The Last Tommy
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Col mustard.
Sounds as though he could be a senior, service officer or ex senior, service officer, RN most probably, who is pretty miffed about someone else getting this proposed honour. He misses the point entirely because the reasons advocated are beyond him, or, he wants to miss it and there seems little point in discussing it further with him. I would say he is a small man as well!
Thank you, good night and a happy new year Vecvechookattack.
NC43
Further to my last. Am I not correct in thinking the last Australian WW1 veteran received a state funeral?
NC43
Sounds as though he could be a senior, service officer or ex senior, service officer, RN most probably, who is pretty miffed about someone else getting this proposed honour. He misses the point entirely because the reasons advocated are beyond him, or, he wants to miss it and there seems little point in discussing it further with him. I would say he is a small man as well!
Thank you, good night and a happy new year Vecvechookattack.
NC43
Further to my last. Am I not correct in thinking the last Australian WW1 veteran received a state funeral?
NC43
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've looked through this thread a few times now and cannot see one good reason why the last Tommy should be honoured with a state funeral. In fact I can't find any reason why he should. I can see a few posts stating it might be a "good idea" but not one with a reason why it would be a good idea.
So, if anyone can come up with a good reason then lets have it. Remember that the reason has to be a good one. Suggestions such as "because they were brave" won't fit. There is one simple rule concerning the granting of a state funeral that you all seem to be missing. And your correct about the Service. Maybe the reason Im so against it is because I'm in the RN and understand the significance such an occasion brings.
So, if anyone can come up with a good reason then lets have it. Remember that the reason has to be a good one. Suggestions such as "because they were brave" won't fit. There is one simple rule concerning the granting of a state funeral that you all seem to be missing. And your correct about the Service. Maybe the reason Im so against it is because I'm in the RN and understand the significance such an occasion brings.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vecvechookattack
The business of a state funeral for the last soldier seems to be becoming a bit of an obsession with you and I cannot quite understand why. State funerals are usually (usually) reseved for the Sovereign as head of State and it is true that few others have had them. The exceptions have been mentioned, with the exception of the fist Earl of Beaconsfield, who did not have one because his family refused it.. The others have been national figures and your comment: “ Nope. State funerals are not for servicemen. Leave well alone” tells one much since all the other recipients were servicemen, but of high rank….precedent, if that is what you are worried about, has already been created….is it that rank is what you are worried about. I think I am beginning to see the true reason for your objection…and, might one ask what the particular rule is that we all appear to be missing?
I fail to see the connection of your being “in the RN and understand the significance that such an occasion brings”. Quite a pompous statement since most of the people on this thread are, or were, serving members of HM Forces; that argument therefore is not particularly sound, or relevant.
My reasons for a “fitting tribute” is that the ‘unknown warrior’ is buried in Westminster Abby and lies with the most illustrious in the land’. His arrival in the UK was marked with a certain amount ceremony and he is a totally unknown person. Do you not see that this last man, whoever he may be, is simply a representative of the millions of men who died in the conflict and it is a fitting tribute to his passing, just as was Nelson's, and all the others.…not just because he was a brave man.
Thank you once again,
NC43
The business of a state funeral for the last soldier seems to be becoming a bit of an obsession with you and I cannot quite understand why. State funerals are usually (usually) reseved for the Sovereign as head of State and it is true that few others have had them. The exceptions have been mentioned, with the exception of the fist Earl of Beaconsfield, who did not have one because his family refused it.. The others have been national figures and your comment: “ Nope. State funerals are not for servicemen. Leave well alone” tells one much since all the other recipients were servicemen, but of high rank….precedent, if that is what you are worried about, has already been created….is it that rank is what you are worried about. I think I am beginning to see the true reason for your objection…and, might one ask what the particular rule is that we all appear to be missing?
I fail to see the connection of your being “in the RN and understand the significance that such an occasion brings”. Quite a pompous statement since most of the people on this thread are, or were, serving members of HM Forces; that argument therefore is not particularly sound, or relevant.
My reasons for a “fitting tribute” is that the ‘unknown warrior’ is buried in Westminster Abby and lies with the most illustrious in the land’. His arrival in the UK was marked with a certain amount ceremony and he is a totally unknown person. Do you not see that this last man, whoever he may be, is simply a representative of the millions of men who died in the conflict and it is a fitting tribute to his passing, just as was Nelson's, and all the others.…not just because he was a brave man.
