Prince William to open IWM Foundation's new First World War Galleries 17 July

[DaisyMeRollin]

This teacher's advice would be if you have the time then you can gain some sense of their background knowledge. Depending upon a child's socio-economic background, geographic location,primary language, culture you may have someone with extensive previous knowledge or be very lacking in it. I live and worked in Los Angeles Co.in Title One (low income) schools At anytime I was about 30 minutes from the ocean, but I did have students who because of their lack of transportation, parents' insecurities about being near the water, and their work schedule would not have been able to take them to the beach. Their first trip was when we visited the tide pools. Prepping them for the trip required me to give a preview of what would happen. My bilingual aide would have to chat with parents to ease their concerns and to remind them about what their student could or could not do there. All this I knew because I'd spent time working in this environment. If the POTUS came to visit and asked one of these students about what they enjoyed about the beach prior to our trip it would be safe to assume that since they lived near the Pacific Ocean that they'd experienced it. He would not have the time to gain knowledge of their background info. If a child then said "I don't know about the beach," I wouldn't expect him to go into a meaningful dialogue if the time didn't allow him to get to know the child.

(Yes I'm off topic too.)

I can totally agree with that. Having an open, active symbiosis in your relationships with students gives you a better indication of what level to approach from. Props to you. Title One in LA. You are a brave soul.

Since we're relating this to "War is stupid," in respects to the child not having previous knowledge of the World Wars (if that is the case), would the POTUS hypothetically reply with, "I don't know about the beach either."? No one is saying that he should have whipped out the magic dry-erase board and continued with a long-winded diatribe.

[HistoryGirl]

^so it was well thought out?
Double post auto-merged: July 19, 2014, 10:04:34 PM

That was a question for Cindy since she claimed to not believe it was off hand.

[TLLK]

Oh no that would not be necessary at all. I'm thinking also that to a ten year old with cameras and reporters near by that even with some background knowledge that he may have just been a bit overwhelmed and ready for the guy in the blue suit to move on to someone else.  :P

Daisymerollin and History Girl-Great discussion today on kids, instruction and more. :thanks:

[cinrit]

^so it was well thought out?
Double post auto-merged: July 19, 2014, 10:04:34 PM

That was a question for Cindy since she claimed to not believe it was off hand. 

I said in my opinion, I don't think the response was off-hand and gave the reason for my thoughts, so I'm not sure what more you want me to say.

Cindy

[HistoryGirl]

Well if a remark is neither off hand nor dismissive then it is thought out which is what I got from your post because of the aforementioned reason, so I was making sure that was your stance.

In my opinion, if that was thought out, it's even worse than if it had been an off hand remark, which is why I gave him the benefit of the doubt and said that it had been off hand since he doesn't appear to be the sharpest tool in the shed.

[wannable]

Perhaps he is the sharpest, depending on ones point of view of WW1. Apparently for the kid and likewise William, that war or perhaps all wars are stupid.

Seems like the kid schooling may be inclined to think for yourself, future opinion makers.

I've read opinions about WW1, passionate discussions. For me that war was an unfortunate mistake.

[HistoryGirl]

The comment was made about WWII; perhaps wars may be stupid, but I myself would prefer the involvement rather than allow a madman to rule over Europe.

[Curryong]

The comment was made about WWII; perhaps wars may be stupid, but I myself would prefer the involvement rather than allow a madman to rule over Europe.

I totally agree, HistoryGirl! I had an argument with someone only the other day about how else Hitler would have been stopped. The British and French tried everything in the 1930's, listening to him, negotiating with him, appeasing him to the point of, at Munich, almost licking his boots, in an effort to avert war. He could only have been removed by a putsch, assassination or defeat in war, IMO.

[In All I Do]

The comment was made about WWII; perhaps wars may be stupid, but I myself would prefer the involvement rather than allow a madman to rule over Europe.

I totally agree, HistoryGirl! I had an argument with someone only the other day about how else Hitler would have been stopped. The British and French tried everything in the 1930's, listening to him, negotiating with him, appeasing him to the point of, at Munich, almost licking his boots, in an effort to avert war. He could only have been removed by a putsch, assassination or defeat in war, IMO.

Well, they could have tried not imposing crippling war reparations after WWI, thus not setting up the conditions that allowed someone like Hitler to come into power in the first place. But hindsight is 20/20, as they say, and by the time it was clear what they were dealing with, their options were severely limited it's true..

[HistoryGirl]

Yes Curryong, I agree. Things look quite easy in hindsight, but they were attempting to avoid war since the first world war had been so disastrous. Though war is ridiculously destructive, it is at times unavoidable and I do believe WWII was one.

I don't enjoy the over-simplification of events such as that simply because it is a child. How else is a kid supposed to learn; there are ways to state an opinion without being rude or incorrect. But I don't blame William because I really don't think valuable moments like that are that important to him and I suppose it's not all the way his fault since they've never been expected of him.

