View Full Version: New claimant- Harry Futcher b. 22nd April 1904

The 110 Club > WWI Veterans > New claimant- Harry Futcher b. 22nd April 1904


Title: New claimant- Harry Futcher b. 22nd April 1904


Swerve17 - April 23, 2010 06:42 AM (GMT)
Heres the link -

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/8112...s_106th_b\
irthday/

Whats the general feeling about this? It sounds plausible. I'm quite excited about this, as 3 legged cross (Where he lives) Is around 5 miles from where I live!

Cjeales - April 23, 2010 09:37 AM (GMT)
He served at 14 years old as a "bandsman"? I admit, I had no idea they would send someone that young! Does this count as being a war veteran?

longevitydude - April 23, 2010 02:29 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Cjeales @ Apr 23 2010, 04:37 AM)
He served at 14 years old as a "bandsman"? I admit, I had no idea they would send someone that young! Does this count as being a war veteran?

if being a waitress for the soldiers counts, or being a nurse counts, then yes, Harry Futcher can in fact be considered a veteran as well.

katherinePlunket - April 24, 2010 12:56 PM (GMT)
This is getting ridiculous - maybe an 8-year-old cleaned his brother's rifle when he came home from the Front, does he count?? Some "veterans" might not even be 100 yet :D

longevitydude - April 24, 2010 01:16 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (katherinePlunket @ Apr 24 2010, 07:56 AM)
This is getting ridiculous - maybe an 8-year-old cleaned his brother's rifle when he came home from the Front, does he count?? Some "veterans" might not even be 100 yet :D

i wonder if making the uniforms and weapons counts :D :D :D :D

Swerve17 - April 24, 2010 02:53 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Apr 24 2010, 08:16 AM)
QUOTE (katherinePlunket @ Apr 24 2010, 07:56 AM)
This is getting ridiculous - maybe an 8-year-old cleaned his brother's rifle when he came home from the Front, does he count??  Some "veterans" might not even be 100 yet  :D

i wonder if making the uniforms and weapons counts :D :D :D :D

I think combat veterans are the only proper veterans. Those that have seen it all.

longevitydude - April 24, 2010 03:02 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Swerve17 @ Apr 24 2010, 09:53 AM)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Apr 24 2010, 08:16 AM)
QUOTE (katherinePlunket @ Apr 24 2010, 07:56 AM)
This is getting ridiculous - maybe an 8-year-old cleaned his brother's rifle when he came home from the Front, does he count??  Some "veterans" might not even be 100 yet  :D

i wonder if making the uniforms and weapons counts :D :D :D :D

I think combat veterans are the only proper veterans. Those that have seen it all.

i guess that standard would make Harry Patch the last one.

clark kent - April 24, 2010 03:13 PM (GMT)
as long as you were trained for service in an army or navy or air force back then i think that counts as a veteran

longevitydude - April 24, 2010 03:14 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (clark kent @ Apr 24 2010, 10:13 AM)
as long as you were trained for service in an army or navy or air force back then i think that counts as a veteran

do you consider florence green a veteran, does being a waitress for the soldiers count.

SiameseTurtle - April 24, 2010 06:35 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Swerve17 @ Apr 24 2010, 02:53 PM)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Apr 24 2010, 08:16 AM)
QUOTE (katherinePlunket @ Apr 24 2010, 07:56 AM)
This is getting ridiculous - maybe an 8-year-old cleaned his brother's rifle when he came home from the Front, does he count??  Some "veterans" might not even be 100 yet  :D

i wonder if making the uniforms and weapons counts :D :D :D :D

I think combat veterans are the only proper veterans. Those that have seen it all.

