Remembering the Veterans of "The War to End All Wars"

Last year around this time, I posted an entry called Remembering the WWI Vets Who Are Still Alive, which focused on an article, The Race to Remember, which brought attention to the few surviving British veterans of the First World War. Yesterday, while listening to NPR (Yes, them again!) I happened to hear a story about the fourteen surviving American veterans of the so-called "War to End All Wars" which I found to be quite fascinating. For the past couple of years, The WWI Living History Project has been making an effort to interview all of the surviving American veterans of World War One—including two who actually served in the infamous trenches. You can listen to NPR's program about Recording the Living History of WWI Veterans by clicking here—and the entire two hour program is scheduled to air today on selected radio stations.

I admit that I was a little surprised that so many veterans of World War I were still alive, since if they were born in 1900—which would have made them seventeen when America entered the war—they'd be at least 106 years old today. As it turns out, the youngest of these men is only 105 years old, since he lied about his age in order to join the U.S. Army at sixteen. What I really find staggering is trying to fathom the amount of change these men witnessed during their relatively long lives—lives which have spanned the most technically dynamic era in human history. Consider that these men were born just prior to the invention of the airplane and lived to see not only the advent of nuclear weapons and the Internet, but man going to the moon. Amazing!

In spite of all this technological change, I think the societal changes that these former soldiers and sailors witnessed probably were more challenging, disturbing and unexpected. Consider that these young men were born during the final years of the rather overly optimistic, idealistic and innocent Victorian Era, but now they're sharing our post-Cold War planet with Generation X and the so-called New Silent Generation. Not only that, but they managed to survive one of the most bloody and ghastly wars in human history—a war in which over eight million human beings lost their lives.

Since the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month is now upon us, I wanted to take this opportunity to draw attention to the sacrifice and suffering of veterans of the now almost forgotten Great War of 1914-1918. In the United States, this public holiday is called Veterans Day, although prior to the end of the Second World War it was simply known as Armistice Day—in commemoration of the end of the First World War. It's known as Remembrance Day in the United Kingdom, Canada and other Commonwealth countries, all of who made great sacrifices in human lives during this conflict. Names like the Somme, Verdun, Vimy Ridge and Gallipoli were well-known to all British, French, Canadian and Australian youths of previous generations—although I doubt many of today's young people (especially the Americans!) would recognize any of these names. So to assist any of our readers who might not be too familiar with these great slaughter grounds of The Great War, I'm filling this post full of links so that you can take the time to educate yourself. I couldn't think of a more appropriate thing to do on this day in which, 88 years ago, the so-called "War to End All Wars" came to an end.

Please note that at least one Canadian Muslim took the time to remember the veterans today, since Abdiel has a nice posting called A Remembrance Day Prayer—in which he mentions the uncle he lost in World War Two. No posting about Canadians who served in the Second World War would be complete without taking the opportunity to mention the sacrifices made during the debacle at Dieppe or on the beaches at Normandy (and watch Saving Private Ryan if you want a small taste of what went on there), in which Canadian troops played a significant role. I'll also take the opportunity to mention that my great uncle (i.e. my maternal grandmother's brother) was killed during World War Two as well. Although I have quite a few older relatives who served during this war, he was the only one that was killed—while leading a counterattack against advancing Wehrmacht forces during the initial stages of the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944. I clearly recall learning about him when I was a young boy and always remember missing not having him around to be the great uncle that I'm sure he would have been—since not only was he into working out, captain of his college boxing team (at the same all-male, at least back when we attended, military college that I graduated from), but a genuine war hero as well.

I also want to point out the fact that Muslims were quite involved in this great conflict, not only because the Ottoman Empire fought on the side of the Central Powers, but many troops from then colonized Muslim countries served with great distinction in the armies of Britain and France as well. In one of many books I read about the First World War while a young military officer, I recall learning about how the Germans really feared the French Colonial troops from Senegal and other West African countries...so let's not forget their sacrifice. If you're interested in learning more about the unbelievable ferocity of the war in the trenches, I have an Amazon Listmania! list called Great Books on The Great War which includes the best books that I know of on the subject. Ever since reading The Price of Glory: Verdun 1916 about twenty years ago, with the mind-boggling number of casualties that it presents, and seeing some before and after photographs depicting the horrific impact that artillery fire had on the area around the village of Paschendale, I've been fascinated by the First World War.

