Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:01 pm
I was going to watch it, but then I remembered that I don't give a s&%$ about the Japanese side of the story.
Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:09 pm
ah hahaah! I though that too.[/theme song from Deliverance/]
But it was actually pretty good. Somehow I never realized Iwo actually had plants on it
Even after the navy pounding there was still a lot of grass--and there was a town as well. I guess it was mostly interesting from a historical perspective, and getting to know the island...
But it was actually pretty good. Somehow I never realized Iwo actually had plants on it
Even after the navy pounding there was still a lot of grass--and there was a town as well. I guess it was mostly interesting from a historical perspective, and getting to know the island...
Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:58 pm
muddyboots wrote:I am not confused, cripes. Nor am I suffering from a stupor.
From websters:her·o·ism
Pronunciation: 'her-&-"wi-z&m, 'he-r&- also 'hir-
Function: noun
1 : heroic conduct especially as exhibited in fulfilling a high purpose or attaining a noble end
2 : the qualities of a hero
If you are attempting to change civilization for what YOU perceive to be "the better" then what is a nobler cause? Certainly a high purpose to THEM, as I said. Therefore the terrorists, although fanatics ti US, were heroic IN THEIR PEOPLE'S eyes. Which is all I ever said. Were they evil? I dunno. Were they effective? yes. did they change the world for the better? I think so, if by the better you mean we have dropped an awful lot of bombs on people who needed it
As for the Japanese, they were sacrificing themselves in what THEY percieved to be a noble cause: to protect the mainland, their families, Japan's pride, and their Emporer. It would be stupid to say they didn't think they were heroes. And I suspect, as Eastwood did, you could find a great deal of heroism in their struggle--if you were willing to get past your own indoctrination that claims we were innocent as virgins. And that is an almsot laughable idea. To wail about the haulocaust and ignore what the russians did in China, Poland, germany, and everywhere else they rolled --and that we welcomed them with open arms is silly.
And to claim that the japanese did anything more horrific than dropping the only two nuclear weapons ever used in war against them...well...We weren't virgins.
You make my case perfectly. Anyway, I'm off to sensitivity training to get my mind right. Cheerio.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:24 am
Convincing some people of a simple point can be harder than teaching a blind man to read. 
I made no point of yours. As for sensitivity training, you're welcome to go. But it won't teach you anything worthwhile. I suggest a logic class.
I made no point of yours. As for sensitivity training, you're welcome to go. But it won't teach you anything worthwhile. I suggest a logic class.
Last edited by muddyboots on Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:02 am, edited 2 times in total.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:24 am
Uh, oh, saw this coming...
It's an intreaguing, well made film, and for those capable and interested, thought provoking.
Some of us regard life as a learning opportunity, and aim to have an open mind. Most people just want to live their lives, eat, have kids, enjoy life. The Japanese system and culture gave rise to one of the most horrific systematic abuses of humanity of the 20th century, but it doesn't mean that many Japanese people weren't just Mr or Mrs average. No country's history is a pretty picture (if you think yours is, look again - there's a lot that's carefully 'forgotten' as well as the high points we like to trumpet) and many of us don't like the politicians or systems we live in to a degree - it's easier to criticise than to overthrow a fascist dictatorship - and when is it appropriate to attack your countries legitimate government? But deciding a priori that you needn't challenge your assumptions is absolutely certainly a dangerous road to travel.
Mostly forgotten now is the two major shifts in the Western view of the Japanese in 1941 - 1943. Before the attacks in December 1941, most western observers had the contemptuous, ignorant and ultimately very expensive (in lives, material and economics) view of the Japanese as unable to achieve to western standards. The rapid advances by the Japanese who routed the Dutch, British, New Zealand, Australian and American forces (often with inferior numbers) became some kind of superman, able to over-run western defences on a bowl of rice a week, and able to blend into the jungle in ways westerners would never understand.
The major achievement was realising that the Japanese war machine could be stopped, and beaten; that they were neither sub- or super-human, and that we could be better at jungle warfare. Among other things, Letters presents the Japanese understanding of those changes - from contempt to arrogance to realisation of complete impending annihilation. Soldiers are neither heroes or swine, as often presented here in 'tribute' or xenophobic threads - they are mostly ordinary people in extra-ordinary situations, and some excel, some fall; some do their duty, others see a higher duty, others lie and cheat. Unlike today's western armies, most W.W.II soldiers were conscripts - their choice of putting themselves in the line of fire, which is honoured today, by some, was made for them by their state.