But not all combat veterans have seen it all. Some were still in training. Some, though deployed, were never involved in combat. What about a medic who had to run across the front line to save others? What about a driver delivering food supplies to soldiers at the front line? They are putting their lives on the line. It's very difficult to draw a perfect line.

longevitydude - April 24, 2010 06:39 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (SiameseTurtle @ Apr 24 2010, 01:35 PM)
QUOTE (Swerve17 @ Apr 24 2010, 02:53 PM)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Apr 24 2010, 08:16 AM)
QUOTE (katherinePlunket @ Apr 24 2010, 07:56 AM)
This is getting ridiculous - maybe an 8-year-old cleaned his brother's rifle when he came home from the Front, does he count??  Some "veterans" might not even be 100 yet  :D

i wonder if making the uniforms and weapons counts :D :D :D :D

I think combat veterans are the only proper veterans. Those that have seen it all.

But not all combat veterans have seen it all. Some were still in training. Some, though deployed, were never involved in combat. What about a medic who had to run across the front line to save others? What about a driver delivering food supplies to soldiers at the front line? They are putting their lives on the line. It's very difficult to draw a perfect line.

Andrew is right, and since the waitresses were serving the soldiers they were helping their country and maybe thats why they can be considered veterans, like Florence Green.

makila - April 25, 2010 01:57 PM (GMT)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

clark kent - April 25, 2010 02:06 PM (GMT)
yeah i consider florence green as a veteran. as long as you had any service in helping the soldiers of world war 1 you may count as a veteran

longevitydude - April 25, 2010 02:08 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (clark kent @ Apr 25 2010, 09:06 AM)
yeah i consider florence green as a veteran. as long as you had any service in helping the soldiers of world war 1 you may count as a veteran

i like clark kent's answer better ;)

SiameseTurtle - April 25, 2010 03:17 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (makila @ Apr 25 2010, 01:57 PM)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

How can you say that when they still put their life on the line to serve their country? This is about what they did, age doesn't come into it.

longevitydude - April 25, 2010 03:26 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (SiameseTurtle @ Apr 25 2010, 10:17 AM)
QUOTE (makila @ Apr 25 2010, 01:57 PM)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

How can you say that when they still put their life on the line to serve their country? This is about what they did, age doesn't come into it.

Andrew is right, frank buckles isnt on wikipedia because hes a centenarian ;) hes on it because hes a veteran who lived to be the last American veteran, if he wasnt a veteran his age wouldnt be enough for him to have an article, his service playes over 80% a part into his notability, while his age may help, thats not even 20% of his notability, but both his age and service do play a part, and rightly so hes mainly recognized for his service instead of his age, but however, if he died in battle or sometime before 100, he probably wouldnt be getting the respect he deserves, since only the last surviving ones and the oldest ones seem to be the most noticed.

BTW the only ''cheaters'' are the ones who claim to be veterans even though they arent.

ryoung122 - April 25, 2010 06:03 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (makila @ Apr 25 2010, 08:57 AM)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

I think that's an OFFENSIVE and SHAMEFUL comment. Simply because someone, like Frank Buckles, was over-eager to be in the war, does NOT warrant such commentary. Some boys as young as 14 fought. To be 17 wasn't that far off.

Now, he drove an ambulance...that is an important job for the wounded, I would say. Combat veteran? No. Real veteran? Yes.


ryoung122 - April 25, 2010 06:05 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Apr 25 2010, 10:26 AM)
QUOTE (SiameseTurtle @ Apr 25 2010, 10:17 AM)
QUOTE (makila @ Apr 25 2010, 01:57 PM)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

How can you say that when they still put their life on the line to serve their country? This is about what they did, age doesn't come into it.

Andrew is right, frank buckles isnt on wikipedia because hes a centenarian ;) hes on it because hes a veteran who lived to be the last American veteran, if he wasnt a veteran his age wouldnt be enough for him to have an article, his service playes over 80% a part into his notability, while his age may help, thats not even 20% of his notability, but both his age and service do play a part, and rightly so hes mainly recognized for his service instead of his age, but however, if he died in battle or sometime before 100, he probably wouldnt be getting the respect he deserves, since only the last surviving ones and the oldest ones seem to be the most noticed.

BTW the only ''cheaters'' are the ones who claim to be veterans even though they arent.