On a more contemporary note, even though I'm a former officer in the U.S. Marine Corps, I have to say that I disagree with some of the remarks President Bush made yesterday at the dedication of the National Museum of the Marine Corps. During his speech, he said: "And years from now, when America looks out on a democratic Middle East growing in freedom and prosperity, Americans will speak of the battles like Fallujah with the same awe and reverence that we now give to Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima." Without really addressing the fact that if the Middle East ever ends up being "democratic" and enjoying "freedom and prosperity" it'll be in spite of George W. Bush, not because of him—I will say that I don't accept the parallels he drew between the battles of Fallujah [1, 2] and the battles of Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima. I sincerely hope that in years to come, when the smoke of battle, fog of propaganda and haze of disinformation has cleared, Americans will be able to clearly see what distinguishes these battles. Suffice it to say that Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima were fought during a war that was not only both legally and morally justified, but took place between the armed combatants of two standing armies. This is in clear contradistinction to the attack on Fallujah, which was the domestic residence of thousands of Iraqis whose homeland had been illegally invaded based upon trumped-up charges. This offensive action, which was characterized by the overwhelming use of U.S. firepower, was dishonestly portrayed not only as a battle against "terrorists", in spite of the fact that attacking the military forces of an invading army isn't considered "terrorism" by any recognized definition of the word, but was also widely considered within the U.S. military as an (unofficial) act of revenge for the (un-Islamic) killing and mutilation of four American private military contractors (i.e. well-armed mercenaries). So instead of going into Fallujah with a justified rallying cry that was akin to the "Remember Pearl Harbor!", of World War Two, many U.S. Marines entered the fray will propaganda-filled heads that were convinced that not only were Iraqis somehow involved in the 9/11 attacks, but laboring under an outlook in which Iraqi civilians had been dehumanized and anyone carrying a weapon was deemed a "terrorist". This is why such things as the cold-blooded execution of a wounded Iraqi insurgent were brushed-off and even justified by many Americans, both civilian and military (and we only know about it because it was caught on videotape by an NBC reporter—otherwise, more than likely, it would have never come to the public's attention).

Indeed, without this state-of-mind, which was reinforced, if not encouraged, by the generally hateful and dehumanizing rhetoric found not only in the mainstream media at that time, but which was issuing forth from key members of the Bush Administration as well, I think such incidents would have drastically reduced. Indeed, without such a twisted and self-righteous moral environment, how could a military investigation determine "that the Marine was acting in self-defense" when he shot a wounded man who had taken refuge in a mosque? I'll take this opportunity to request that all of the hypocrites out there ask themselves how they would have reacted had the situation been reversed? Had an enemy soldier done such a thing to an American soldier, especially one wo had taken refuge in a church, at no time in our history would most Americans accept it as "acting in self-defense." Which just goes to show you that it's not only some Muslim extremists out there that are not only ethically and morally confused—since this obviously goes up to the highest levels of the U.S. government—but plenty of Americans are wallowing deep in a sewer of double-standards as well.

All of this brings to mind what was for me one of the most memorable images of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This occurred when a reporter briefly spoke with a young U.S. Marine—who was decked out in his kevlar helmet and expensive flak jacket—who exclaimed, regarding the trapped "terrorists" his unit was then engaged with: "I wish they'd come out and fight like men!" Well, I thought, if you'd ask the two M1A1 tanks, which were busily blasting away at the building, to withdraw along with the attack helicopters and F/A-18 fighters that were also pounding the place, maybe the Iraqis would come out and "fight like men." I also couldn't help but thinking that such misguided and delusional sentiments were probably shared by the British redcoats back in 1775, when they were engaged in fighting American "rebels" who practiced the then-considered-cowardly tactics of hit-and-run attacks and shooting from behind walls and trees. Ironically enough, one of the first things British troops reported from the battles of Lexington and Concord, was that American colonial militiamen had a knack for mutilating the bodies of dead British soldiers. I'm sure that'll be a tough pill for many bigoted pro-Bush Americans to swallow...but I hope they manage to force down this piece of the painful truth (which I'll summarize as: Human beings are human beings, so please treat all of their lives—regardless of race, creed, nationality or religion—with equal sanctity).

On that note, I'll remind my readers that "terrorism" is generally understood to be "violence committed against civilians," thus the U.S. forces that forcibly entered Fallujah are much more deserving of that ominous label than any of the civilians, both combatant and non-combatants, who were in the city—regardless of the grotesque crimes that a few of them may have been guilty of. Thus I'll call on President George W. Bush to refrain from comparing the attack on Fallujah with any battle in which U.S. soldiers fought honorably and tenaciously against the well-trained and determined soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army. Those who are too lazy or uninterested to read about this in book form, can head to theatres to watch the film Flags of Our Fathers, which was recently released, or pick up a copy of the already mentioned Saving Private Ryan. However, for the bibliophiles out there, I'd recommend Guadalcanal: Starvation Island and Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account of the Landmark Battle (which includes Japanese accounts), if you want to read about a battle in which isolated and outnumbered U.S. Marines handily defeated a numerically superior enemy force in fighting that involved plenty of hand-to-hand combat in harsh jungle conditions.

On a final note, since the title of this post almost forces one to think about it, I'll recommend A Peace to End All Peace to all those who want to learn more about the lasting impact that the First World War had on the contemporary Middle East...so please read it.

Semper Fi and Deen On...