Would it have been 'better' for the Japanese soldiers to have run from Iwo Jima? That kind of 'last ditch' defence is enshrined in heroic stories right back to the dawn of history.
In short, deliberate ignorance (and arrogance) is never justifiable, and dangerous. We should have serious reservations about Japan's approach to war, but we also need to aim for understanding - either to win the war, or the peace. There's some quote about history, learning, and repeating...
Regards,
mustangdriver wrote:I was going to watch it, but then I remembered that I don't give a s&%$ about the Japanese side of the story.
It's an intreaguing, well made film, and for those capable and interested, thought provoking.
Some of us regard life as a learning opportunity, and aim to have an open mind. Most people just want to live their lives, eat, have kids, enjoy life. The Japanese system and culture gave rise to one of the most horrific systematic abuses of humanity of the 20th century, but it doesn't mean that many Japanese people weren't just Mr or Mrs average. No country's history is a pretty picture (if you think yours is, look again - there's a lot that's carefully 'forgotten' as well as the high points we like to trumpet) and many of us don't like the politicians or systems we live in to a degree - it's easier to criticise than to overthrow a fascist dictatorship - and when is it appropriate to attack your countries legitimate government? But deciding a priori that you needn't challenge your assumptions is absolutely certainly a dangerous road to travel.
Mostly forgotten now is the two major shifts in the Western view of the Japanese in 1941 - 1943. Before the attacks in December 1941, most western observers had the contemptuous, ignorant and ultimately very expensive (in lives, material and economics) view of the Japanese as unable to achieve to western standards. The rapid advances by the Japanese who routed the Dutch, British, New Zealand, Australian and American forces (often with inferior numbers) became some kind of superman, able to over-run western defences on a bowl of rice a week, and able to blend into the jungle in ways westerners would never understand.
The major achievement was realising that the Japanese war machine could be stopped, and beaten; that they were neither sub- or super-human, and that we could be better at jungle warfare. Among other things, Letters presents the Japanese understanding of those changes - from contempt to arrogance to realisation of complete impending annihilation. Soldiers are neither heroes or swine, as often presented here in 'tribute' or xenophobic threads - they are mostly ordinary people in extra-ordinary situations, and some excel, some fall; some do their duty, others see a higher duty, others lie and cheat. Unlike today's western armies, most W.W.II soldiers were conscripts - their choice of putting themselves in the line of fire, which is honoured today, by some, was made for them by their state.
Would it have been 'better' for the Japanese soldiers to have run from Iwo Jima? That kind of 'last ditch' defence is enshrined in heroic stories right back to the dawn of history.
In short, deliberate ignorance (and arrogance) is never justifiable, and dangerous. We should have serious reservations about Japan's approach to war, but we also need to aim for understanding - either to win the war, or the peace. There's some quote about history, learning, and repeating...
Regards,
Thu Jun 14, 2007 7:35 am
I have a family member that is a death march survivor. He has been on the history Channel and on the local Public Channel as well. He taught me all that I need to know about the Japanese soldier in WWII. They were being paraded through town and civilians were out to watch. While there he saw a family standing outside their home. A father was holding an infant baby in his arms. A Japanese soldier walked over put his riffle in the infants mouth and blew his head off. Did they show that in the movie? And that is just the start of his stories. No, I don't believe in placing fiction with history and showing that the Japanese soldier was just the average joe fighting for his country. I place this movie in the same category as Pearl Harbor. And for the record, I don't believe them to be heroes. That would be the same as saying that the guy that used to gas Jewish people in a concentration camp is a hero. I think not.
Now if you are watching the movie for enjoyment of a movie, then there is nothing wrong with that at all. I actually like Pearl harbor from just a movie standpoint not historical standpoint.
Now if you are watching the movie for enjoyment of a movie, then there is nothing wrong with that at all. I actually like Pearl harbor from just a movie standpoint not historical standpoint.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 8:45 am
Mustangdriver,
I'm sorry to hear you have a relative who was on the death marches. The fact that you can have known him puts him in a small percentage of survivors; those that didn't die during the war generally died within the next twenty years, and their lives were often he11*. Nevertheless, I'm more sorry to see you hold onto someone else's anger.
While you retain that attitude, you'll remain a poor historian with a strong personal view. If you wish to support the NMUSAF (for instance) as well as you can rather than as loudly as you can, you might want to try and learn a bit more. I can understand your point of view, but I can't respect it, I'm afraid. (Although I'm always interested to see what you are going to say, and it's often interesting - sometimes I do agree...)
