Go to WHO IS THIS GUY CALLED ARIEL?
- Add a comment
- Go to SOME MORE OF ARIEL'S STUFF. BECAUSE I THINK IT'S TIMELY TO REWORK IT
But face it we will!
posted by
Whacky
on May 5, 2006 at 8:00 PM
| link to this | reply
Ariel70
I don't suggest for a moment that the peril was not real, only that one's perspective of it is affected by proximity or perceived proximity. For example I have met people who live in very, calm and remote parts of the world who are terrified about terrorists on their doorstep and yet I have met people in cities who recognize some dangers but do not live in terror. In 1941, the deployment of manpower played a much bigger part than now for all the countries and so it was felt and experienced on a very human scale and personally touched so many people. These days, for many it is like watching something remote. But as the casualties increase it becomes more real.
See isn't it good when a post sparks conversation? Being one of the more lightweight contributors here my contribution has not sparked debate today. Mine today was about the choices we make and making your way in the world when you entering the midlife phase
posted by
Azur
on May 5, 2006 at 3:39 PM
| link to this | reply
Ariel70,
This is very interesting and no, not too long, because as Azur commented, a long post that keeps my attention is not that long. I learned a lot here about the salient battles of WWII, which some consider the last necessary and just war. As you say, it was not territorial bullying and imperialist aggression on the part of the Allies, but a "cassus belli" (a new term I'll remember, thank you), a just and necessary war, which was very nearly lost for lack of will to recognize what really lay at stake: freedom from real tyrrany.
I am not sure that the threat now is not as serious, though, merely different, more nebulous and difficult to grasp as the enemy works in shadows and waits to strike again.
posted by
Blanche.
on May 5, 2006 at 3:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Azur
Thank you for your interesting comment.
The peril that the world was in in 1941 was not merely a matter of perception, but was horribly real a; far more real that those that we face today. It did not need the rudimentary media of those days to drive the message home that the democracies faced evil forces implacably dedicated to their destruction forever.
Had they won, the Axis powers would hold the world in an iron grip today. Sounds like hyperbole, I know, but it's true. We would still be living in a Dark Age.
Thanks for you correction of Philipines ; it kept coming up as a misspelling, and I was too tired/lazy to go and check
posted by
ariel70
on May 5, 2006 at 3:03 PM
| link to this | reply
As with anything I think much depends on one's proximity to events
I read your long post. I don't mind long posts - we only need to be mindful to make it worthwhile for the reader as it is an investment of their time.
I wonder how it would have been in 1941 had there been the same means of communication as now. I think the ways that and the speed that information comes out these a days affects how they are played out.
I don't know if things are as bad or worse than in 1941. It is probably an impossible comparison to make because wars (and peace) are waged differently. In some respects it is less clear cut.
It was an interesting post because is always interesting to think about these things. People's fears and ambitions seem to remain constant - no less or more at any time
I am sorry for the loss of your brother.
P.S. BTW, it is Philippines. I had to drum this in to myself when working on news.
posted by
Azur
on May 5, 2006 at 2:55 PM
| link to this | reply
That was very well written. In our time, annihilation would be super quick with nuclear power.
(B)
posted by
A-and-B
on May 5, 2006 at 2:26 PM
| link to this | reply