Taco Cowboy writes:
"FoxNews is reporting the discovery of a WW1 trench system in the UK, and how the war transformed Britain.
Two lines of trenches face off across No Man's Land. A soldier marches, rifle in hand, along a ditch. These are instantly familiar images of World War I
In the heathland on England's south coast long forgotten trenches are being discovered. Thousands of troops trained here to take on the German army. The trenches, near the town of Gosport, about 80 miles (130 kilometers) south of London, were rediscovered a few months ago by Robert Harper, head of conservation at the local council. Several other sets of practice trenches have been found in Britain, but this is easily the most extensive. Conservation body English Heritage, which announced the find Friday, said the task of mapping and documenting the site has just begun. The trenches are being used to reveal how the Great War transformed Britain - physically as well as socially. As living memories of the conflict fade, historians hope these physical traces can help preserve the story of the war for future generations."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by xyzzyyzzyx on Thursday March 13 2014, @07:25PM
I am happy we were all born too late to learn this firsthand.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by isostatic on Thursday March 13 2014, @11:35PM
You hope
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bucc5062 on Thursday March 13 2014, @07:34PM
What amazes me that that this is 2014, close to 100 years since t his horrible action and only now they are finding stuff like this in such a developed country as England. In RTFA they mentioned that people used it as a picnic area, but at some point between way back and now there was not one person who said "Hey, these things look man made, I wonder what they are?"
On a side note, NPR has been running a series on the notion, what would the world look like had WWI never happened. That the duke was not shot. Some of the analysis has be fascinating. I only disagreed with the notion that technology would have been less "forward" then we have it today. Perhaps in some areas, but aviation/transportation was building up, all sorts of new technology was being discovered, more on the commercial side. Perhaps we would have less dependency on oil based energy without War requiring so much energy. Would we have nuclear power or was it only the bomb that was the seed that bore such fruit. Europe, without Hitler was vastly different and it is possible that the US, instead of being the world power, would have been a lessor power to Europe.
It goes to show how (sometimes) one event can trigger such a cascade of events that transform the world. Overall, one bullet, aimed at one man led to the death of millions. That is heady stuff to consider.
The more things change, the more they look the same
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JeanCroix on Thursday March 13 2014, @07:44PM
(Score: 5, Interesting) by frojack on Thursday March 13 2014, @08:16PM
It might do well to realize we are watching such a moment today, with de-badged Russian army troops occupying Crimea, looking for someone to shoot at them to justify a full Russian Army roll in.
Russia, having resigned itself to giving up Ukraine and Crimea, has now decided they really do need to hang onto the naval bases that have in that area. This stealth invasion is immensely popular on the Russian street.
It would probably only take one sniper at this point.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by JeanCroix on Thursday March 13 2014, @08:28PM
(Score: 4, Informative) by Haktar on Thursday March 13 2014, @09:22PM
The situations are not all that close though. When Austria-Hungaria declared war on Serbia they didn't expect to start a worldwide war. The (sometimes secret) alliances throughout Europe roped everybody in. In contrast, the consequences of an actual war in crimea are a lot clearer. And unlike the various actors in 1914 nobody really expects to go out of that kind of conflict as a 'winner'.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Yog-Yogguth on Thursday March 13 2014, @11:25PM
Nope the US already tried the snipers during Maidan and it didn't work. Then they threw the EU under the bus with a "fuck you" as some kind of magic voodoo incantation :)
Thumbs up to Obama for wanting to go down as the last president of what used to be the US of A. The US has zero credibility left yet tries to pull this kind of stunt right after both NSA and Syria. Whatever they're smoking it's not pot :D
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 1) by gishzida on Thursday March 13 2014, @11:52PM
I seemed to have missed this... the U.S. did what? To whom? With what? When? And whom is the source of this information? Did they recover the bullets or the snipers?
(Score: 1) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday March 14 2014, @01:29AM
I would recommend reading non-US and non-US-influenced news sources including Chinese and Russian ones. At last try to find the voices of whoever the US government claims to be opposing. Sometimes you'll find it's only a sick and perverse double act but other times you'll find a lot of actual information.
All of it is public knowledge outside the US bubble for anyone paying attention and the US deserves no credibility at all.
Why anyone would trust the US government on anything at all considering what everyone even inside the US should know based on the whole NSA thing is way beyond me.
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 14 2014, @01:41AM
In other words, you don't know shit and you're just pulling stuff out of your ass or parroting conspiracy crap.
(Score: 1) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday March 14 2014, @02:19AM
Yeah I can hear your pain, have some free tinfoil while you sulk over Snowden and everything that "just can't possibly be true", you sound as if you've realized you're out of luck but that goes for all of us so cheer up while you can :)
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 1) by T0T4L_L43R on Friday March 14 2014, @08:04AM
You wouldn't happen to be employed in the diplomatic service of Russia would you?
