A thoughful and intellegent individual who, like me shares a deep love for history. Have you read this? Good book.Sylvester wrote:Egads John, what do you take me for?
-John
Wow, that whole thing is online? I never personally liked cavalry, I was in the Union army (The Army of the Potomac, not many can say that) for the 125th reenactment of Gettysburg back in 1988, they had a huge cavalry battle there too. Maybe I should read this book and see if Custer really did screw up on day three.LiveonJG wrote:A thoughful and intellegent individual who, like me shares a deep love for history. Have you read this? Good book.Sylvester wrote:Egads John, what do you take me for?
-John
I would have to say no, it doesn't glorify it, but there are those that do. The study of it in a military sense, say by the Army, tries to learn from the past and try not to repeat it. From an amateur historian point of view, I suppose it does glorify all the death and carnage. From my point of view, and just mine, my mindset is from a war like view, if that makes sense. A car wreck, that is a good comparison. I don't know why I like reading about it, but it is right up there with my interest in shipwrecks too. And I am not a violent person either.hambone wrote:Maybe I'm askin for it, but doesn't military history glorify the extreme loss of life by studying tactics and hardware in place of all the horror?
I'll betcha those dudes gettin a lead slug thru their skull weren't thinkin much about strategy. Or those that survived but with lifelong mental problems....
Fill me in, both of you seem like peaceful folks. I'm sure I'm missing some finer nuance. It is interesting to learn about the places and cultures of eras long past. I used to live in Virginia and was fascinated by the Civil War. But it's kind of a grim fascination, like a car wreck.
War screws people up.
Well stated Sly. Carwreck, that works. It is horrifying and fascinating. As a species we are at our very worst during a war. Yet, that need to survive brings about a massive influx of new technology and innovation. Some are deadly, those things designed to slaughter us more efficiently, but some things are beautiful and enrich our lives.Sylvester wrote:I would have to say no, it doesn't glorify it, but there are those that do. The study of it in a military sense, say by the Army, tries to learn from the past and try not to repeat it. From an amateur historian point of view, I suppose it does glorify all the death and carnage. From my point of view, and just mine, my mindset is from a war like view, if that makes sense. A car wreck, that is a good comparison. I don't know why I like reading about it, but it is right up there with my interest in shipwrecks too. And I am not a violent person either.hambone wrote:Maybe I'm askin for it, but doesn't military history glorify the extreme loss of life by studying tactics and hardware in place of all the horror?
I'll betcha those dudes gettin a lead slug thru their skull weren't thinkin much about strategy. Or those that survived but with lifelong mental problems....
Fill me in, both of you seem like peaceful folks. I'm sure I'm missing some finer nuance. It is interesting to learn about the places and cultures of eras long past. I used to live in Virginia and was fascinated by the Civil War. But it's kind of a grim fascination, like a car wreck.
War screws people up.
Prurient: an unwholesome interest. I recall years ago I went to school with a creep that was into the holocaust in a sick sort of way. It was said his interest was prurient. Jeez I got it from an english teacher. American applies it to only an unhealthy interest in sex but Webster's allows for an unwholesome interest: especially sex. I'm not saying that everyone that studies war is a sicko but I suspect in some there is a degree of perversity.zblair wrote:Hey Russ, I just looked up the word prurient; I'm not sure that word fits there *scratches head* What did you mean to say? Prudent?
Maybe to some an unhealthy hobby. A younger individual fascinated by the Holocaust, to me is like people I knew that studied and collected things like the SS crap, simply because they liked it. I personally am not fascinated by say what is a better killing device in Civil War artillery for soldiers, grape shot or canister? However, I am not sure how I would categorize myself, or John either. If I were a pacifist, I may be inclined to say we glorified war, killing, butchering, destroying, etc simply by reading a lot about it. The reason I went into the Air Force and not the Army was I figured I could use my mind more productively and receive better training there than just pulling a trigger or a lanyard. I know there are more jobs in the Army than that, but that is primarily what you are expected to be. Broken down, in my case I like the military and the lifestyle it provided. War, when experienced by those on the direct receiving end, is not a solution to anything.RussellK wrote:I'm not saying that everyone that studies war is a sicko but I suspect in some there is a degree of perversity.