A woman thought to be the world's last known surviving service member of World War I has died aged 110.Florence Green, from King's Lynn, Norfolk, served as a mess steward at RAF bases in Marham and Narborough.
And with that the book closes.
Chat Forum
Last 1st world war service member dies
-
Posted 3 months ago #
-
At the going down of the sun....
Posted 3 months ago # -
went on a school trip to france/belgium to do with the first world war and went to the ypres town gate where they play the last post every evening brings a lump to my thoat and a tear to my eye just thinking about it(over 20years ago)
Posted 3 months ago # -
Reading a book about the Mnt Everest expedition at the moment; the opening chapters are all about the trench warfare. Makes for very sober reading (understatement).
Posted 3 months ago # -
This news saddens me, but also brings a smile to my face, wierd i know. 'The last fighting tommy' by Harry Patch is still one of my favourite books. It's such a shame that we will never learn from our past mistakes.
Posted 3 months ago # -
It's such a shame that we will never learn from our past mistakes.
Although by WW2 we'd leaned to RUN at German machine gun posts not walk.
Posted 3 months ago # -
It's such a shame that we will never learn from our past mistakes.
People like to say this but I don't think it's true. We're not fighting in trenches anymore are we?
Posted 3 months ago # -
Yup! My great grandad went over the top at many battles including the 'most famous' - the Battle of the Somme - and was gassed twice yet survived and went on to live to 90 years old. And he volunteered! Thanks Frank! Crazy bastards!
Posted 3 months ago # -
It's such a shame that we will never learn from our past mistakes.
People like to say this but I don't think it's true. We're not fighting in trenches anymore are we?
I think he may be refering to the fact that 'only the dead have seen the last of war'
Posted 3 months ago # -
And with that the book closes.
Nah....heroes like that live forever.
Posted 3 months ago # -
I went to the cenotaph when the last 3 Brits went, strange place I did not feel much emotion; unlike when you see the memorials in France. RIP Mrs Green.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Makes me feel old. As kids we all knew someone from the great war.
I remember my gran telling me how they could hear the guns in France and she lived 50 miles from the coast.Posted 3 months ago # -
Sorry to hijack this post...and it may appear disrespectful.
But seriously this persons death saddens me in more ways than just the final breaths of her life.
I watched a documentary the other night...as did several others on here.
It featured young healthy men fighting a war on distant soil....dying on foreign soil...for what?
What happened to vicey at the end of the Royal Marines programme has really affected me.....so bloody sad that we just don't seem to learn - do we?
Posted 3 months ago # -
The last of so very many--RIP all of you.
The WWII vets are also passing ever so quickly now---within most of our lifetimes, the last of those will depart as well.Posted 3 months ago # -
It featured young healthy men fighting a war on distant soil....dying on foreign soil...for what?
So not much different to the situation almost a hundred years ago then.
I've yet to fathom what WW1 was about, although to be fair I don't think I've ever met anyone who claimed to know. "Lots of reasons" appears to be the general consensus, with nationalism, militarism, and alliances, usually given as examples, although no specific reason is ever offered. Which all seems very vague for what was one of the most horrific wars in history. The only conclusion I can come to is that governments were determined to go to war with the flimsiest excuse in the hope that it would bring them glory and a chunk of someone else's country.
Anyway RIP Florence Green, I hope the sacrifices your generation were forced to make won't be easily forgotten.
Posted 3 months ago # -
The only conclusion I can come to is that governments were determined to go to war with the flimsiest excuse in the hope that it would bring them glory and a chunk of someone else's country.
I know what you mean. I have read a couple of extensive histories of WWI and the reasons/rationale about the causes do seem rather vague, at best. To be sure, it must have been horrific.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Florence Green, from King's Lynn, Norfolk, served as a mess steward at RAF bases in Marham and Narborough.
Didnt exactly charge towards death with bayonet fixed
Posted 3 months ago # -
Nor did the generals cheekyboy.
Posted 3 months ago # -
You should be very proud of that retort ernie!