Thank you once again,
NC43
What a tribute it would be to an entire generation of people who sacrificed so much in the cause in the defense of the country. I would think posters here with their usually joint life experiences of serving the nation would value such a tribute to their comrades in arms.
It seems more appropriate to honour those that did something beyond being born into the right family.
It seems more appropriate to honour those that did something beyond being born into the right family.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, Im not worried about the rank.....don't care if he was an AB or an Admiral. I just don't think that they deserve it. I would defend their right to be remembered for ever.
We owe our freedom to all those brave men and women who made such huge sacrifice for world peace but to say that this event would act as a fitting tribute to the millions of men who died in WW1 is tosh. If that is the case then why not wait for the last German/Polish/Russian/Spanish/French etc etc.... soldier who served in WW1 to die? Why not have a state funeral when the last British Soldier to fight against the Spanish Revelution dies?
No, this would not be a fitting tribute to their memory. Every year we conduct a fitting tribute to their memory. In other commonwealth countries they offer fitting tributes every day with a 2 min silence.
A state funeral for a bloke 99% of the British public have never heard of would be wrong. There are better ways.
We owe our freedom to all those brave men and women who made such huge sacrifice for world peace but to say that this event would act as a fitting tribute to the millions of men who died in WW1 is tosh. If that is the case then why not wait for the last German/Polish/Russian/Spanish/French etc etc.... soldier who served in WW1 to die? Why not have a state funeral when the last British Soldier to fight against the Spanish Revelution dies?
No, this would not be a fitting tribute to their memory. Every year we conduct a fitting tribute to their memory. In other commonwealth countries they offer fitting tributes every day with a 2 min silence.
A state funeral for a bloke 99% of the British public have never heard of would be wrong. There are better ways.
I am half way between nutcracker43 and vevechooattack on this.
The passing of that generation who suffered WW1 is indeed something that should be marked, but I am not too sure that a state funeral is the right way to do it. A sombre state occasion would seem right but somehow wholly out of place, I think we need a truly original and unique way of marking a truly unique occasion. The connection with the tomb of the unknown warrior is a powerful reason for linking this to the Abbey of Westminster in some way. I also have a good deal of sympathy for vevechooattack and his concern over a “state circus”, pomp and ceremony would surely only be seen as glorifying war, the last thing I am sure that nutcracker43 intends in his admirable quest for a state occasion.
tablet_eraser
Whilst not wishing for one moment to decry the sacrifice and pain of those who fought in WW1, to describe that stupid futile waste of human life as anything approaching a battle “across a few miles of muddy ground in France to preserve our way of life” is way off beam
It was a ridiculous spat between a bunch of cousins who were more concerned with saving face and national pride than preserving the populations way of life. The ruling monarchs of the time had more in common with each other than their own masses who they willingly committed to wholesale slaughter.
The passing of that generation who suffered WW1 is indeed something that should be marked, but I am not too sure that a state funeral is the right way to do it. A sombre state occasion would seem right but somehow wholly out of place, I think we need a truly original and unique way of marking a truly unique occasion. The connection with the tomb of the unknown warrior is a powerful reason for linking this to the Abbey of Westminster in some way. I also have a good deal of sympathy for vevechooattack and his concern over a “state circus”, pomp and ceremony would surely only be seen as glorifying war, the last thing I am sure that nutcracker43 intends in his admirable quest for a state occasion.
tablet_eraser
Whilst not wishing for one moment to decry the sacrifice and pain of those who fought in WW1, to describe that stupid futile waste of human life as anything approaching a battle “across a few miles of muddy ground in France to preserve our way of life” is way off beam
It was a ridiculous spat between a bunch of cousins who were more concerned with saving face and national pride than preserving the populations way of life. The ruling monarchs of the time had more in common with each other than their own masses who they willingly committed to wholesale slaughter.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pr00ne,
You and I happen to agree on that point - I believe I was the first to use the world futile. There are so many ways to describe the First World War. Out-and-out butchery probably comes closest. My point was that those men fought for their country (not forgetting the painful irony of the poem "Dulce Et Decorum Est...") and to prevent the risk of their country being invaded. If the BEF had been driven off the continent, Germany would have had time to regroup and rearm and who knows where we'd be now.
vevechooattack,
We get the point - you don't agree with us! I happen to be mildly offended by your assertion that you know more about State occasions than the rest of us simply because you're in the RN. Maybe you'd care to support that argument?
