The Boys Crusades Analysis

World War II is frequently labeled the ‘Good War,’ as it is characterized as one of the few wars in history that is justified by a majority of the world. Throughout the entirety of the war, the Allied forces worked to defeat the nefarious Axis powers. Paul Fussell’s book The Boys’ Crusades exhibits the truth about World War II, and it shows the harsh reality of combat. Young servicemen in America risked their lives in battle, and while they are respected for their work, few people understand the brutality they endure. The Boys’ Crusades argues that the brutality of war must be understood by the public, and as a result of the harshness of combat, World War II cannot be classified as the ‘Good War.’ While servicemen and women are often praised for their heroic duty in war, few people actually understand the circumstances that the soldiers have endured. Soldiers spent each term of World War II in a state of hunger, filth, and exhaustion. Anxiety constantly loomed over each infantry, as there was always a threat of attack. The young American forces had little experience in warfare, as many of these soldiers entered battle for the …show more content…
In order to survive, the soldiers endured savagery, which became a daunting task. When referring to World War II as the ‘Good War,’ it tends to soften the reality of combat. Fussell argues that war is always perilous and should not be taken lightly under any circumstance. Although the Allied forces should be commended for their bravery, war should still not be characterized as ‘Good.’ The bravery of the soldiers displayed in The Boys’ Crusades does not justify ‘Good’ or ‘Bad,’ it simply exhibits the harsh circumstances of World War II. The troops actions may have been necessary to defeat the Axis powers, but the necessity of war does not translate to a ‘Good