European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.

Verdun remembered

by Lupin
Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 06:52:36 AM EST

(cross-posted from Daily Kos)

My local rag here in the South of France ("La Depeche") had an article on how today is the start of the commemoration of the battle of Verdun, the bloodiest battle of World War I.

The battle lasted from February to December 1916, something I can barely comprehend.

French casualties during the battle were estimated at 550,000 with German losses set at 434,000, half of the total being fatalities -- all in truly horrible, Hell on Earth circumstances.

More here.

Interestingly, according to the paper, there are still a handful of survivors, the oldest being 111 years old. (TV interviews here)

Next time, I see a macho [American] asshole dressed in fatigues babbling on how "we're at war" and rag about "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" I will reflect on how we don't know the true meaning of war.

I also find it revealing that the French still care about this. When is the last time we heard from or about a WWI veteran in the US?

. Home
. About
. Contact
. New User Guide
. FAQ
. ET Editorial Guidelines
. Search
. Search (Google)

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Verdun remembered | 61 comments (61 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

When was the last time the US had 400,000 casualties?

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 07:05:35 AM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

WWII.

But, when was the last time the US had that many casualties in a single battle?

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 07:55:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (4.00 / 2)

Conflict Enrolled Combat dead Other Wounded Total casualties
Revolutionary War 200.0 4,435 * 6,188 10,623
War of 1812 286.0 2,260 * 4,505 6,765
Mexican War 78.7 1,733 11,550 4,152 17,435
Civil War: Union 2,803.3 110,070 249,458 275,175 634,703
Confederate 1,064.2 74,524 124,000 137,000 + 335,524
Combined 3,867.5 184,594 373,458 412,175 + 970,227
Spanish-American War 306.8 385 2,061 1,662 4,108
World War I 4,743.8 53,513 63,195 204,002 320,710
World War II 16,353.7 292,131 115,185 670,846 1,078,162
Korean War 5,764.1 33,651 * 103,284 136,935
Vietnam War 8,744.0 47,369 10,799 153,303 211,471
Gulf War 2,750.0 148 145 467 ^ 760

(source)

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 08:01:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Very interesting data. Thanks for posting it!

by Lupin on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 08:20:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

So, apparently, never.... I can't think of a battle on American soil that even began to resemble the battles in Europe.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:32:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

At Gettysburg "the bloodiest[1] battle of the American Civil War", there were 50,000 casualties in three days. The biggest battle in the Spanish Civil War was the Battle of the Ebro, lasting almost 4 months and with over 100,000 casualties.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:39:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

So, had the battles gone on for the same length of time, the casualties would've been higher than Verdun.

What were the figures for Stalingrad?

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:48:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Stalingrad (none / 0)

I am speechless... 850,000 casualties on each side, in 6 1/2 months.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:51:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (none / 0)

It says 1.7 to 2 million casualties, combined Allied and Axis, in the "Soviet Victory" section -- last sentence of the second-to-the-last paragraph.

Unreal.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:56:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (none / 0)

At Normandy there were 200,000 casualties on each side, over 2 1/2 months. Which gives you an idea of how stupid it is to continue calling the Normandy Landings "D-Day".

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:59:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (none / 0)

Agreed.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 12:34:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (4.00 / 2)

IIRC the German Ostheer was taking 200,000 casualties (dead and wounded) each and every month during that period. Just to put the different scale into even greater perspective. Even in the first year following the beginning of Barbarossa the German Army had 1.3 million combat casualties - again, that's just combat. The winter of 1941-42 took a pretty serious toll as well in deaths by cold and illness.

In general the German army was just constantly getting chewed up in the East - combat unit goes in, loses half its men, gets replacements, loses three quarters of its men, gets some untrained replacements, gets wiped out again, gets untrained middle aged replacements... Of course the life expectancy of a Red Army combat soldier was pretty short as well.

by MarekNYC on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 12:51:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (none / 0)

wow...2 million casualties...that staggers the imagination...

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia

by whataboutbob on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:26:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (none / 1)

850,000 casualties on each side, in 6 1/2 months.