Actually, he status as "one of the last" plays the most role here. If he died at 78, no one would have paid attention other than his own family and local community.

The difference, age-wise, is that the subset of "veterans" (mostly male) "involved in WWI" means that they became notable around age 105 or so, rather than 110.

longevitydude - April 25, 2010 06:41 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (ryoung122 @ Apr 25 2010, 01:05 PM)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Apr 25 2010, 10:26 AM)
QUOTE (SiameseTurtle @ Apr 25 2010, 10:17 AM)
QUOTE (makila @ Apr 25 2010, 01:57 PM)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

How can you say that when they still put their life on the line to serve their country? This is about what they did, age doesn't come into it.

Andrew is right, frank buckles isnt on wikipedia because hes a centenarian ;) hes on it because hes a veteran who lived to be the last American veteran, if he wasnt a veteran his age wouldnt be enough for him to have an article, his service playes over 80% a part into his notability, while his age may help, thats not even 20% of his notability, but both his age and service do play a part, and rightly so hes mainly recognized for his service instead of his age, but however, if he died in battle or sometime before 100, he probably wouldnt be getting the respect he deserves, since only the last surviving ones and the oldest ones seem to be the most noticed.

BTW the only ''cheaters'' are the ones who claim to be veterans even though they arent.

Actually, he status as "one of the last" plays the most role here. If he died at 78, no one would have paid attention other than his own family and local community.

The difference, age-wise, is that the subset of "veterans" (mostly male) "involved in WWI" means that they became notable around age 105 or so, rather than 110.

your right about that, if he becomes THE last, his fame will probably increase, being one of the last veterans in a country is notable, but being THE last in a country is even more notable, its a shame most are forgotten just because they dont live long or dont survive the war, at least they have a family who will remember them though, whoever THE last WW1 vet winds up being will probably be very famous, Frank Buckles was given a lot of attention even when there were other American veterans of WW1, if he becomes THE last he will probably get more recognition than he does now, especially if he becomes a supercentenarian.

while they start getting noticed at about 105, if they make it to 110, or WOP they usually get even more fame.

They ALL served their countries and should at least be remembered by someone, while all afds tend to make me mad, the ones about veterans make me the angriest.

longevitydude - April 25, 2010 06:48 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (ryoung122 @ Apr 25 2010, 01:03 PM)
QUOTE (makila @ Apr 25 2010, 08:57 AM)
In my eyes, Harry Patch was the last real soldier of world war I that we know of. IF there is still someone out there alive that really fought and did NOT cheat with his age, they would be born in 1898(18 in 1917) and at least 111 years old. I do anyone who cheated and fought at age 16 NOT a veteran but a cheater. ;)

I think that's an OFFENSIVE and SHAMEFUL comment. Simply because someone, like Frank Buckles, was over-eager to be in the war, does NOT warrant such commentary. Some boys as young as 14 fought. To be 17 wasn't that far off.

Now, he drove an ambulance...that is an important job for the wounded, I would say. Combat veteran? No. Real veteran? Yes.

Theres more to being a veteran than being a certain age or being a combat soldier, anyone in the military is considered one and those who didnt actually take part are WW1 ERA veterans, serving the soldiers is a job in the military, Florence Green was a waitress and Frank Buckles and an ambulance driver.

Jamin - May 1, 2010 08:21 AM (GMT)
If he was a solder then there must be documents proving it.

Btw.: To be a solder with 14 was not commen. The normal age for this was 18 in germany and 17 in austria, if I remember correct. Younger ones are exceptions - some are regulary, some like Johann Moszynski are from coincidence: Moszynski was 14 when he met a german regiment in galicia and followed them. So he was part of them until 1918 and participated in different battles.

longevitydude - June 15, 2010 11:15 PM (GMT)

Swerve17 - June 16, 2010 09:37 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (longevitydude @ Jun 15 2010, 06:15 PM)
http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/announcem...TCHER_HARRY___/

sadly he died.

This is sad, he lived less than 4 miles away from me.




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree