Some really warped opinions!

Those people were celebrating the end of those respective wars, that no more allied soldiers would be killed and they would be returning home soon... NOT that Hitler had killed himself.

I'm disgusted that you would attempt to compare the two, especially for a self-professed expert on history such as yourself.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:Those people were celebrating the end of those respective wars, that no more allied soldiers would be killed and they would be returning home soon... NOT that Hitler had killed himself.

I'm disgusted that you would attempt to compare the two, especially for a self-professed expert on history such as yourself.

Look, I'm not trying to pick a fight or be belligerent, but those people celebrating VE and VJ days were not just celebrating that no more allied soldiers would be killed and would be returning home. That's just not true. Do you think they'd hold those celebrations if the war ended with Germany as the victor? Did Germany hold ticker tape parades in their streets because the end of the war meant no more of their children would be sacrificed to Hitler's war machine? Did Japan have ticker tape parades? I don't think so. Rather, the VE and VJ day celebrations were celebrations of victory over an enemy - just as the celebration on the news of Osama's death was a celebration of victory over an enemy.

I think you are seriously over estimating just how far mankind has come when it comes basic human nature.

You can be disgusted with me all you like, but it doesn't change a thing in the real world. The truth is that people have celebrated death for eons. Hell, what were the people cheering on the gladiators doing? Cheering life? And we still, as a species, celebrate violence - what is boxing, or UFC fighting, or modern wrestling or bullfighting or any of the other violent and sometimes deadly sports that mankind participates in?

One doesn't need an extensive knowledge of history to conclude that I am right here. Osama was the enemy that finally kicked off this war against "terrorism" and he has been an objective of that war ever since 9/11. Some people saw Osama's death as a huge victory in the ongoing war and celebrated that victory - which was the death of an individual, a central figure in that war - and they celebrated that victory in a way that you or I might find distasteful. But that celebration was NOT anything new, or unprecedented or even unexpected (if one lives in the real world) - it was a display of the baser side of human nature.

That was never your point; you said that you believed people were celebrating Hitler's suicide. There is a world of difference between celebrating in relief and these orgasmic expressions of jingoism.

In many historical societies, there has been a code of conduct to act in war. That often included graciousness in victory and humanity toward your enemies, rules of engagement and humility. It is something I feel we have lost when we delight in slaughter, when we do not exercise restraint and act like barbarians. If we are going to take the moral high ground, ought we really to start showing it?

I don't have to be a pacifist to find jingoism distasteful.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:That was never your point; you said that you believed people were celebrating Hitler's suicide. There is a world of difference between celebrating in relief and these orgasmic expressions of jingoism.

I should know what my point was, I did write it. And I did not say that. What I said was:

Sure... not a single soul cheered when it was learned that Hitler was dead... we didn't have massive ticker-tape parades through the streets after wins in WWI and WWII.

These are two separate statements. One the statement that's italicized I would give you 10/1 odds that there were people on the scene who cheered Hitler's death. One the one that's underlined, you can clearly see that I did not say the ticker tape parades were about the death of Hitler, but about our WINS in WWI and WWII.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:In many historical societies, there has been a code of conduct to act in war. That often included graciousness in victory and humanity toward your enemies, rules of engagement and humility. It is something I feel we have lost when we delight in slaughter, when we do not exercise restraint and act like barbarians. If we are going to take the moral high ground, ought we really to start showing it?

You are quite right. In some cases officers were allowed to surrender and even retain their swords. Some captured enemies were even allowed to return home on a promise that they would provide a ransom on their return. There was quite a bit of graciousness in victory in the past. But if you think about it, this was between the actual combatants themselves - the people who put themselves on the battlefield in harms way, and it was usually the act of officers on the field of battle. And I would submit that our military still adhere to laws of war and are as gracious as they can be given the extremely brutal and barbaric nature of the enemy we fight today. And certainly in WWII we saw many examples of prisoners on both sides being treated in humane and even gracious ways - particularly amongst officers.

But all of this is amongst those on the field of battle, and not necessarily in the population at large.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:I don't have to be a pacifist to find jingoism distasteful.

I never said, or even implied, that one need be a pacifist to find jingoism distasteful. In fact, I didn't even address the subject of jingoism.