(Score: 1) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday March 14 2014, @08:50AM
Nope, in fact if anything I'm trained to kill Russians specifically. That was long ago and these days the Russians aren't the enemies of humanity, the US unfortunately is.
Georgia, Syria, Ukraine, some (actually quit the majority of people it seems) would loudly add Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, and Iran but I wouldn't. Instead I would loudly add Manning, Assange, and Snowden as well as Aaron Swartz and about twenty others dead and alive. You might see their names mentioned once in a while from various people on the site; a few lawsuits, an exceptional car crash, the ordinary covert harassment, and true Americans living in de facto exile.
Who did you say you worked for again? Be brave and take a vacation to Hong Kong :)
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 2, Informative) by gishzida on Friday March 14 2014, @12:49PM
That was a straight up question... not "I've got my head up my ass, what channel is that on?". I do read non-US based news. I am well aware that what is on the media in most countries is slanted to a particular political and/or moral "agenda". It is a cultural or belief normalization method. Ask any Fox news watcher and you be told "It's fair and balanced" when it is very obviously not even true....
The media lying has been true at least since at least Ronald Reagan's second term. I recall seeing long after Reagan was out of office an unexpurgated version of one of his news conferences. It was something like: "Welll, And Then.... And if you think about it... So we shoulddn't... Can... Willl. Not. American people. This. welll... You know. What?" and so on for about 15 minutes...
Not one of the Networks came forward to say it was obvious that the President is suffering from Alzheimer's... a fact which was not revealed until he was out of office five years. The truth be told it was probably Bush I [former CIA] and his buddy Cheney were running things. Iran-Contra was totally their doing... who did they get for breaking the Law? A "rogue" colonel.
I tend not to watch tv/cable news... mostly web among these Reuters / BBC / and other foreign news sources... I stopped listening to the US based media when it became apparent during the Bush administration that they were not telling us everything we need to know.
So as I said... where did you hear the US was involved in the Maiden? Proof? Saying it is so does not make it so... Which is why I asked for the bullets or the snipers themselves... It's kinda like saying "we are being visited by beings from another universe" but failing to show actual proof of said visits... A "rationalist Skeptic" would pull a story like that apart in a minute for lack of tangible evidence. Eyewitness accounts mean nothing. It is also more likely the Russians taking shots... a bloody uprising would permit them to do "Czechoslovakia" in Ukraine.
(Score: 1) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday March 14 2014, @07:58PM
Okay I apologize for the short fuse so here's a longer reply explaining why I've reached the conclusions I have. I'll add an extra mile although I don't think it really ought to be necessary, I'll also leave some stuff out like the wiretaps and the withdrawn statements and people possibly fearing for their lives when quoted publicly. In this case (the US vs. the Russian Federation) it would be good to find the Russian take on things to compare and contrast the different versions. For English language versions I would recommend http://rt.com/ [rt.com] aka Russia Today. You might want to have a look at the Wikipedia article about RT [wikipedia.org]. RT openly admits to being pro-Russian and even if they hadn't it would be obvious. They often include views and information which is ignored elsewhere. Regarding Maidan one such thing would be who was in physical control of the building the shots in question were fired from.
Proof is in some ways a red herring, there is seldom if ever absolute proof for anything at all if such a thing is even epistemologically possible for the non-trivial and non-abstract. However one can still aim to do ones best. I would like to believe that most people automatically would attempt that if they care.
Eyewitness accounts including accounts by survivors, contextual knowledge of locations and the situation, knowledge of the organizational structure of the protests and in particular the relevant parts of the protests, any rules and discipline and who enforces them, the people involved, the opponents, outside interests, all the various motivations plain and/or hidden, the full range of personal experience and knowledge: everything matters to some degree.
All of this in total makes it unbelievable that for example Russians or anyone pro-Russian would pull off the sniping undiscovered. If one claims the specific sniping in question simply didn't take place one has the burden of proof in explaining the victims in question on both sides. If one claims pro-Russians did it one would have to explain how they got through well-disciplined Right Sector control including military-style "object(ive) control" and local "area supremacy" (these are not hard things to do right) both in, during the sniping from high value vantage points, and out again, all undiscovered. I have some practical experience on these topics and find the notion ridiculous. One might as well claim that invisible unicorns fired those shots. If one claims it is simply a mistake one would have to explain why the mistake continued and I would add that the Right Sector rules banned alcohol (and narcotics would likely lead to a summary execution; these are religious straight-edge (aka straightX) nazi's) and even carrying "arms for purely personal protection" and sidearms was forbidden.
