Remembering lambs to the slaughter

Today is Remembrance Sunday. The day on which we stop for 2 minutes to remember the millions who were slaughtered in the First World War.

But I'm in two minds over the whole thing. Those with ancestors who died in the Great War may wish to stop reading. And I should add, what follows is my opinion, as someone who was born in the late 1970s when even the Second World War was starting to fade from people's memories.

I suppose that attitudes 100 years ago were different, and when "your country" called upon you to fight, you did exactly that. It may be that history views the world with rose-tinted glasses, but perhaps people actually looked up to politicians and their elected leaders back then. Certainly if that kind of thing were to happen now, there wouldn't be a particularly favourable response.

Essentially though, what the Government said to the people of Britain in 1914 was "volunteer for the Army so you can go to Europe and kill people". I'm sorry, but where's the heroics in shooting at people because you don't believe in what their Government stands for? Remember, the Germans in the trenches on the other side weren't the enemy. Essentially, the leaders of two countries had a falling-out, and their response was to send millions of their men (and it was just men in those days) to die in vain.

What made it worse was that when volunteers were in short supply, young men were forcibly conscripted into their country's army. They didn't have a say in the matter. I've heard stories that "army recruiters" would turn up on your doorstep, and any able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 30 would be marched off at gunpoint.

That may be legend, or there may be some truth in it. Nowadays we call that "kidnapping". And "hostage taking". 100 years ago, it was being carried out by agents of those who the population had elected.

So why the hell are we still celebrating it?

I actually quite like the "white poppy" idea that's been talked about recently. This page has some more information. But the whole thing has become bogged down in politics.

So, lest we forget, 100 years ago (in 1914), this country sent millions of its citizens to meet their maker. And then, having not learned from history, it did the same thing again 75 years ago (in 1939). A century later Britain still has the blood of millions on its hands.

As you, dear readers, may have guessed by now, I'm somewhat of a pacifist. On a personal level, I believe the use of force is acceptable to defend yourself, your home, your property and your family. And when I say "force" I mean no more force than is reasonable. Knocking someone to the ground when they've tried to eg rob you at a cashpoint is reasonable. It gives you time to get away from the situation. Kicking them repeatedly in the face once they're on the floor is not reasonable, because at this point that person is no longer a threat to you.

If someone breaks into your house, you are entitled to protect yourself and your family. What would I do in such a situation? Probably bash them over the head, then make sure they couldn't get away until the police arrived.

And if someone invades your country? There's a topic for discussion. Maybe that's when to start using force against an intruder?

But getting back to the original point, effectively murdering millions of your own people by sending them on a suicide mission, often against their will? It's not on.

Controversy over. Normal service will resume in the next post.