Posted on 02/01/2010 2:22:40 PM PST by Daffynition
Washington (CNN) -- The last surviving U.S. veteran of World War I, former Cpl. Frank Buckles, turns 109 on Monday and is still hoping for a national memorial in Washington for his comrades.
Buckles is expected to deliver remarks during a quiet celebration Monday afternoon at his home in Charles Town, West Virginia.
But the old "Doughboy" -- as World War I American infantry troops were called -- has already been outspoken in recent years, urging congressional lawmakers to give federal recognition and a facelift to a run-down District of Columbia memorial in an overgrown, wooded area along the National Mall.
In December, at 108, Buckles testified on Capitol Hill as lawmakers considered whether to fund renovation and give the site "national" monument status. But rival legislation seeks the "national" designation for a 1920s-era memorial located in Kansas City, Missouri.
Congress has not yet decided on the legislation.
In 2008, the old soldier came to Washington and visited that 1930s-vintage District memorial. In his wheelchair, helped along by a military aide, he slowly crossed the cracks in the flagstone walkway, and saw the cracks in the marble gazebo.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I'm just surprised that every one of them didn't run screaming until their legs melted. Oh! Gasp! All that patriotism, courage, and true American manliness! I'm melting! Melting!
C’mon, SC! One-hundred-nine years makes him “antique,” not “ancient.” Thanks anyway for the ping. I love this man and his story and hope that he succeeds in getting the WWI memorial repaired and declared a national monument. Lest we forget.
Just damn, I hope I don’t live to be 109, especially if we can’t turn this communist agenda around, of course if they implement nationalized health care I don’t think I will have to worry about living much longer!
By this line of reasoning the Vietnam Memorial should never have been built because every one whose name is on it will never see it, all having died while serving their country. You don't put up memorials for the ones who lived through it, you put them up for the generations to come so they will remember.
Please read more history. War was only a "glorious romp on horseback" to the ruling class. The lowly peasents were placed in the infantry and given inferior weapons, weapons which were used only against other peasents. The cavalry were the elite, the sons of nobles and lesser nobles who, most likely, bought their commissions and had no training in how to run an army and learned through OJT.
When firearms were invented the knights(if you wish to call them that)screamed about them being devils weapons, they were appalled that the lowly foot soldier could now bring them down,that wasn't supposed to happen, only other cavalry(and by default other nobles)were supposed to be able to bring weapons to bear agaisnt them.
The gun control movement has its roots in the distant pass where nobles tried to outlaw firearms for warfare, especially rifles.
Rifles were especially evil because they were accurate and killed more officers. The church banned them(at the insistence of the nobles)because demons hid in the rifling and then grabbed the ball on its way out of the barrel and guided it to it's target.
They proved this by making silver balls(no risque jokes please!)and cutting a cross into it and of course accuracy was poor because silver won't hold rifling as well as lead and the cross cut into it distorted the ball also.
War has always been a slaughter for the foot soldiers. Firearms, machine guns in particular, evened the odds so that every one was equally in danger. Machine guns, and the old fashioned tactics used in WWI, caused a casualty rate that was unheard of before that.
'Sitting in a wingback chair, recalling distant names and dates with a clarity that would challenge someone half his age, Buckles says he was always "full of history."
And in more than a century of living it, he says, little compares to that first time the world went to war.
"The world began to change with World War I," he says. "Nothing like it ever happened before."'
Englishman Arthur S Mole and his American colleague John D Thomas took these incredible pictures of thousands of soldiers forming icons of American history. Arthur's great nephew Joseph Mole, 70, says: "In the picture of the Statue of Liberty there are 18,000 men: 12,000 of them in the torch alone, but just 17 at the base. The men at the top of the picture are actually half a mile away from the men at the bottom"
Incredible.
Thanks for posting.
You are attributing a statement to me that I did not make; I was refencing and responding to it. Second, your interpretation of such memorials is too limited. Take the stated purpose of the WW II memorial in Washington DC for instance (which was the topic of my post):
"The World War II Memorial honors the 16 million who served in the armed forces of the U.S., the more than 400,000 who died, and all who supported the war effort from home. Symbolic of the defining event of the 20th Century, the memorial is a monument to the spirit, sacrifice, and commitment of the American people.
If you are interested in more images google: "Living Photos by Mole and Thomas"; there are several sites with more amazing pictures.
It's actually quite mind boggling that most of these image were created over 90 years ago. Using thousands of returned soldiers in post WW1 peace time, English photographer Arthur S Mole and his American colleague John D Thomas were commissioned by the US government to take a series of morale building photographs for the troops. They recreated battalion insignias and symbols of American pride by coordinating the thousands of soldiers in colour coded clothing and arranging them in such a way as to correct the distortion of perspective created by distance from the lens. Amazing.
The images were created by Arthur literally drawing the image in outline onto the lens of his camera and then coordinating with troops on the ground who then positioned flags as markers. Each shot took around 1 whole week to get the outlines right but only half an hour to move the thousands of soldiers into place for the final shot.
It's a technique that has been replicated many times since but the fact that this was produced using the technology of the day is all the more impressive.
[Glenn Beck's favorite president....[///sarc]
Aha!
Now I understand. I thought there was something strange in how the perspective seemed defeated in them. Very clever.
Anyone who says we shouldn't build a WWI memorial based on the fact almost all of the veterans are dead simply isn't thinking or are not very patriotic.
I also take exception to you saying the WWII memorial was built only for those who actually fought or were living at the time. It was built also to make sure we remember as I already pointed out.
BTW, I lost relatives in WWII and also had some who came back. I lost several close friends in Vietnam and had some who came back.
Bonus Army
excerpt:On July 28, U.S. Attorney General Mitchell ordered the veterans removed from all government property. Washington police met with resistance, shots were fired and two veterans killed. President Hoover then ordered the army to clear out the veterans. The infantry and cavalry were supported by six tanks, and commanded by Army Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur. General, later President, Dwight D. Eisenhower was his liaison with Washington police, and Major George Patton led the cavalry. The Bonus Army, their wives and children were driven out with fixed bayonets and adamsite gas, an arsenical vomiting agent, and their shelters and belongings burned. Two more of the veterans, and an unknown number of babies and children, died (accounts range from one to “a number” of casualties).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
I didn’t know about any being shot, but I know one vet burned to death when the gov. ordered the tents burned.
When it comes to honoring WW2 vets, these mean way more than anything the FedGov could do.
WW2 monuments:
http://www.waymarking.com/cat/details.aspx?f=1&guid=ba6e346b-0502-4480-b447-51f55696b1d8
Strange, it appeared that your post was addressed only to me. I was not jumping on you, merely stating that there are different ways of looking at the memorial issue if you care to look. Your suggestion that I need to take a few reading comprehension courses is, I would argue, sopohmoric and “jumping on someone”.
BTW, I am a veteran and there is a long string of veterans in my wife’s family and my family dating back to WWI, one of whom was a casualty of war and buried in an American cemetary in France.
As a final comment, you said: “I also take exception to you saying the WWII memorial was built only for those who actually fought or were living at the time.”
My actual post said: “My father and father-in-law were both WWII vets but neither had the privilege of seeing the WWII Memorial in DC. By the time it was eventually built, neither was able to visit it.” I was lamenting the fact that they were unable to see, not saying what you claimed I said.
Bless them all.
:)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.