MovieChat Forums > Sergeant York (1941) Discussion > The irony to the story

The irony to the story

posted 16 years ago by nelson95
16 replies | jump to latest

York tried to stay out of the First World War but couldn't do it. When the Second World War then came he tried to get into it but couldn't do that because the army wouldn't let him enlist on account of his age. If you stop and think about it that almost doesn't make sense because there were men in the military at that point in time within the same age bracket. Now if York had had no prior military service I could see that but he did have prior service and was a Medal of Honor winner to boot so you'd think they would have taken that into consideration and made some sort of allowance for it. So it seems the poor guy couldn't win for losing!

[–] Rasputin_Phoenix 16 years ago

Yeah, I see what you are saying. But to be honest...a war hero like that being i n the line of fire would be dangerous- what if he was killed? It would be a huge propaganda victory for the enemy. Plus, a war hero famous because he killed numerous Germans- fighting Germans. He would be a huge target. It would be like, oh I dont know- a country putting a crown prince in war zone or something.

[–] nelson95 16 years ago

Yeah, but that doesn't necessarily mean they would have had to put him in the front lines, I'm sure he could have served in some capacity in the rear areas. Now it might interest you to know that he did serve as a member of the local draft board throughout WWII.

[–] Captain_Augustus_McCrae 16 years ago

Please do not refer to a person "winning" the Medal of Honor, or any other decoration for valor. Those who have performed the deeds necessary to be considered for such an award have seen many- sometimes most- of their buddies killed in action, and don't feel that this makes them "winners" of anything. Recipients of awards for valor generally prefer "received the Medal...." or "were awarded the Medal....". To someone who has never seen combat, it might sound like nit-picking, but I believe that these men have earned the right to have their wishes in this matter honored.

[–] Steyr808 16 years ago

I get what you are saying, but it is semantics.

Through their actions and deeds they have "won" the decoration. It's not as trivial as winning a card game or the lottery, and certainly not as random, but still correct given the definition of the word.

To "win" is to achieve victory or to prevail. I would say every MOH recipient has won the award and did so at great cost and effort. They are a true winner, someone who prevails when nobody expects it to be possible through great effort.

In that past many man have proudly won such decorations like the MOH, Blue Max and Iron Cross. The problem is winning doesn't carry the same connotation it once did as things are "won" so easily today. And people who succeed at childrens games such as football and basketball are usually thought of when you say the word "winner."

I think we simply need to return to the correct usage of the word.

[–] rusher-5 13 years ago

Maybe true with the US but in Soviet Union you actually didn't "win" anything. You were "awarded" or "received" a medal. If you weren't considered to be that loyal to the state you could do everything but you'd still not "win" the medal. I think the same goes for militaries... Winning happens when there are clear rules- you're into competition, finish first and win. In the army you might do great things but then someone discovered you're gay or maybe suspected communist (in McCarty times) and you wouldn't win squat... Even now medals are given on the base of who does heroic deeds + one's looks and views he holds.

[–] boxerrebellion 12 years ago

No it's not a matter of semantics. Talk to a few of the men who wear the Medal of Honour - the three I have met were WWII Vets. They would not use the word 'won' to describe their Medal. I have not had the privilege of meeting any of the the more recent recipients.

[–] boxerrebellion 12 years ago

Thank you. You said it much better than I did... I wish I had seen your post before I did mine.

[–] bari2525 16 years ago

Nelson -

I see what you're saying about men in his age bracket in the military at the start of WWII, but you must remember that these men were CAREER military men (25 plus years), and USUALLY officers of a certain rank.

Alvin York had been back in Tennessee for 23 years, which made him about 53-54 years old, and he was already experiencing health issues. Not to mention the fact that he had several children, and was more than a little overweight (no offense meant to him).

He did serve on the local area draft board, but nothing more "high ranking" than that.

Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway. John Wayne

[–] nelson95 16 years ago

Right and I think just the fact that York wanted to serve his country that bad during the Second World War is a real tribute to him! That's really the only point I was trying to make.

[–] bari2525 16 years ago

Yep, and I agree with you! It's a shame he wasn't allowed to do more.

Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway. John Wayne

[–] cplprice 16 years ago

An even greater irony. York initially opposed our entering WWII and for a time refused to allow the movie to be made. Gary Cooper convinced York that fighting the Axis Powers was a necessity and got him to rethink his isolationist/pacifist stance. In fact his pacifist stance caused him to get many threats and much hate mail, some woman wrote that she wished he'd died in Germany during WWII. He was called a coward and a fraud, he never backed down. He was a man of great character. The only way he was changed in his stance was with a reasopned argument.

[–] indy_go_blue44 12 years ago

MANY people opposed us entering WW2, and some regard Hitler's declaration of war on Dec. 11, 1941 as his third biggest mistake in the war (after attacking Russia and not completing the conquest of Britain before attacking Russia.) There was an incredible amount of cynicism against the French and British for the Versailles Treaty as well as regard for Washington's warning to "avoid foreign entanglements." Many Americans felt that the big bankers (still badly hated for their part in the not yet ended Great Depression) and munition makers drug the US into the Great War and they trying their best not to let it happen again.

Alvin York was opposed to war, period. I'm not exactly sure what his reasoning was in regards to staying out of WW2, but it's not because he was a coward or shirker.

[–] bari2525 12 years ago

As in the case of The Great War, he was INITIALLY against our entry into WWII, but like everyone else with two eyes and a brain, the attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec 7, 1941 changed all of that forever.

He understood the world was in bad shape and we simply couldn't stay neutral any longer.

He HATED killing, but he hated war and the carnage it caused worse than what it took to bring it all to an end.

I don't act...I react. John Wayne

[–] Benicky 12 years ago

With today's instant media we would not have entered the war. If people saw the Normandy invasion live people would have freaked

[–] boxerrebellion 12 years ago

I know that the OP won't see this, but I think it needs to be said. The word 'Winner' does not seem appropriate when referring to the Medal of Honour. I have met some recipients, and they ALL would have preferred NOT to have received it because they would have preferred NOT to have been in the situation - and would have preferred that the lives of the men they saved or tried to save not have been on the line. They do not consider themselves heroes (I disagree), but feel they did what anyone would have done in that situation. The Medal of Honour is NOT a contest to be won. Each of those men EARNED it.

[–] silvercometred1 9 years ago

If you stop and think about it that almost doesn't make sense because there were men in the military at that point in time within the same age bracket.

Most of those were career military men who were already in the US Army, mostly senior NCOs and Officers. Or an older civilian, whom had a specialty that the Army needed.