Who Betrayed Nicholas II?
Robert_Hall:
Ann, I thought as much. Not sure how I feel about the revisionism of history though. Some of those executions were unjust and I think the families deserve redress. However, that was so long ago, what difference does it make now ?
I have always respected men and women in uniform, whether or not I agree with the cause. It is difficult to judge by today's standards. We now have an understanding of "conscience objector", for instance. That was not very well understood back then. And who can define cowardice in an individual? Some, as I understand, were severely shell shocked. Others, especially the Russians, were starving and being told to obey insane , useless orders, same on the Western Front I suppose, when generals got fat and sent more into the meat grinder. Where does "honour" come into this ?
Alixz:
History is being revised everyday as different groups make their dissatisfaction known.
A friend of mine and I were just discussing this today when it comes to various "politically sensitive" phrases or siguls. (I do mean siguls not signals) such as the swastika.
Even in computers, cords which were once called master and slave cords are now called ribbon cords with no clarification of where the cord serves the computer or how it does. I wonder when "mother and daughter" boards will have their names changed?
But the revision of history when it comes to battles is quite common. That is what Oscar Wilde was talking about when he said,
"To give an accurate description of what has never occurred is not merely the proper occupation of the historian, but the inalienable privilege of any man of parts and culture."- Oscar Wilde
Robert_Hall:
Great quote, Alixz, I have always admired Wilde and his wisdom. Fey as it may have seemed at times. I vist his monument in London everytime I am am there.
Alixz:
In all of books on quotes that I have read and no matter how inspired other writers were, Wilde always tops them, in my opinion.
I love this one:
“Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."
And then:
"Always forgive your enemies - nothing annoys them so much."
I think that Nicholas II did just that.
Petr:
Quote from: TimM on February 11, 2012, 10:37:26 PM
Yeah, the Russian military betrayed the man they had sworn an oath to be loyal to, and then they helped deliver the country into Lenin's waiting arms :(
Tim, I'm not sure that such a sweeping statement is completely accurate. That army morale was suffering by February 1917 and that there was a collapse in discipline in the rear areas (particularly in Petrograd) is undeniable, largely among conscripts. However, until the Bolshevik/Leftist propaganda totally subverted frontline troops, a measure of discipline was still being maintained at the front. For the most part the officer corps were still true to their oaths (although there were some commanders and General Staff members who began to side with the oppositionists as time went on). By the time of the installation of the Provisional Government, however, discipline collapsed with the decree of the government establishing "Soldier and Sailor Soviets" which totally undermined and destroyed the chain of command. It was at this point that one can truly say that the army "delivered the country into Lenin's waiting arms."
Petr
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page