Forum Overview
::
World in Conflict
::
Re: I don't know that I would blame the armchair enthusiasts...
[quote name="laudablepuss"][quote name="fabio"][quote name="Mischief Professional"]All that said, I think you're misinterpreting laudable, fabs. I think he finds WWI fascinating like a trainwreck and wishes to understand it in a preventative sense, he's not celebrating it. That, and it gives him a great excuse to take a fun-filled trip to France.[/quote] All I wanted was an explanation on how visiting anniversary memorials for battle sites is any different than historical atrocity massacres. At first I got the brush off that how it didn't EVEN need to be explained how large scale wars are historically fascinating while civilian atrocities are bad taste icky, which was the very phenomenon I was curious about. Then I get the "war is an inevitable and sometimes necessary human nature" bit which is cowardly complacent at best and still fails to explain how genocide somehow doesn't fall into the same category (I think we've found the military equivalent to the "murder vs rape" phenomenon from your law classes).[/quote] What thread are you reading? Who said "war is human nature" other than the guy in MM's video who was refuting the idea? By the way, the war is not considered an atrocity the way those others are. The same way that "abortion is murder!" is inaccurate because killing an adult is a crime, but aborting a fetus is not. Wars are accepted and allowed, which may be ridiculous sure. The Joker had a line about this in the last Batman movie (trying to speak your language here). Also, not everything about this war was bad! Some actual useful things came out of it. Explosive welding and a huge leap in prosthetic technology for example. Not enough to offset the lunacy, though. And finally, I have to ask you, with your "atrocity tourism" concept: what the fuck is wrong with learning about these events anyway?[/quote]