection with the vandalism of the Cenotaph war memorial at the Esplanade Park. [/quote] [url]http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/cenotaph-vandal-nabbed-central-police-division-officers-20130427[/url]
[QUOTE=BCell;40443787]It's both WW1 and WW2 memorial. The WW2 memorial part is right behind. It was added after the WW2 ended and the japanese left[/QUOTE] I was replying to Sableye where he said "the very reason why their country/citystate is free and self governing under a democratic republic is because of [B]WW1[/B]".
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.