Knowledge about ordinary realpolitik and manipulation (actual politics) is a must, otherwise one ends up in a kind of fantasy world where nothing is truly real except for opinions and perception, and that is a road straight into hell (as well as semi-official US policy) and an attitude that ruins modern governance as well as the ideals forming the foundations of all modern nations (including Russia).
Nobody I know of (not even me) are saying the snipers were US citizens but rather that they were acting in US interests by shooting at both sides in order to provoke more widespread violence thus giving the US a perceived moral authority to interfere with more force and perhaps militarily. Either under the pretext of stopping a civil war or due to a humanitarian crisis or to counteract the Russians in case the Russians were stupid enough to take such a rather obvious bait and roll into Kiev (which they didn't despite what just about all western news media portray the overall situation as, not even in Crimea). There is no shortage of people among the Maidan protesters who would be more than willing to play the part, for example most members of Svobada [wikipedia.org] or Right Sector [wikipedia.org]. I don't doubt their belief and can even sympathize to a certain extent but so what; they're nevertheless not the only Ukrainians.
As much as possible has to be included in the evaluation one makes and at least from my point of view that includes quite a lot of baggage (and it's just about all dirty laundry) concerning the people who support the US stance the most vehemently. They are in general political crooks the lot of them, one also takes note of which individuals voice views that are not streamlined to fit the US narrative and while I simply have to refuse to go into detail (it wouldn't mean much to anyone not already familiar with with it in the first place anyway) some of the examples of such persons are pleasantly surprising. I find it personally gratifying that what I consider the true opposition within Europe and the EU does not seem to side with the US government and are relatively understanding towards and supportive of Russian actions so far.
Yes, contrary to what US politicians and western media conglomerates thinks Russia is so far coming out of this smelling like a rose, just as with Syria.
Anyway, except the local political tangent does it remind you of Syria yet? I find it's pretty much the same ruse. The "problem" might be that the US government (and possibly a lot of US citizens) doesn't realize nor care that they have zero credibility left; they need to prove every little thing they claim and even then people will think they're smoking crack because at this stage anyone who has been following everything that has involved the US during the last five years should continually assume that they're always lying and scheming.
I realize these views could hurt as hell for actual real Americans who still believe in human freedom and the US constitution and they have my full sympathy.
(Score: 1) by fleg on Friday March 14 2014, @04:07AM
looks like a conspiracy theory.
its based on a leaked conversation between eu foreign affairs chief and estonian foreign minister, reported here...
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/05/ukrai ne-bugged-call-catherine-ashton-urmas-paet [theguardian.com]
the estonian is basing his information on what he thinks a Dr Bogomolets said.
but this...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/u kraine/10677370/Ukraine-Russia-crisis-live.html [telegraph.co.uk]
reports that when the doctor was asked to confirm, she denied thats what she had said.
(Score: 1) by MrNemesis on Friday March 14 2014, @03:28PM
In the immortal words of Edmund, "the real reason for the whole thing was that it was too much effort not to have a war [johndclare.net]".
I don't know if this series ever made much of a splash outside the UK, but this series and especially this episode formed the basis for my history teachers' introduction to "the rise of the superpowers" for my GCSE.
"To paraphrase Nietzsche, I have looked into the abyss and been sick in it."
(Score: 4, Informative) by edIII on Thursday March 13 2014, @09:19PM
Are you saying we might live in a world where the legitimacy of Kloe Kardashianana's ass would be less important than the socio-political-economic ramifications of the Russian invasion of Crimea?
Call me a cynic, but I don't think those people died for much in WWI. That's the most brutal part about it. It was just senseless.
WWII, I continue to optimistically believe, was about fighting Hitler. It was never about Germany or anything else, just the world standing up and saying enough was enough to such insanity that Hitler represented. Without Germany, would Japan have decided to start its world conquest anyways?
Hitler gets the wrap for WWII, but what would have happened to Russia without the influence of Stalin? The Russian Revolution was heavily influenced by military setbacks from WWI.
I'm beginning to think that had WWI never happened, the world may well have been a better place. Who knows though.
All I know is that war only shifts power around and the wealth it provides. It rarely benefits the people. Rarely. I know the Jews were being put into the ovens en masse, but it's not like we lift a finger to stop genocide in Africa for ideological reasons either.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 5, Informative) by GungnirSniper on Thursday March 13 2014, @11:27PM
The ordinary German and British soldiers were friendly enough in 1914 they had a Christmas truce [wikipedia.org] and even visited each others' sides with gifts. The French, still smarting from their prior thrashing by the Prussians [wikipedia.org] did to a lesser extent. Likely stirred by the soldiers' sentiments, propaganda on all sides was used to promote and frame the conflict [telegraph.co.uk] as a clash of peoples, cultures, and democracy vs. tyranny.
