At the going down of the sun

I wholeheartedly endorse the anti-war sentiments expressed by Jude Law et al (Letters, 22 May). It may be worth reminding David Cameron, before he goes on to mark the anniversary of the first world war with a "truly national commemoration of national spirit", that the so-called "war memorials" erected throughout the land after the war were originally called "peace memorials". If you look at two politically neutral guidebooks, in Arthur Mee's The King's England, in the 30s, you will see them referred to in a quite matter-of-fact way as "peace memorials", whereas three decades and another world war later, Nikolaus Pevsner's The Buildings of England describes them as "war memorials". Let any modern memorial mark that peace, and remember with humility the suffering and sacrifice on all sides rather than by taking pride in "national spirit".
Austen Lynch
Garstang, Lancashire

• So David Cameron plans to spend £55m commemorating the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the first world war. I trust he will commemorate the West Indies Regiment. On 6 December 1918, 180 sergeants forwarded a petition to the secretary of state complaining about the levels of pay, which were much lower than for white troops, and the failure to increase their separation allowance, as well as discriminations in promotion. On the same day, the men of the 9th Battalion revolted as they had been forced to work as labourers, including cleaning the latrines of the Italian Labour Corps. So shall we also be commemorating British racism during the war?
Marika Sherwood
Sr research fellow, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London

• David Cameron is unlikely to take the good advice of Jude Law et al and "promote peace and international co-operation", especially given his current Ukip infatuation. However, individuals can decide to wear "never again" white poppies in 2014 as a reminder that, in almost all cases, war is a choice and peace an alternative. In doing so, they would also show sincere respect for those who have died or been wounded in war by signalling that they do not want such avoidable loss and suffering to happen again.
Richard Stainton
Whitstable, Kent

• If Martin Adams (Letters, 22 May) had read the article on the previous page by Guy Standing, about the progressive stripping of social security rights from working and unemployed people since the time of Margaret Thatcher, perhaps he would not have written about "the acts of bravery that helped ensure that this and other nations were not enslaved", since that enslavement is precisely what so many of the unemployed, the disabled, the low-paid and the mentally ill experience as their daily lot.
Fr Julian Dunn
Great Haseley, Oxfordshire

• I thought the whole point of continued remembrance of the two world wars, and all wars, was to help to avoid starting another. Every November, across the world, there are thousands of services where lines from poems of Laurence Binyon and John McCrae are spoken: At the going down of the sun and in the morning / We will remember them (For the Fallen); If ye break faith with us who die / We shall not sleep, though poppies grow / In Flanders' Fields (In Flanders' Fields). Are these words not meant to be taken to heart?
K Vines
Yelverton, Devon

• The first world war was labelled the war to end war. The second world war, the war to end tyranny. War and tyranny still flourish. Both wars were failures. Those who died or were maimed for life fighting or sheltering from bombing or fleeing or starving were not the only casualties. Their families, their communities, their nations and their economies were all deeply affected for many years. At 88, my memories of both wars – my parents' and my own – still bring me to tears. They failed. We need, as communities, to remember the suffering wars bring about, to recognise that to try to solve conflict by violent means, by war, will fail. I shall be adding my name to ww1.stopwar.org.uk and urging my friends to do the same.
Audrey Urry
Bridport, Dorset