To make matters worse if you were captured you had a high chance of dying (German soldiers) very high chance of dying (Soviet soldiers) - that was generally true on the Eastern Front

by MarekNYC on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 12:34:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stalingrad (none / 1)

That's certainly true. I'm reading Tony Judt's PostWar: A History of Europe Since 1945 right now, and he covers what happened on the Eastern Front, but also (especially) in the immediate aftermath.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 12:40:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

The Gettysburg Campaign lasted six weeks, and included 12 different battles, with most casualties at Gettysburg... I think what constitutes a "battle" and what constitutes a "campaign" is not consistent.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:56:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Wait, no, not more for Ebro.

Are these American-only?

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:50:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Obviously, Gettysburg would be American-only. I meant Ebro, just to clarify and to avoid looking like a complete moron.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:52:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

The 100,000 at the Ebro were mostly Spanish, of course.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:52:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Oh, okay. They are combined figures.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:58:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

There were many very bloody American Civil War battles...Gettysberg was definitely the most significant and the turning point for that conflict...but many, many other battles occurred in that same war, with high death counts, and a lot of it was either close range or hand-to-hand combat. I read a book about it once, and it was pretty disturbing. The thing about the 20th and 21st century's wars is that there has been a trend away from seeing who you are killing. Did WWI have a lot oface to face fighting?

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia

by whataboutbob on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:25:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (4.00 / 2)

Try Cold Harbor as diaried by raybin over at DailyKos last year Cold Harbor and the Birth of Modern Warfare

Eats cheroots and leaves.

by NeutralObserver on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:05:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

Not the battles, on the other hand, if we compare casualties to population numbers and contemplate the introducion of industrial warfare, the American Civil War compares to WWI. (Not to WWII though.)

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:08:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

What is "other"? Non-combat dead?

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire

by p------- on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 12:14:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Missing in action?

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 12:24:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Yes, non-combat dead, i.e. illnesses and wounded soldiers dying and accidents.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 05:10:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

You remind me of the WWI field railways diary I fail to finish for four straight weeks with the excuse of Alex being away...

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 07:55:59 AM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

About time I re-read Alistair Horne's book The Price of Glory, 1916 again.

I think it was 1991 or 1992 that I visited the Verdun battlefield with an American friend. We went to the museum and the remains of the forts.

The thing I most remember though, was the ruins of one of the villages. Ruins, well different coloured patches of earth where the buildings had been. Everything surrounded by a patchwork of depressions, the remains of the shell holes.

Eats cheroots and leaves.

by NeutralObserver on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:22:33 AM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

Next time, I see a macho [American] asshole dressed in fatigues babbling on how "we're at war" and rag about "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" I will reflect on how we don't know the true meaning of war.

I've yet to meet a WWII veteran who spoke this way. (I've never met a WWI veteran, unfortunately.) That's largely a line taken by chickenhawks who've never fought, or who were militant, "Kill-the-Commies" soldiers during "'Nam".

I also find it revealing that the French still care about this. When is the last time we heard from or about a WWI veteran in the US?

Most of our WWI veterans are dead, and our WWII veterans are disappearing rapidly. We have WWI vets on local television, now and then, as well as on Veterans Day and the anniversary of the end of the war. WWII tends to receive most of the glory, probably because there are more people who served in it to speak with.

I've met a couple of people who were at Normandy. My grandfather was in the South-Pacific (mainly island-hopping in the Philippines).

You're mistaken if you think we don't care.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 09:42:59 AM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

Drew, regarding the last line, note: Lupin is an American recently turned ex-pat.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:05:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

DoDo, I hate to reply for lupin, but he is French, who returned home after many years in the USA

Eats cheroots and leaves.

by NeutralObserver on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:10:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Ah! Never knew.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:53:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

He calls himself "An American Expat in the South of France". Maybe he's a two-way expat?