Orwell's Two Minutes Hate [wikipedia.org] comes from WW1.
Most likely, since they occupied Taiwan in 1895 [wikipedia.org] and invaded China in 1931 [wikipedia.org], two years before Hitler came to power.
Alexander Kerensky's Russian government's policy of staying in an unpopular war was one reason the Bolsheviks were able to take power. [wikipedia.org]
Most likely. No European Fratricides, no Communist states, no Russian Revolution, no German Revolution, no Nazis, fewer American interventions, but you could have also still had bad things like British India, the Czarist Autocracy, and European colonies in Asia and Africa.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday March 14 2014, @12:01AM
Japan started (in Korea and Manchuria and both with and against various Chinese powers) years before Hitler was elected in Germany, and for the Russian revolution you would be thinking of Lenin, Stalin came later.
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 2) by edIII on Friday March 14 2014, @03:09AM
No, I was thinking Stalin. Stalin is responsible for far more death than Hitler was on his best day.
Had Lenin not come to power, or communist Russia come into being, Stalin would have been reduced to either a regular soldier or a worker someplace spouting communist rhetoric from Lenin. Not a man who created the very foundation for Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's book.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 1) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday March 14 2014, @09:05AM
You are right, it only seemed like you directly involved him in the Russian revolution but it was a misunderstanding on my part then.
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 5, Insightful) by frojack on Thursday March 13 2014, @07:40PM
In a densely populated island, I'm surprised these were ever "forgotten", in fact I sort of doubt it. Probably the young generation shown in the pictures find them new, but I suspect historians (local and national) always knew about these.
I've visited places in the US that still have battlements, earth works, gun emplacements dating back to the revolutionary war, the Civil war, and WWII. Pill boxes in Sitka Alaska, Naval Gun emplacements in Cross Sound (rusted guns still in place). Abandoned radio antenna stations, POW camps, and induction camps from both world wars can be found in several states.
Local historical museums and historical society documented all of these places. With the UK's sense of history, I doubt these places were ever really forgotten.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Informative) by n1 on Thursday March 13 2014, @09:45PM
We have a lot of history in the UK from hundreds of years ago, and from a hundred years ago. That however doesn't mean we know everything between then and now, and things like those trenches would not be immediately obvious to have any value in preserving. In the scope of WWI these trenches were a sentence in a paragraph in a chapter in one of the many volumes of the book on WWI. There was no value in preserving them or remembering at the time, allowing them to be rediscovered now on a slow news day.
The national and probably more likely local historians may have had access to the information, but if anyone actually 'knew' about it is a different proposition, which I doubt given the reports. So while it might be on record, it actually being 'known' I think plays out more like this;
You/Historian: Do we have information on military activity locally during WWI?
Local Council: "Yes information pertaining to activities regarding troop movements locally in WWI are located in file cabinet 565241B, drawer 3. Unless someone else took it out and didn't write it in the log. Also not sure where that file cabinet is..."
You: Oh...
And even if you managed to find it, you'd probably find that trenches were constructed directly by MoD/Army without local oversight, so you'd have to file a request with the MoD for the information which they may or may not respond to, in either case you'd need to know all the information you were looking for already, in order to request it. If your request didn't tally with their records (ie, wrong dates/administrative regions, then your request would be returned blank, as no information was available). You might hope for in 6 months time when the Army is doing a new PR campaign all the information you wanted suddenly comes out as part of a 'support the troops' presentation...
I'll stop being cynical now.
(Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Thursday March 13 2014, @10:25PM
It was in fact a historian with the local council that started looking into these, according to the story. Probably after someone started asking questions based on Google maps as Dunbal suggests in his post below.
But that's not the only location. There were many more further north near Sheffield according to this document (complete with maps) http://www.pals.org.uk/sheffield/redmires.pdf [pals.org.uk]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Dunbal on Thursday March 13 2014, @08:59PM
(Score: 3, Interesting) by NovelUserName on Friday March 14 2014, @03:09PM
For those like me who looked at the map in this link and said "what trenches?" Here's what I think the parent refers to: there is a dirt road enclosing a trianguloid area. Smaller roads (or large footpaths) divide this into 3 sections. In the Lower left hand section you can see faint 'S' shaped squiggles in the ground, which are presumably the remains of the earthworks.
The trenches are oriented at lots of different angles, so it does not appear that the site was organized as two opposing lines as I naively pictured when I read the summary. I assume that some of this replicates the support trenches behind the actual front line. It probably also reflects that this site was for training and was organized as lots of small independent sections, where groups of soldiers could train.
(Score: 2) by NovelUserName on Friday March 14 2014, @03:11PM
Actually, having keyed to the shapes, I can see them in far more of the map now.