Pte. Alfred Henry HOOK V.C. - poor treatment in "Zulu" film (General)

by Jefff , West London, Middlesex, Wednesday, December 31, 2014, 01:38 (3456 days ago) @ Roger Griffiths

Cheers Roger,
no I hadn't read Chard's account, until today that is. It certainly proves that wars are serious things indeed, and best avoided if possible.
http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/vc/chard_account.htm

Some people, including CND activists who'd camped outside RAF Greenham Common, have asked me why I've worked in the "bloody" defence trade. I haven't made guns or bombs, but I have engineered equipment for British military aircraft, vehicles and even warships, as well as their civilian relations.
I wholly agree with Roosevelt's "speak softly, and carry a big stick." I believe the reason those British ladies were able to camp outside Greenham Common protesting against the nuclear deterrent, is largely because we had it in the first place, otherwise they may well have been speaking Russian...
Post WW2 the USA's bombers flew under "Strategic Air Command", motto "Peace is Our Profession"; again that makes complete sense to me. I am not in favour of war if avoidable, but I do standup to bullies. I'm not overproud of our aggressive Empire-building in the past, but I am very proud of what my ancestors and our servicemen & women achieved against the likes of Napoleon and Hitler, and how our engineering prowess has supported their efforts; without the World Wars technology in all walks of life would be way-behind what we all enjoy now. Wars are never "good", but sadly they are sometimes necessary.

Anyhow, "rant" over, just felt I should explain my views to anyone who may think me a warmonger because I'm interested in tanks and guns, I'm not.

Back to your last point Roger, which casual readers may think shows the British soldiers in a very bad light, murdering unarmed wounded natives. I think the following forum thread sums-up my view, and I think reality, very well; it discusses a modern newspaper article suggesting these were war crimes.
http://www.victorianwars.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=994

I'll leave my very last word on this terrible day in 1879 to the Rorke's Drift website;

"The film was perhaps too political in that it portrayed the British as an evil conniving force out to bring down the peaceful Zulu nation. It is true that unreasonable demands were made on the Zulus. Demands which were unrealistic and maybe not achievable, within unreasonable timescales, if not impossible to meet. On the other hand, the Zulus, though a great people, were ruthless and whose own political ambitions had made them the most feared race in central Southern Africa. Under King Shaka, they expanded their empire from 10 square miles to cover most of central Southern Africa in the early 1820's, not before many of their own people had been massacred. On the death of Shaka's mother (with whom it is suggested he had an "unnatural relationship"), 5,000 of his own people were put to death. Perhaps they didn't grieve loudly enough. After Shaka, Dingane took over (having had Shaka murdered), then Mpande, and eventually after a dual between brothers, Cetyweyo became king. In any event having reportedly killed 20,000 of his own people. According to their spiritual beliefs, the Zulus disembowelled their foes to release the spirits of the dead.# They did however hang drummer boys up on meat hooks at Isandlwana and cut off their testicles. After this, drummer boys were not allowed to enter battle zones again."
http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/zulu_dawn.htm

# Some say in respectful kindness to the dead, but others say to save the victors from being haunted by the spirits of the vanquished....

Thanks again Roger for helping me better understand this whole subject.
I appreciate this final post is not all local Family History, but I think the recent turns of this thread on such a gruesome subject is better for these points being clarified. I do hope my openness hasn't upset anyone, thankyou.