Nelsons Comment

"Today, during class we had a class discussion about All Quiet on the Western Front and war in general. We talked about different aspects of war, we talked about WWI, WWII, Desert Storm, and wars in general. After the discussion I came to the computer to write my reflection (about a subject that I already forgot) and Lucien told me that he was pretty annoyed about the fact that everytime we talk about war it goes back to past crimes and leaders. He told me that he was pretty annoyed about us not talking about wars NOW; it always goes back to Alexander, it always goes back to Hitler; WWI. Me, I believe he is right in the sense that war is NOT a thing of the past. War is currently waged in the Middle East, and in Africa, but for some reason we talk about Hitler and not Bush (or the US senate for that matter). We talk about the Holocaust and not Darfur, and even though the Holocaust was bigger, Darfur is present. And even though history is important; I believe that the present is more so."

Do you agree or disagree???

Nelson, you made a very good point but I am afraid to disagree with you some what. I agree with some of your thought but I think that your last statement is incorrect. Yes, i do think that the present is very important and we should look at the present day wars and problems but history is far important. History has a tendency to repeat it self. If we study and learn about past problems we may be able to prevent those problems today or in the future. Along with past problems come mistakes. These mistakes can lead to wars, crimes or corruption. But, I do have to agree with your earlier statements about the past and discussion. How whenever the word war or corrupt political leaders come into play, all we can talk about is the past. The past wars and the past leaders. This should change but we must not just ban talking about the past. Thanks for the controversial read.