[Curryong]

In spite of P.M. Lloyd George's remark about 'squeezing the Germans till the pips squeak', I told think the British would have imposed such harsh conditions at Versailles if it hadn't been for the determination of the French (and Belgians) in the negotiations to make Germany pay. And, after all Northern France and Belgium were just left devastated economically  as a result of the war, not to mention the human cost.

Of course, lots of other factors came into play in the rise of Hitler besides resentment over blame and reparations. The world-wide Depression hit Germany hard. The 'Victor nations' in Europe had been lent large sums by the US, which wanted to be paid back, and Germany was in no position by 1932 to pay THEM so they could pass it on, and so the scene was set!

[TLLK]

Yes Curryong, I agree. Things look quite easy in hindsight, but they were attempting to avoid war since the first world war had been so disastrous. Though war is ridiculously destructive, it is at times unavoidable and I do believe WWII was one.

I don't enjoy the over-simplification of events such as that simply because it is a child. How else is a kid supposed to learn; there are ways to state an opinion without being rude or incorrect. But I don't blame William because I really don't think valuable moments like that are that important to him and I suppose it's not all the way his fault since they've never been expected of him.

We checked into visiting Dauchau when we were near Munich in 2012, but at the time my son was 11 and according to the site's recommendations, he was too young so we opted to skip it. He does know about what went on in the camps, who Hitler was and about his impact on the world.  I know that in Germany all students starting around age 13 go to visit a former concentration camp as part of their 20th century history.

As for what is expected of William or any member of the BRF, I do believe that they are made aware of their nation's history, its impact upon the world and its position today. In many ways they do have a front seat to history and their nation's journey from post-WWII through conversations with the older members of the family, their military training, contact with members of the government and with the many people they have the opportunity to meet ie: D-Day veterans.

[HistoryGirl]

Again, I didn't say he had to reenact a scene out of Schindler's List, just that there were other ways to state a fact without simply agreeing that WWII was stupid. A lot of people know facts, but that doesn't equate a desire to further true education.

[DaisyMeRollin]

Why do I always end up thinking of the KKK raid scene in Django Unchained as a metaphor for some of the threads on RIF, or even William's public engagements? LOL!

"Okay. I'm confused. Are the bags on or off?"

"Now, I think, we all think, that the bags was a nice idea, but not pointin' any fingers, they could have been done better. So, how 'bout no bags this time, but next time, we do the bags right. Then we go full regalia."

Definitely not linking that scene here.

[Lady Adams]

^^  :laugh10: :high5:

[TLLK]

Again, I didn't say he had to reenact a scene out of Schindler's List, just that there were other ways to state a fact without simply agreeing that WWII was stupid. A lot of people know facts, but that doesn't equate a desire to further true education.

I don't know where anyone asked that of you in our discussion today. However if you could share where you believe that was the request perhaps we can discuss it in a PM?

[HistoryGirl]

Schindler's List is a story about a man who saves Jews during the Holocaust, you described a story about your 11 year old son not being old enough to go to Dachau (a concentration camp for Jews); I assume you regaled the story as a way to show that a 10 year old would not be able to understand WWII like an adult would. I then stated that I never believed it was necessary for William to describe the Holocaust to the boy (hence the reference to Schindler's List). My original point was that I didn't want William to hold an impromptu lecture on what WWII entailed, just that there were better ways to encourage the boy while not diminishing the real aspects of the war.

[Limabeany]

 :goodpost:

Again, I didn't say he had to reenact a scene out of Schindler's List, just that there were other ways to state a fact without simply agreeing that WWII was stupid. A lot of people know facts, but that doesn't equate a desire to further true education.

Double post auto-merged: July 21, 2014, 09:40:05 PM

:notworthy: :goodpost: :notworthy:

The comment was made about WWII; perhaps wars may be stupid, but I myself would prefer the involvement rather than allow a madman to rule over Europe.

I totally agree, HistoryGirl! I had an argument with someone only the other day about how else Hitler would have been stopped. The British and French tried everything in the 1930's, listening to him, negotiating with him, appeasing him to the point of, at Munich, almost licking his boots, in an effort to avert war. He could only have been removed by a putsch, assassination or defeat in war, IMO.

[cinrit]

Well if a remark is neither off hand nor dismissive then it is thought out which is what I got from your post because of the aforementioned reason, so I was making sure that was your stance.

In my opinion, if that was thought out, it's even worse than if it had been an off hand remark, which is why I gave him the benefit of the doubt and said that it had been off hand since he doesn't appear to be the sharpest tool in the shed. 

If by "well-considered" you mean do I think he took several seconds at the time to think about a response to the child, then no, he obviously didn't.  But if you mean "well-considered" in general as his personal thoughts about war, then yes, I think he has probably thought about it about it quite a bit, having been raised in a family where most of his immediate relatives have served in the military in one capacity or another.  Consider that to think war is "stupid" (the child's word) isn't wrong ... it's an opinion, just as to disagree with that word is an opinion.  Even, in the words of Gen. Douglas MacArthur: "No one hates war more than a soldier." 

Cindy

[HistoryGirl]

To each their own I suppose.