Should we ever celebrate the outbreak of a war?

We may remember (though not expressly celebrate) individual battles, such as Hastings (14 October), Trafalgar (21 October) and Waterloo (18 June) for being significant dates in our history. Furthermore, Waterloo did, to all intents and purposes, mark the end of the Napoleonic Wars, so any commemoration of it can be associated with peace, but should we ever celebrate the outbreak of a war?
 
David Cameron seems to think that we should, and he has plans for us to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War (surely one of the most pointless wars in our history and definitely one of the most destructive) in August 2014. Could it be a cynical attempt to create a ‘feel good factor’ nine months before the next general election, and also to distract attention from the referendum for Scottish independence, the campaign for which will be in its closing stages?
 
Cameron says that “remembrance must be the hallmark of our commemorations”, but isn’t that what Remembrance Day every November is all about? ‘Newsnight’ presenter Jeremy Paxman isn’t impressed by Cameron’s plans and said:-
 
“Only a moron would celebrate war. These occasions, when the Prime Minister escapes from his speech-writers, are hazardous. His address also included the cloth-eared ambition to spend lots of public money to make the Imperial War Museum 'even more incredible'. The whole point of the place is its awful credibility.”
 
It’s probably dawned on Cameron that when it’s time to celebrate 100 years since the end of the First World War in November 2018, he’ll be history just like the war itself, so he wants to get in on the act now. He’s allocated £50 million to his proposals, quite amazing when he and his obnoxious government are always telling us there’s no money in the kitty.
 
When you stop and think about the outbreak of any war – not knowing what devastation it will unleash, how many people will be killed or maimed, and the uncertainty over the eventual outcome of the conflict – can such a celebration ever be right?
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/07/jeremy-paxman-only-a-moron-would-celebrate-war_n_4057751.html
 
http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/8156-bbcs-paxman-perplexed-and-outraged-at-camerons-qcloth-earedq-plans-to-celebrate-war

Archduke assassinated in Balkans. 16 million dead and 20 million wounded.

Rejoice!  Rejoice!
David William Donald Cameron Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, First Lord of the Treasury, Minister for the Civil Service and Leader of the Conservative Party.

Personally I'll be wearing a white poppy - killing strangers, for whatever purpose, is nothing to be glad about

A poppy is to remember the dead not to glorify the killing of foreign enemies. It's a shame some political groups have attempted to hijack it in recent years though. I feel letting them do so is conceding victory to them though. The sentiments behind wearing a white poppy are fine but please don't misrepresent what the red poppy stands for, Boatlady (if that is what you were inferring in your post).
I agree with the OP though. Commemorating the outbreak of the First World War seems very odd and the timing is a bit fishy, to say the least. Paxman is spot on.

The apocryphal Curate is credited with saying that his breakfast egg was "good in parts".  Which may apply to Cameron's latest bright idea, following Hug a Hoodie, and then Hug a Polar Bear, inasmuch as we do need to be reminded from time to time of Man's inhumanity to Man.

There isn't much for anyone to be proud of about two World Wars apart from the gallantry of those whom the politicians sent to fight, but we should certainly never allow our memory to fade.

Politicians certainly love to use Remembrance Day to their advantage. Last November, the hypocrite Cameron interrupted a tour of the Middle East, where he was trying to sell arms to some brutal regimes, so that he could be at the Cenotaph.

If I knew where I could obtain a white poppy, I'd wear it alongside a red one. As far as I'm concerned, a red poppy is to remember the fallen, a white poppy is the hope for peace in the future.

Purchase a normal red poppy, pull it apart and cut out a copy of the red flower in something white possibly sheet plastic, Re-assemble.

Or immerse last November's poppy in dilute bleach.

http://www.ppu.org.uk/

You can order white poppies through the above link, as well as reading about the Peace Pledge Union.

I will also be thinking about the wasted lives of those who fought and died in a range of wars and armed struggles, as represented by the red poppy. The white poppy reminds me that the declaration and waging of war represents a failure, and of the hope and belief that there should always be a better way to resolve our differences as nations and social groups

Ivan wrote:Politicians certainly love to use Remembrance Day to their advantage.

