Peteee wrote:Creative Component: Was it worth it? Resistance activity in Czechoslovakia increased after the assassination, but still had a relatively small impact on the war. Were all the sacrifices worth it, or should the Government-in-Exile have let sleeping dogs lie?
I anything in the futility of war truly "worth it" ? There are many examples through out history of battles/incidents/raids that at the time did not seem to have much effect but with hindsight and review take on greater significance. The Spartan sacrifice at Thermopylae paved the way for the eventual Greek victory. The Dambusters raid though costly in lives and limited impact distracted the German war effort for a number of months. Oskar Schindler's rescue of Polish Jews although comparatively small is significant in the number of their descendants and his memory.
To me what comes through in this assassination and the examples that I have given is that they crucially gave people Hope. In their darkest hours they were able to believe that someone was thinking about them when all else seemed forlorn. Yes, the sacrifices and the prices paid were high for such a small action but the pebbles were put into motion for the avalanche that became the increased resistance movement.
Who knows what further atrocities Heydrich may have committed, who knows what more the Nazi regime may have done if it hadn't been distracted by it's Czech "problem", for all its "small" impact it may well have helped shorten the war.
Ultimately you ask was it worth it - I respond by quoting you Dukasaur "The church where the seven died is a shrine. When I last visited there, I saw many cards and flowers left by English soldiers -- Gabčík, Kubiš, the other five are remembered in Britain as well as at home."
I say any action that is remembered and the memory respected was worth it.
morleyjoe wrote:Wow Peteee - how do I top that? Very impressive, so I'm not sure how I can. But you are the only one to provide a creative component at every stage, so I better make a showing of this...
A key word from Peteee in all of this could simply be hindsight. As defined, it is the recognition of the realities, possibilities, or requirements of a situation, event, decision etc., after its occurrence. Hindsight has taught us many things, especially when it comes to war. For example, many believe that World War I was really a pointless bloodbath, while World War II saw nations trying to survive and fight against an evil tyrannt.
But even with this knowledge, how can we really judge if sacrifices were worth it, in seeing things from only our personal perspective? We can read all about it in history books, many of which would have been written by those on one side or the other, as well as those who have no up close and personal experiences regarding the subject of which they write. Having read these accounts, we can often decide what our own opinions would be, but they really don't have true meaning or context.
I honestly believe there is no way one can determine the worthiness of a sacrifice of any kind unless they have had a direct personal connection with the chain of events as they unfolded. And even then, you would likely get so many different answers depending upon from where and by who the events are witnessed. From the boy who's father never comes home, the mother who has lost her family, or the community who has lost their leader, they are the ones who could provide an answer, as they would have personal experiences from the chain of events that unfolded. Even then, I'm sure you would get differing opinions on both sides of any event or action. There is no doubt that there are those who will believe with all of their hearts and souls that the sacrifices made in the noted situation were worth it.
Can we make judgement, even with hindsight, history books, and personal accounts of others? Unless there is a dramatically obvious answer, where the outcome is so incredibly one sided, I feel that there is no way one can truly make a decision, without being one of those who made the sacrifices themselves. And with the event in question, I cannot say that even those personal perspectives would get us any closer to an answer.
So was it worth it? I cannot honestly say one way or the other.
aspalm wrote:Was it worth it?
The language of the question leads to the more inflammatory debate on whether any war is "worth it" or whether an individual dies "in vain" if the cause they were fighting for goes against ones own convictions or for a cause that ultimately failed.
In this case, however, the answer is a resounding yes- it was worth it. Because at the time of action, the individuals were performing what was determined to be the best course of action against an oppressive and evil regime.
It is never fair to look back on any such sacrifice of life and apply the benefit of hindsight. One can only evaluate what the knowledge and options were at the time, a task which is nearly impossible to do with the bias of future perspective.
As Abraham Lincoln put it more eloquently at Gettysburg: that it is "far above our poor power to add or detract" from their sacrifice.
Wow, three very impressive answers. Thank you all for your perspectives.
Aspalm's was in some ways very good. I liked the thesis: one can't give fair judgement with hindsight, but only in view of what the people's knowledge and options were at the time. Nonetheless, the competition is getting hot and given the closeness of the competition small details matter. Thus, the fact that this response was outside of the 1-week submission period puts it in last place. 1 point.
Joe's response was very nicely written, but ultimately his answer was not an answer. A yes-or-no question requires, ultimately, a yes-or-no. There may be reservations, doubts, and conditions, but "I can't say" is not enough. 3 points.
That leaves Peteee as our winner this round. Very thought provoking response, marred only by some clumsy grammar and syntax which in this case is not enough to hide the wisdom underneath. Congratulations, 5 points.