Spot on !
Spot on !
Posted 3 months ago # -
Let's not forget. RIP.
Been chatting to our kids about it a bit this week - been doing WW2 in school, and we got onto WW1.Posted 3 months ago # -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrQnnZJ68Xo
Lyrics are very moving...
Posted 3 months ago # -
Whilst I agree that we still go to war on flimsy reasons, lets not at least recognise that the number of deaths has dropped. The French lost 1.4 MILLION men in 4 years of WW1 (twice that of the British, eleven times that of the Americans), more than all but the Germans and Russians. Imagine 2 in every 3 men you know, putting on a uniform and walking off to war. Then imagine that 1 of those 2 comes home wounded and a further 1 in 6 doesn't come home at all. Big stats on a smaller level are always easier for me to grasp, not sure if that's the same for anyone else.
Overall that war cost 5500 men in uniform day their lives every single day.
So yes, it would be great if we'd learned how to avoid killing each other but at least we've moved past the meat grinder that war was 100 years ago.
Posted 3 months ago # -
.....at least we've moved past the meat grinder that war was 100 years ago.
Well it's certainly true that we've learnt the lesson not to go to war with our equals, which means that high casualty figures are now solely sustained by our enemies, so yes, there's some improvement there.
But there isn't a huge difference between a young British soldier dying in some far flung corner of the Empire a hundred years ago and a young British soldier dying in Afghanistan today.
Other than we had much clearer reasons and aims a hundred years ago. Why we are in Afghanistan today all seems very vague, with different people having different ideas. Apparently it is now imperative that we talk to our enemies in Afghanistan to see if we can come to some sort of arrangement with them - we're told that some of them aren't that bad after all. Maybe we should have thought about talking before going to war.
Yup, the more it changes the more it stays the same...... we still have pointless wars which no one is quite sure are about.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Did we have much clearer reasons and aims 100 years ago? I don't think so.....
A war such as Afghanistan will always have to have a negotiated solution.
Posted 3 months ago # -
I think that takes you onto a more philosophical question namely, can you impose democracy on a people or is it something that has to find root and grow. In countries where national boundaries contain factions that have been at war for hundreds of years, is it even possible to tell them to MTFU and make friends or do you have to accept that there will be tribal/regional/factional conflict until enough of the people decide they want a change
I still think that if the Taliban had booted Al Qaida out, we'd never have gone to war. The whole thing about the oppressive regime was hardly new but 9/11 and their refusal to hand over or even expel those who said they carried out the attacks was the tipping point.
high casualty figures are now solely sustained by our enemies
I'd argue that whilst the enemies are sustaining higher losses than our side, neither compare to anything like the butchery of the past. Admittedly the nature of war has changed so it's not armies squaring off against each other which has also had an impact but that's at least in response to the fact that nobody wants the slaughter of the last century repeated.Posted 3 months ago # -
Did we have much clearer reasons and aims 100 years ago?
Yes, pretty much so. A 100 years ago the aim was to protect and defend the Empire. And the reason for the Empire was very clear - to bring Britain huge wealth and power. Today we're not so sure why we are in places such Afghanistan, well at least the general population isn't sure. The reasons/excuses given appear to change according to the situation and the current political agenda.
.
I'd argue that whilst the enemies are sustaining higher losses than our side, neither compare to anything like the butchery of the past.
Well the combined deaths directly and indirectly caused as a result of military action in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, probably exceeds 1 million. A study published in the Lancet estimates between 654,965 and 942,636 civilian deaths in Iraq alone.
http://www.brussellstribunal.org/pdf/lancet111006.pdf
Considering these countries have relatively small populations and the wars were low intensity wars, these are staggeringly high casualties.
The Vietnam war cost between 1 million and 3 million lives. Although only 58,000 Americans died throughout the entire Vietnam war, which incidentally is about the same as British who died on the first day of the Battle of the Somme.
Fighting unequal adversaries does keep casualty figures low whilst theirs high. But the final tally is still quite horrendous.
Posted 3 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