The lie about Michael Foot and the infamous donkey jacket that never was being a prime example. The odious Michael Heseltine even repeated the falsehood shortly after Foot's death.

This one?

Yes. It wasn't a donkey jacket a la those worn by the Flying Pickets of the time and it was in no way, shape or form a slur on the veterans or those who died during the various wars in which we, as a nation, have been involved. It was supposedly quite an expensive jacket. Foot could've worn a made to measure Armani suit with matching overcoat and he would have still looked like the sort of university lecturer who smokes a pipe and has elbow patches on his jacket or, as my Granny would've said, 'looked a right clip' (i.e. a mess). That's just the way he was really.

This year, I will wear a poppy for the last time
I will remember friends and comrades in private next year, as the solemnity of remembrance has been twisted into a justification for conflict

Over the last 10 years the sepia tone of November has become blood-soaked with paper poppies festooning the lapels of our politicians, newsreaders and business leaders. The most fortunate in our society have turned the solemnity of remembrance for fallen soldiers in ancient wars into a justification for our most recent armed conflicts. The American civil war's General Sherman once said that "war is hell", but unfortunately today's politicians in Britain use past wars to bolster our flagging belief in national austerity or to compel us to surrender our rights as citizens, in the name of the public good.

 
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/08/poppy-last-time-remembrance-harry-leslie-smith
 
I wasn't quite sure where to put this. It's a rather poignant piece but also a scathing attack on Cameron's idea of 'celebrating' the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of WWI next year.

In the US, we have "Pearl Harbor Day," but that is less of a celebration and more of a remembrance - especially since WWII veterans are on the verge of extinction. While Pearl Harbor certainly marked the outbreak of WWII for the United States, no one is actually celebrating the fact that we went to war. Instead, we celebrate the lives of those who died during the attack, and the bravery of those who went to war for the sake of badly behaved rulers, dictators, tyrants, and authoritarians.

Whither Chilcott? Or do I mean "wither" as in fade away?

The Chilcott Enquiry into Tony Blair's conduct of the Iraq War was due to report many years ago, and it has today been announced that it will not appear before the May general Election.

They just don't care what the Public think, do they?

Just love Liberalism
Hugs , kisses and good wishes to ISIL , al-qaeda and Boko Haram .
Probably lacking good social welfare support and regular benefits . Poor dears .

patakace. The terms of service, to which new members have to agree when they join this forum, include:-

"Messages which promote or evoke illegal practices are prohibited."

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t18-posting-rules

Sending “good wishes” to terrorist organisations which have murdered tens of thousands of people across the world would appear to fall foul of that rule. I can imagine that the French owners of this site would take a particularly dim view of that comment in the light of recent events in their country. It also reflects badly on a respectably-run forum if we allow such filth to be displayed, but then perhaps your intention is to try to get us closed down?

I won't remove your execrable remark on this occasion, as it might make other members realise that they should treat with contempt much of what you post here. However, anything in future which is equally offensive will be deleted on sight and will result in a suspension of your membership.

Ivan ,
So it flew right over your head .
You seem like a middle / southern American with your complete inability to read satire and irony . A person lacking intellectual humour .
You managed to read a post 100% incorrectly and then PC mania took over and the need to cover yourself .

The point at issue is not whether a very small chat site needs people like me --- and oh boy , it does --- but whether I retain the time and interest to stay .
And I do not .
This site is far too insular , narrow and fanatic ----- essentially half a dozen of you engaged in mutual verbal masturbation .
And unfortunately of below average IQ ----- no style , breadth or depth .
Just concerned with spitting out bile and demonising a few characters stereotypically , just as all terrorist types do .
And that in essence is all you are , word Fanatic terrorists .
I have looked , tasted and decided to go elsewhere .

Delete it quick before anybody sees

I have looked , tasted and decided to go elsewhere .

Delete? By no means. Let that unfortunate intervention remain as a perfect paradigm of how not to win friends and influence people.