You and I happen to agree on that point - I believe I was the first to use the world futile. There are so many ways to describe the First World War. Out-and-out butchery probably comes closest. My point was that those men fought for their country (not forgetting the painful irony of the poem "Dulce Et Decorum Est...") and to prevent the risk of their country being invaded. If the BEF had been driven off the continent, Germany would have had time to regroup and rearm and who knows where we'd be now.
vevechooattack,
We get the point - you don't agree with us! I happen to be mildly offended by your assertion that you know more about State occasions than the rest of us simply because you're in the RN. Maybe you'd care to support that argument?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
prOOne.
I am not suggesting, in the slightest, that a state funeral would somehow glorify war...that would never be anyone's intention. It is simply a recognition of all the useless sacrifice of that generation. Our friend Vecverchookattack speaks of knowing why state funerals should or should not be allowed and yet fails to share this secret with us. The tone of his post is one of pure humbug, arrogance and small mindedness, I'm afraid. If his intention was to irritate the hell out of me, he has succeeded Something of the subject under discussion is not the place in which to indulge himself and I have one more question for him. Are you, indeed, a small man?
NC43
I am not suggesting, in the slightest, that a state funeral would somehow glorify war...that would never be anyone's intention. It is simply a recognition of all the useless sacrifice of that generation. Our friend Vecverchookattack speaks of knowing why state funerals should or should not be allowed and yet fails to share this secret with us. The tone of his post is one of pure humbug, arrogance and small mindedness, I'm afraid. If his intention was to irritate the hell out of me, he has succeeded Something of the subject under discussion is not the place in which to indulge himself and I have one more question for him. Are you, indeed, a small man?
NC43
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hove
Age: 72
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must admit, like others, I'm not sure what is the correct way to go here.
I don't think it won't be fair on all the other servicemen who passed away for the last to get a state funeral, but on the other hand I feel they must be remembered.
I'm sure, sadly, that many children today would know little of what happened between 1939-1945, let alone 1914-18, and we should somehow reinforce to all that we care and know what suffering they endured so that we can be posting these messages.
Clicker
I don't think it won't be fair on all the other servicemen who passed away for the last to get a state funeral, but on the other hand I feel they must be remembered.
I'm sure, sadly, that many children today would know little of what happened between 1939-1945, let alone 1914-18, and we should somehow reinforce to all that we care and know what suffering they endured so that we can be posting these messages.
Clicker
I can see nothing but good in honouring in the last Tommy when he dies. The last ever Tommy will represent his fallen comrades and will take the final posthumous salute on behalf of his brothers-in-arms. No argument, surely.
Like many of you, I was so impressed by the statesmanship and dignity of Harry Patch in the 'The Last Tommy' programmes on BBC. I heard him on the radio recently but his, still incredibly lucid, voice is now beginning to falter. What a wonderful man.
Like many of you, I was so impressed by the statesmanship and dignity of Harry Patch in the 'The Last Tommy' programmes on BBC. I heard him on the radio recently but his, still incredibly lucid, voice is now beginning to falter. What a wonderful man.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because a state funeral is for the Monarch. On the very rare occasions they are granted by special royal privalege to a person whom the country deems requires a special funeral. Such people such as Princess Diana, The Queen Mother, Churchill etc were all considered special enough that the country almost demanded that the death of those people should be recognised by a grand state occasion such as a state funeral.
An ordinary sailor/Soldier/airman does not warrant that.
The comment about the RN referred to the fact that the RN lead the procession on a state funeral with ratings pulling the funeral carriage. Not sure we have the manpower available to do that anymore.
An ordinary sailor/Soldier/airman does not warrant that.
The comment about the RN referred to the fact that the RN lead the procession on a state funeral with ratings pulling the funeral carriage. Not sure we have the manpower available to do that anymore.
Because a state funeral is for the Monarch.
In Italy, Nicola Calipari, an Italian intelligence officer shot and killed by American troops in Iraq while escorting a former hostage to freedom had a State Funeral. In Spain one was held for the 190 victims of the Madrid train bombings.
An ordinary sailor/Soldier/airman does not warrant that.
So there is no real reason why the last Tommy cannot be honoured in this way.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, all right then....sorry, Unless you live in Australia or Spain. Maybe thats a better idea then.
But thats my point. If you have a state funeral for ordinary people then the funeral loses its state of occasion. It would become a normal funeral. State Funerals are special. They are not for every tom(my) dick or harry.
Lets honour the last WW1 vet to die properly, with dignity and respect not with a media circus.
Lets hold a military funeral for him. Fly past with a formation of RAF FJ's in the missing man formation. A 19 gun salute, full military honours, bands, flags flying. Lets make the country proud of our ex-servicemen but please don't make the same mistake that the Australian and Spanish people did.
But thats my point. If you have a state funeral for ordinary people then the funeral loses its state of occasion. It would become a normal funeral. State Funerals are special. They are not for every tom(my) dick or harry.
Lets honour the last WW1 vet to die properly, with dignity and respect not with a media circus.
Lets hold a military funeral for him. Fly past with a formation of RAF FJ's in the missing man formation. A 19 gun salute, full military honours, bands, flags flying. Lets make the country proud of our ex-servicemen but please don't make the same mistake that the Australian and Spanish people did.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 59
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radio 4 PM programme had a piece about this tonight. Ian Duncan Smith and others have tabled an Early Day Motion calling for a state funeral for the last veteran.
Also they interviewed the someone who said that he had asked a number of WW1 veterans if they wanted this. They all said it was a good idea but they didn't want it to be them.
Also they interviewed the someone who said that he had asked a number of WW1 veterans if they wanted this. They all said it was a good idea but they didn't want it to be them.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank goodness for that. If the plan is to raise an EDM then that will be the end of this matter and we can see it fall by the wayside. EDM's rarely get past the front door and will only be debated if they receive 50.1% of parlimetary votes. So, that will be the end of any discussion about stste funerals then.
At the last count this EDM had 21 votes. Which is less than the EDM calling for a pay rise for the cleaners on the London Underground. That shows you the level of support for this silly concept.
I fully support a funeral with full military honours.
At the last count this EDM had 21 votes. Which is less than the EDM calling for a pay rise for the cleaners on the London Underground. That shows you the level of support for this silly concept.
I fully support a funeral with full military honours.
Last edited by vecvechookattack; 30th Dec 2005 at 15:37.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Much as I hate to have to agree with VVC in any way, I do not feel that a "State Funeral" for the last WW1 survivor is appropriate. This was done on Armistice Day 1920 for the "Unknown Warrior" (NOT Soldier) whose Body was laid to rest in Westminster Abbey after a procession through the City of London which included the unveiling of the Cenotaph. At the Abbey a Guard of Honour was provided by 100 holders of the Victoria Cross.
A more appropriate course may be to start a campaign to revert to "Remembrance Day" on the 11th of November and make it a Public Holiday as it is in Belgium, Canada, France and the USA. Australia and New Zealand have their commemorations on 25 April - ANZAC Day.
A more appropriate course may be to start a campaign to revert to "Remembrance Day" on the 11th of November and make it a Public Holiday as it is in Belgium, Canada, France and the USA. Australia and New Zealand have their commemorations on 25 April - ANZAC Day.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VVC
At last we agree on something.
Let us also remind the Public that since the end of WW2 there has been only one year,1968,when a British Serviceman has NOT been killed in action.
The vast majority of Personnel in WW1 & WW2 were conscripts. Whilst not wishing to denigrate in any way their heroism and self sacrifice; we should acknowledge the fact that today the Armed Forces are all volunteers.
Given that in the first half of the 20th Century the UK policed a large Empire, and had border disputes along the boundaries of that Empire; it is possible that 1968 was the only year in that Century where a British serviceman did not lay down his life.
At last we agree on something.
Let us also remind the Public that since the end of WW2 there has been only one year,1968,when a British Serviceman has NOT been killed in action.
The vast majority of Personnel in WW1 & WW2 were conscripts. Whilst not wishing to denigrate in any way their heroism and self sacrifice; we should acknowledge the fact that today the Armed Forces are all volunteers.
Given that in the first half of the 20th Century the UK policed a large Empire, and had border disputes along the boundaries of that Empire; it is possible that 1968 was the only year in that Century where a British serviceman did not lay down his life.