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:57:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

No, the book is by his wife.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 11:09:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

Actually to remove any doubts (and save you time to check the blog) we both have dual citizenships, US and France; the wife was born in the US, I was born in France, we each have relatives in both countries, and spent the last 28 years in Los Angeles. And I went to NATO school in Fontainebleau as a teenager. I think we're both genuinely equal-time citizens and love both countries equally. However what has been happening to the US has broken our hearts. But this shouldn't be about us.

by Lupin on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 01:03:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

Having clarified our citizenships this should not be about me.

We subscribed to the LA TIMES for 28 years and I don't recall (I could be wrong, it is a long time after all) ever seeing an actual article with a photo of the trenches of WWI on Veterans Day or Armistice Day.

That's all I was saying.

by Lupin on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 01:06:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

We seem to be in memorial vein, Lupin. (I hadn't seen this diary before posting this one).

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 11:11:36 AM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

I didn't know anything about the Red Poster. Very interesting.

by Lupin on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 01:04:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Posted last November 11 (none / 0)

The War Everybody Lost

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 05:15:30 PM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

A significant difference between the First World War and the American Civil War and the Second World War is the static nature of the battle lines. There was a diorama at the British Imperial War Museum a while ago that showed how the trench system worked, and the interesting thing is that the battlefield itself was only a couple of hundred yards or so across. The support trenches came up from behind, and "normal" activity proceeded immediately behind that--less than a mile away.

(There was some trench warfare in the Civil War and others, too, but it was the main feature of the First World War.)

Before seeing the exhibit, I had always thought of all of Europe being reduced to a mud pit, but it was actually a fairly small amount of real estate--but a lot of dead people.

by asdf on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:12:16 PM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Well, the trench warfare front was small, but in it did move inside a band two-three hundred kilometres across. Also, today there is too much focus on the man-to-man combat, while much of the casualties and horror came from incredible amounts of various cannons, which destroyed areas well behind the front.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:04:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

A (good) novel that throws light on trench warfare is Sebastian Faulks' Birdsong. Though it's not set at Verdun (but Flanders, where the British were), it tells how mines were dug under no-man's-land in direction of the enemy trenches, serving as listening-posts and, if possible, bases from which to blow the enemy up from beneath.

The mines were driven far under the ground into a blue clay. At the heads of the deeper ones the men enlarged chambers where they could rest and sleep without needing to go back above the ground. They bore the stench of their packed, unwashed bodies for the sake of the warmth and safety. Any minute was better that was not spent beneath the endless dripping sky; no night was unbearable that offered shelter from the freezing winds that stiffened their waterlogged tunics and trousers into icy boards. The smell was hard to breathe, but it was no better above ground where the chloride of lime seemed not to relieve but to compound the atmosphere of putrefying flesh, where the latrine saps had been buried or abandoned and men preferred to inhale the toxic smoke of braziers than the smell of faeces.
While the principal deep mines, which had been under construction for two years, were gradually enlarged and driven out towards the ridge, Weir's company were working on a shallow tunnel from which they could listen for enemy counter-mines. One morning they heard sounds of German activity above them. There appeared to be an underground ladder from which men were jumping. The noise of their boots could be heard stamping along the tunnel overhead. Weir ordered his tunnel to be evacuated, but two or three men had to be left in listening posts at all times to be sure that the Germans would not undermine the actual trench. There were no volunteers for this job, so he had to make a duty rota. They took candles with them so they could read books as they listened. Only twenty men had been down and back by the time the explosion they most dreaded shook the earth. With a large camouflet the Germans blew their tunnel. The two listeners were buried under thousands of tons of Flanders soil.

This underground war was going on all the time along the almost fixed battle-fronts, and no doubt at Verdun too.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 04:01:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

In the biggest non-accidental and non-marine explosion of WWI, a chunk of the German front was blown up with a bang that could be heard to London - a single act that killed over 30,000.

