Remembering the fallen...

Belisarius

Forum Staff
Jun 2006
10,359
U.K.
#41
Nice signature, Son of Cathal. Who's it by?
He also said, "I look at it this way... For centuries now, man has done everything he can to destroy, defile, and interfere with nature: clear-cutting forests, strip-mining mountains, poisoning the atmosphere, over-fishing the oceans, polluting the rivers and lakes, destroying wetlands and aquifers... so when nature strikes back, and smacks him on the head and kicks him in the nuts, I enjoy that. I have absolutely no sympathy for human beings whatsoever. None. And no matter what kind of problem humans are facing, whether it's natural or man-made, I always hope it gets worse"

But as it's a secret, I won't divulge who said it. :D;)
 

galteeman

Ad Honorem
Apr 2008
2,198
Sodom and Begorrah
#42
Good post galteeman -- that must've taken you a while to compile!! :)



How d'ya mean??

Thanks for the praise but it should go to my friend Niall Ferguson who knows a bit about this stuff.
Something which i don't fully understand myself is the high casualties suffered by the Scots compared to the rest of the UK. The total killed as a percentage of those mobilised for the Scots was 26.4% compared to 11.8% for Britain as a whole, so why are the Scots dying at twice the rate? Were they more gung ho? or were they considered more expendable? Mabye you can shed some light here.:)
 

galteeman

Ad Honorem
Apr 2008
2,198
Sodom and Begorrah
#43
I am proud that my countrymen voted against conscription for the simple fact that they did not want others to have to experience what they experienced and this was just after Third Ypres
That may have been one of the reasons they voted against conscription but there were many others, like thinking the war itself was wrong, or the natural antipathy of Irish Australians to the establishment. Or the natural antipathy of the Australian working class in general to the British establishment, among others.
 
Nov 2008
639
Melbourne, Australia
#44
I can't see how conscription in Australia could work now, let alone in the first or second world wars. Surely the population wasn't large enough. A conscription of a few hundred thousand men would have been a huge blow to Australian society at that time.
 

avon

Forum Staff
May 2008
14,253
#45
Thanks for the praise but it should go to my friend Niall Ferguson who knows a bit about this stuff.
Who's he, never heard of the man;:rolleyes: surely you're just being modest!! ;):D

Something which i don't fully understand myself is the high casualties suffered by the Scots compared to the rest of the UK. The total killed as a percentage of those mobilised for the Scots was 26.4% compared to 11.8% for Britain as a whole, so why are the Scots dying at twice the rate? Were they more gung ho? or were they considered more expendable? Mabye you can shed some light here.:)
Not me. I think I shall defer to someone who actually knows something of WWI (I'm sure one shall be along at sometime soon!!). Whilst I'm not entirely sure of the reason for the higher proportion of deaths, I would suggest that it might well be through a combination of the two possibilities you give.

The one question that I can answer with certainty: 'why are the Scots dying at twice the rate?' I should think that that was because they were being killed at twice the rate.
 
Jul 2007
9,098
Canada
#46
Something which i don't fully understand myself is the high casualties suffered by the Scots compared to the rest of the UK. The total killed as a percentage of those mobilised for the Scots was 26.4% compared to 11.8% for Britain as a whole, so why are the Scots dying at twice the rate? Were they more gung ho? or were they considered more expendable? Mabye you can shed some light here.:)
Well, my guess would be that since Scots were traditionally overrepresented in elite units, and elite units see more action in offensives than regulars, it's bound to happen. Preferably, you're not going to storm the enemy line with crappy regulars if you've got the option to use elite units. The regulars are for defence and backup.
 
Oct 2008
4,311
The Bright Center of the Universe
#47
That may have been one of the reasons they voted against conscription but there were many others, like thinking the war itself was wrong, or the natural antipathy of Irish Australians to the establishment. Or the natural antipathy of the Australian working class in general to the British establishment, among others.
I was speaking more about the soldiers who had already volunteered not the Australian population as a whole
 
Oct 2008
4,311
The Bright Center of the Universe
#48
I can't see how conscription in Australia could work now, let alone in the first or second world wars. Surely the population wasn't large enough. A conscription of a few hundred thousand men would have been a huge blow to Australian society at that time.
The deaths of over 60,000 Australians in the First World War was a big blow to a country with a population of 4-5 million
 
Oct 2008
4,311
The Bright Center of the Universe
#49
Well, my guess would be that since Scots were traditionally overrepresented in elite units, and elite units see more action in offensives than regulars, it's bound to happen. Preferably, you're not going to storm the enemy line with crappy regulars if you've got the option to use elite units. The regulars are for defence and backup.
The same can be said of the Canadians, the New Zealanders and the Australians
 

Rosi

Historum Emeritas
Jul 2008
6,242
#50
He also said, "I look at it this way... For centuries now, man has done everything he can to destroy, defile, and interfere with nature: clear-cutting forests, strip-mining mountains, poisoning the atmosphere, over-fishing the oceans, polluting the rivers and lakes, destroying wetlands and aquifers... so when nature strikes back, and smacks him on the head and kicks him in the nuts, I enjoy that. I have absolutely no sympathy for human beings whatsoever. None. And no matter what kind of problem humans are facing, whether it's natural or man-made, I always hope it gets worse"

But as it's a secret, I won't divulge who said it. :D;)
Let me take a wild guess... George Carlin?
 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions