4 ms·

That's just completely false: Spanish civil war Invasion of Poland Stalin's victory in WWII The Talibans Iran-Iraq war Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire The C

by aredox 3y ago

That's just completely false: Spanish civil war Invasion of Poland Stalin's victory in WWII The Talibans Iran-Iraq war Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire The Crusades Etc, etc, etc...

gumby 3y ago
The meaning of MacDonald‘s quip whooshed over your head. Read it again.
- Spivak 3y ago
  No it didn't, it's a cute quip trying to play on how history is written by the winners but his version isn't actually true. There are plenty of examples where it's generally agreed that the "bad guys" won. Even if you try to read it as good bad being subjective I don't think there's any fixed lens though which a history book would interpret the winners being the good guys in every conflict. The bad guys for sure won the Iraq war.
  - menzoic 3y ago
    You also missed it. There will be varying accounts, but history written by the “bad guys” will frame things differently to make them seem like the good guys.
    - thaumasiotes 3y ago
      > There will be varying accounts, but history written by the “bad guys” will frame things differently to make them seem like the good guys. That's true, but since they frequently lose, that produces a lot of history showing that the good guys lost.
    - LeafItAlone 3y ago
      What you seem to be interpreting the quote as (and likely what it truly is intended to mean) is: “We have been the good guys in every single war.” Rather than “ the good guys have won every single war”. At least in my history books in school growing, my country was framed as the good guys and listed wars we lost.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    It's humor. Not all facts are to be taken literally. I guess you didn't get that.
Amezarak 3y ago
Most wars are not the "good" guys vs the "bad" guys. In many of the cases you mention, I have no idea who you even think the good guys were.
- Roark66 3y ago
  >Most wars are not the "good" guys vs the "bad" guys. In many of the cases you mention, I have no idea who you even think the good guys were. Perhaps that's because you have no idea of the historic context for some of them? I completely disagree that "most wars are not good or bad". If you lived at the time of the wars in one of these countries you'd know very well who are the "good" and "bad" guys(sometimes, both sides can be bad like Stalin's Russia vs Hitler's Germany). If you accept certain values as universal (freedom from tyranny, right not to get killed/raped/enslaved) it becomes pretty clear pretty quick which side (or sometimes both) are fighting to preserve some of these rights and which side is against. Which side has its soldiers motivated by an idea of making their country a safe place and which motivates them by letting them rape, pillage and having death squads right behind in case anyone tries to desert. Also, how both sides treat civilians (own and opposing). For a recent example look at Hamas vs Israel. Hamas clearly states every Jew is a valid target for them, also they use their own civilians as human shields storing and launching weaponry from places like schools, hospitals etc. While Israel, when they are bombing residential blocks full of weapons do so called "knocking on the roof" (shooting on the roof of the building to give civilians a chance to escape). Often said civilians are blocked from escaping by Hamas. If you have any doubts which side is bad, or good, or if both are bad find out what are they fighting for. Why did the war start? What values stand behind both sides.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Good vs. Bad in war is tue rare exception, even WW2 is less clear cut than people think, isn't it? After all, Stalin was on the side of the allies. And what Israel does right now in Gaza is as bad as it gets. And Inam almost sure exactly what Hamas wants them to do. By the way, bombing civilian infrstructure and laying siege to civilians are both violations ofbthe Geneva convention. "Door knocking" or not, the result is some poor folks house is destroyed. Actually, despite being inevitable to a certain degree, the Middle East and all of its conflicts is a prime example of a conflict without good and bad sides, isn't it? Which makes it so damn hard to solve. Just a general remark, because press and media in Germany seem to have a hard time with that at the moment, not all Palestinians are anti-semites, critizing Israel is not tze same thing as critizing jews. And one can easily feel compassion with the innocent people suffering on both sides of this conflict without siding with Hamas. We should understand that, because otherwise we risk pissing off each and every Muslim for no good reason. And that wouldn't help, would it?
bigbillheck 3y ago
> Stalin's victory in WWII Remind me again who the USSR was fighting against in WWII?

by aredox 3y ago

That's just completely false: Spanish civil war Invasion of Poland Stalin's victory in WWII The Talibans Iran-Iraq war Spanish conquest of the Inca Empire The Crusades Etc, etc, etc...

gumby 3y ago

The meaning of MacDonald‘s quip whooshed over your head. Read it again.

Spivak 3y ago
No it didn't, it's a cute quip trying to play on how history is written by the winners but his version isn't actually true. There are plenty of examples where it's generally agreed that the "bad guys" won. Even if you try to read it as good bad being subjective I don't think there's any fixed lens though which a history book would interpret the winners being the good guys in every conflict. The bad guys for sure won the Iraq war.
- menzoic 3y ago
  You also missed it. There will be varying accounts, but history written by the “bad guys” will frame things differently to make them seem like the good guys.
  - thaumasiotes 3y ago
    > There will be varying accounts, but history written by the “bad guys” will frame things differently to make them seem like the good guys. That's true, but since they frequently lose, that produces a lot of history showing that the good guys lost.
  - LeafItAlone 3y ago
    What you seem to be interpreting the quote as (and likely what it truly is intended to mean) is: “We have been the good guys in every single war.” Rather than “ the good guys have won every single war”. At least in my history books in school growing, my country was framed as the good guys and listed wars we lost.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  It's humor. Not all facts are to be taken literally. I guess you didn't get that.

Amezarak 3y ago

Most wars are not the "good" guys vs the "bad" guys. In many of the cases you mention, I have no idea who you even think the good guys were.

Roark66 3y ago
>Most wars are not the "good" guys vs the "bad" guys. In many of the cases you mention, I have no idea who you even think the good guys were. Perhaps that's because you have no idea of the historic context for some of them? I completely disagree that "most wars are not good or bad". If you lived at the time of the wars in one of these countries you'd know very well who are the "good" and "bad" guys(sometimes, both sides can be bad like Stalin's Russia vs Hitler's Germany). If you accept certain values as universal (freedom from tyranny, right not to get killed/raped/enslaved) it becomes pretty clear pretty quick which side (or sometimes both) are fighting to preserve some of these rights and which side is against. Which side has its soldiers motivated by an idea of making their country a safe place and which motivates them by letting them rape, pillage and having death squads right behind in case anyone tries to desert. Also, how both sides treat civilians (own and opposing). For a recent example look at Hamas vs Israel. Hamas clearly states every Jew is a valid target for them, also they use their own civilians as human shields storing and launching weaponry from places like schools, hospitals etc. While Israel, when they are bombing residential blocks full of weapons do so called "knocking on the roof" (shooting on the roof of the building to give civilians a chance to escape). Often said civilians are blocked from escaping by Hamas. If you have any doubts which side is bad, or good, or if both are bad find out what are they fighting for. Why did the war start? What values stand behind both sides.
- hef19898 3y ago
  Good vs. Bad in war is tue rare exception, even WW2 is less clear cut than people think, isn't it? After all, Stalin was on the side of the allies. And what Israel does right now in Gaza is as bad as it gets. And Inam almost sure exactly what Hamas wants them to do. By the way, bombing civilian infrstructure and laying siege to civilians are both violations ofbthe Geneva convention. "Door knocking" or not, the result is some poor folks house is destroyed. Actually, despite being inevitable to a certain degree, the Middle East and all of its conflicts is a prime example of a conflict without good and bad sides, isn't it? Which makes it so damn hard to solve. Just a general remark, because press and media in Germany seem to have a hard time with that at the moment, not all Palestinians are anti-semites, critizing Israel is not tze same thing as critizing jews. And one can easily feel compassion with the innocent people suffering on both sides of this conflict without siding with Hamas. We should understand that, because otherwise we risk pissing off each and every Muslim for no good reason. And that wouldn't help, would it?

bigbillheck 3y ago

> Stalin's victory in WWII Remind me again who the USSR was fighting against in WWII?