Less casualties but perhabs even more cruel was the mountain warfare in the Italian Alps. Repeatedly, the opponent's high-mountain fortresses were blown up. Those fortresses weren't like in centuries before, they were in essence tunnel networks digged (usually by prisoners of war) into the rock of mountains - so blowing them up meant literally blowing off the top of a mountain.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 04:19:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

a chunk of the German front was blown up with a bang that could be heard to London

Further reading: the Messines mines. I mis-remembered the number of dead, though - 'only' 10,000.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 04:25:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Also I have often wondered whether the tragedy of the First World War, and the numerous mutinies on all sides, and associated revolutions, were perhaps part of the reason that socialism took hold in Europe. And since America was not nearly as involved, perhaps that's why it didn't take hold here...

by asdf on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:14:43 PM EST

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Could be. Though, it was different before already: Social Democrats and some communists entered European parliaments in strength before WWI. Also, there was a counter-trend: WWI was the Social Democrats' loss of innocence, that was when in every country, the parties in each warring country shrieked back from arguing for the workers' internationale against imperialist wars, and played "support your troops!" instead.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:08:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Both the German Kaiser and the Czar were overthrown by socialist revolutions.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:17:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

The Czar? Don't you mean Kerenski?

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:21:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Kerenski was a socialist...?

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:31:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

He wqsn't, yet it was his fellows who overthrew the Czar, and the Bolsheviks overthrew him.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:32:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

According to Wikipedia

He was elected to the Fourth Duma in 1912 as a member of the Trudoviks (a moderate labour party). A brilliant orator and skilled parliamentary leader, he became a member of the Provisional Committee of the Duma as a Socialist Revolutionary and a leader of the socialist opposition to the regime of the ruling tsar, Nicholas II.
When the February Revolution broke out in 1917 Kerensky was one of the revolution's most prominent leaders, and was elected vice-chairman of the Petrograd Soviet (workers' council).

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:34:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Right, I remembered that instantly when I posted...

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:36:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (4.00 / 2)

Kerensky died at his home in New York in 1970, one of the last surviving major participants in the turbulent events of 1917. The local Russian Orthodox Churches in New York refused to grant Kerensky burial, seeing him as being largely responsible for Russia falling to the Bolsheviks. A Serbian Orthodox church also refused. Kerensky's body was then flown to London where he was buried at a non-denominational cemetery.

Fucking religious bigots.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:50:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Sorry silly me. Kerenski was a socilalist... but I wouldn't call the February Revolution socialist.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:35:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

The dust from February hadn't settled yet in October, and one of Lenin's aims was apparently to prevent the February regime from becoming legitimized by holding elections. So, I'm going to argue that the period from February to October 1917 was revolutionary, and that in February the Socialists had the upper hand over the liberals.

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:38:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 1)

In February? Methinks only in May, see below.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:41:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Refer to 'the dust from February hadn't settled yet in October'. In fact, you could say the revolution lasted all through the Civil War between Reds and Whites. The spark of the revolution smells of labour revolt to me:

In the first half of February lack of food supply caused riots in the capital, Petrograd. On February 18 (O.S.) the major plant of Petrograd, Putilov plant, announced a strike; the strikers were fired and some shops closed, which caused unrest at other plants. On February 23 (O.S.) (March 8, N.S.) a series of meetings and rallies were held on the occasion of the International Women's Day, which gradually turned into economic and political ones. They continued during the following days. At one point, a large battalion of soldiers was sent to the city to quell the uprising, but many shot or deserted their officers and joined the revolt instead.

(wiki)

By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:45:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered (none / 0)

Wiki:

The February Revolution saw a largely bloodless transfer of power from the Tsar. The regime that came into being was an alliance between liberals and socialists who wanted to instigate political reform, creating a democratically elected executive and constituent assembly...
The Provisional Government which replaced the Tsar was initially led by a liberal aristocrat, Prince Georgy Yevgenyevich Lvov. After his government failed, he was succeeded by a socialist, Alexander Kerensky, a Social Revolutionary.

*Traitor*, n.
A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.

by DoDo on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:40:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Verdun remembered a colonial perspective (4.00 / 4)

I meant to post this earlier but got sidetracked in the middle of the translation. So here it is hopefully still in time to get some readers.

