Warminster to Imber on the 23A

I can very much see where you are coming from Galahad, and you put your case very pleasantly. I understand the sincerity of your position, but I am probably more sceptical of politicians than you are. Usually, any interference in another country is with some ulterior motive. If that was not the case, there would have been endless intervention by Britain and America all over the World. However, Pro-British and Pro American dictatorships have never been a subject for military intervention, regardless of the way they treated their people . Consider Mugabee, Dr. Hastings Banda in Malawi, and the apartheid regime of South Africa in recent history. No matter how bad the lack of civil rights became in those nations, under those rulerships;I do not remember any military intervention. I have also read a fair bit about U.S.A. interference in regimes in Latin America, even when a Government was democratically elected; but where it proved to be unsupportive to United Staes foriegn policy.
I'm not really sure if a local Warminster site is the right place for our debate. I guess it at least shows we are thinking! I am sorry to be such a cynic, but believe me, if you had lived in Northern Ireland, in both communities, and watched the politicians, British and Irish, at work; observed the kind of things happen, that people in Britain think do not happen under British Rule, it would have changed your view of things too. However, it is nice to exchange views with you, and I wish you all the best, and peace.

Peace and dialogue between nations and people is fine aspiration in a rational world. Sadly we all know that in practice such a world is illusory. Chamberlin was a pacifist and following the Great War the last thing he or the majority of the people of Britain wanted was another war. Hitler, however, interpreted Chamberlin's Munich overtures as weakness and calculated that he could therefore continue creating a Greater Germany through forcible annexation and invasion. Fortunately the British people realised that this evil man and his regime had to be defeated and Imber was a part of the price we paid. The list of evil or corrupted leaders in power is very long indeed and I agree that ideally they should be removed by peaceful means. But those that are so removed tend to be the exceptions that prove the rule that the world either puts up with them (e.g. Mugabe) or use force (e.g.Sadam - Kuwait).

Well. You are of course entitled to your opinion, and I am not ignoring what you say. However, it is a mistake to take the position that all that is done by Brithish armed forces and their allies is jsut fine, and dandy...It is always the winners who tell the story. I would not have liked to live under Nazi rule. However, there has been plenty of places where I would not have wanted to be under the rule of British occupying forces. War is a dirty business. people are trained to kill. I don't suppose the people who died in Iraq as a result of British/American bombing, felt more privileged than those who died at the hands of anyone elses bombs. Dresden was not burned by the Nazis, and killing is killing.
However, back to the main issue. People in Imber were lied to. They never got it back. Most of the generatiion who were lied, to are dead. My Grandfather was a foot soldier in the trenches. He was left with wounds. After World War One he was not treated well by the very same people, who had encouraged to go so eagerly to the war. He was evicted from his home in the 1930s by a retired army officer, because he was to ill to work. Put out in the street with a crippled wife and a young child. Be they Governments, Churches, or whoever, the experience of history shows it is best not to trust those who so eagerly send others out to kill and die. It is sadly true that the graves of British Soldiers are scattered round the World, as you say. It is very sad Galahad, that young men should have life snuffed out by a bomb or bullet. However, the balanced fact, is that many people are in their graves, because trained British Service men put them there. Some of those people were non-combatant civilians. We should not think that is okay, as long as it is happening somewhere else. Such thinking has led to increasing terrorism in so many places. Terrorism is dreadful. More innocent people die as a result, but not many people choose terrorism as a career move, unless thay have been motivated by injustice, poverty, or oppression. I am British, and I love my country, but had thirty years living in Ireland. That taught me to think outside the British box; and at least try and understand why other people take desperate measures...Anyway, as I say you are entitled to your opinion. Imber was the subject, and I'm sorry to digress. Maybe you have a military background, and that is why you have your views. I try to look at the World as one place, and the people as one people. Most of us just want the same things. Peace, and a decent life. While that is denied to some, there will be people taking up arms. Goverments reap what they sow, because for a long time now, they have been promoting the idea that you go to war to get peace. When did that actually happen? As you say, World War Two, just led to the Cold War...In the end, peace comes from forming trust through communication.

In late 1943, though the tide of war had turned, the Allies faced the tremendous challenge of breaking into Hitler's Fortress Europe. Troops were being brought back from the Mediterranean and the Americans were arriving in droves. Many will of course be aware that the 3rd US Armoured Division was here in Warminster and they had camps in and around the surrounding villages. Once here they needed somewhere to train for D Day and the invasion of North West Europe; an armoured division needs a lot of ground to conduct realistic battle exercises.

Imber of course was by no means the only village to be taken over by the Army for the requirements of military training - winning our freedom. For example Tynan in Dorset was taken over and is still in Army hands. Hamlets in places such as Senneybridge are still used as training areas and up and down the country farms and whole estates were taken over. While much has been returned, some of it only rescently, large acerage still remains in military usage.

Britain is by no means unique in having taken over land for military purposes and having retained it post war. With much of it similarly still being in use today, Derryhawk is certainally wrong in that respect.

It is also worth remembering that the Second World War brought the Red Army into Central Europe and that that war very quickly morphed into the Cold War, which presented a serious and often overlooked challenge to our freedom.

Who ever coined the phrase 'Freedom is never free, someone always pays the price', was probably thinking of our soldiers graves scattered across the globe but the loss of Imber to its former residents has also been a part of the price for our enduring freedom. At the moment thousands of young men and women, including many from our resident battalion andothers born and brought up in and around Warminster, still require that same realistic training on large tracts of land. To send them out to Afghanistan as well prepared as possible, Imber must continue to pay itsprice. Not to do so would mean even more soldiers graves to mourn.

Amazing the way the Army invaded a village in England in 1943, and it is still occupied. How kind to let people go back now and then...I wonder what the media would say if it happened in another country. Of course the British did it all in a very gentlemanly way. "I say chaps...Frightfully sorry, but we need your farm, house, school, pub, church, but of course we will pay you the going price...That is, the price we will pay you for going.. What's that...Oh yes of course we will give you time to find somewhere else. And yes you can have it back after the War...You must be out in six weeks. Jolly good show."
They must have meant that the people would get it back after Armageddon! Just as well they didn't want Warminster too.