The French paper Le Monde had a
interesting article in their online edition Tuesday regarding Verdun commemorations (translation errors mine):

AFP/JEAN-CHRISTOPHE VERHAEGEN
The Muslim section of the Cemetery in Douaumont where Verdun veterans are buried.

A hundred meters from the ossuary of Douaumont, heavy machinery prepare to build an upcoming memorial dedicated to the Muslim combatants who died during WWI. The bomb disposal experts of the 13th regiment of Valdahon completed the de-mining of the area in early February: 219 ammunition, bombs, shell or grenades were unearthed and neutralized in this small perimeter. The bones of a soldier were also found.

Even if the Elysée still refuses to confirm it, the memorial is set to be inaugurated in June by Jacques Chirac, on the occasion of the ninetieth birthday of the battle of Verdun, for which the ceremonies began Tuesday February 21. The monument will consist of a vast ambulatory of 25 meters by 19 with arcades and crenels in the Moorish style. It will contain at its center a koubba (cupola) of pierre de Meuse [stone from the region].

The building will be next to the catholic vault and the Jewish memorial....

For Dalil Boubaker, president of the French Council of the Muslim Worship (CFCM) and vice-chancellor of the Great Mosque of Paris, the symbolism of 1916 is strong: "It is there that the Islam of France is born ....It took root in the plowed plains of Verdun, Douaumont, Fleury where the Algerian, Tunisian, and Senegalese riflemen and the Moroccan tabors defended France in agony. Today, when French youth have questions about their identity, it is important to say that their parents took part in defending the country."

The genesis of the memorial goes back to the days following the Armistice. ... Questions are raised then as to what form this homage should take: religious or secular? ... From 1920 to 1932, an ossuary with unspecified architecture is finally built, ecumenical and dedicated to hold without discrimination the remains of 130 000 anonymous soldiers.

But there were already thoughts of integrating into it buildings devoted to the catholic, protestant, Jewish and Muslim worship. At the time, nobody disputes the national legitimacy of this last religion, soaked in blood. Thousands of Muslims died in Verdun, their bodies mixed with the hundreds of thousands of French and German victims of this battle. The colonial troops were called up in the middle of 1916 to support the exhausted units. They played a decisive part, especially in the retaking of Douaumont.

In homage to this sacrifice, a Muslim section, which symbolically includes 592 tombs is created. ... The project of building a mosque is even considered up until 1926 then given up, for lack of financing. Instead in 1922 the great Mosque of Paris is born, where a stele is a reminder of the WWI deaths. Islam had thus deserved its place at the table in interwar France....

In 2002, Dalil Boubaker reveals to Jacques Chirac, who has just been re-elected, his wish for a more worthy mausoleum [in Douaumont]. The president of the Republic gives his support and transmits the grievances to the ministry for veterans affairs. They bring about the current project, at a cost of 370 000 euros. Until now, the announcement of the monument's construction has not caused any polemic.

French original by Benoît Hopquin for Le Monde. Full article

by Alexandra in WMass (alexandra_wmass[a|t]yahoo[d|o|t]fr) on Tue Feb 21st, 2006 at 10:47:08 PM EST

Re: Verdun remembered a colonial perspective (none / 0)

Good catch, Alexandra. It's right that the colonial troops, who were Muslims, should be remembered in the same way as the other troops. I wouldn't be surprised, though, if the paleo-Vichy-right took it ill -- Douaumont is symbolically associated with Pétain for them, and some of them still hope to have his remains buried there. There'll probably be some more talk about Islam taking over France... But good for Boubaker and good for Chirac on this one.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 04:19:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Verdun remembered a colonial perspective (none / 0)

Thanks. I found it interesting that the journalist chose to end the article by saying that so far there has been no polemic about this new memorial. I wish it could stay that way but just the fact that the author comments on it suggests the risk of polemic is high.

by Alexandra in WMass (alexandra_wmass[a|t]yahoo[d|o|t]fr) on Wed Feb 22nd, 2006 at 06:24:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Verdun remembered | 61 comments (61 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]