I'm not interested in 'my atrocity story is worse than your atrocity story', but for context, I had a family member who was a member of the Royal Australian Navy, aboard HMAS Perth, sunk in Sunda Strait with the USS Houston and others. He survived, ended up in Japan, sweeping the streets - I never knew him personally - he died an alcoholic, and the family's stories about what happened to him are graphic, vague, demonstrably true and untrue. They were, on occasion used as excuses for bad behaviour towards Japanese people who were born well after the war - racism, plain simple and nasty. That generation's attitude to the Japanese was understandable and fair enough for them. However, I'd also like to hear what life back in Australia was like for the Australian soldier who married a Japanese bride as part of the occupation forces and brought her 'home' to Aus. It's not 1950s Australia here, it's the 21st century, and thanks to a remarkably enlightened American reconstruction of Japan - miles from your relative's view - we did not have another war with Japan 20 years later. However, you aren't helping now.
'Them' Which 'them' are we talking about? The soldiers on Iwo? Mostly the last dregs conscripts. Hardly the same as the guards in the vivisection camps, nor are 'they' those American-Japanese (and Canadian, too) stupidly, cruelly, and wastefully imprisoned throughout W.W.II in America and Canada. Of course it's not the same - but it was hardly 'truth, justice and the American way'; and leaving aside any moral position, it was a dumb thing to do. One German Jew Alien in Australia was reporting in weekly so we knew what he was up to - which happened to be designing Australia's only indigenous fighter aircraft because we had nothing else to defend ourselves with. I wonder what America lost in the internment camps?
Speaking in general - You are right because of what you do, not who you are, or which flag you wrap yourself in or cause you 'know' to be right. Great deeds are done for bad causes, including heroism, just like terrible acts are carried out by the just. If you can't differentiate, and understand the concept of individual justice, yes, you are as bad as anything you condemn. A Japanese farm boy conscripted soldier on Iwo Jima is not the same as an SS thug. Some Japanese on Iwo were appalling, but letters was based on the true story of a man who wasn't - who liked the Americans, knew he was fated to be annihilated, yet did his duty, even though it was in vain. Admirable? A hero? I don't know, but he wasn't the one-dimensional enemy you need so badly. How about the view of United States Marine Corps General Holland Smith: "Of all our adversaries in the Pacific, Kuribayashi was the most redoubtable" .Never mind the film, see here:
http://ww2db.com/person_bio.php?person_id=21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tadamichi_Kuribayashi
Japan paid a high price for it's aggression and dreadful anti-humanitarian war. Enough or too little doesn't matter now, history is to be learnt from, and that requires learning, rather than retaining an old animosity.
You've obviously skipped most of my previous post because I've stood up and said I don't agree with you. You've not thought about what I said; fine, your prerogative. However, I'd recommend the War Diaries of Weary Dunlop or 'Hellfire' (Cameron Forbes) - both vitally important accounts of the experiences of POWs. The work of Ronald Searle is also very interesting, artistically and socially. None of these are your family member. To ignore his view would be insulting, and I wouldn't do that - he earned respect, understanding and the right to anger. However to ignore those in return is to cherish ignorance.
Do yourself a favour, see the film. At the absolute worst, you'll have wasted a couple of hours. Of course it's got biases, and tries to tell a story too simply - but so have you (And so have I although I've gone on too long.) There is more to be said, and different views are needed, otherwise we are on the road to armageddon.
Hopefully, before then, we'll be able to meet for a beer and a discussion on one of our counties, or if you prefer, I'm up for keyboards at 20 paces.
Regards,
*The POW experience was certainly not heck.
I'm sorry to hear you have a relative who was on the death marches. The fact that you can have known him puts him in a small percentage of survivors; those that didn't die during the war generally died within the next twenty years, and their lives were often he11*. Nevertheless, I'm more sorry to see you hold onto someone else's anger.
mustangdriver wrote:He taught me all that I need to know about the Japanese soldier in WWII.
While you retain that attitude, you'll remain a poor historian with a strong personal view. If you wish to support the NMUSAF (for instance) as well as you can rather than as loudly as you can, you might want to try and learn a bit more. I can understand your point of view, but I can't respect it, I'm afraid. (Although I'm always interested to see what you are going to say, and it's often interesting - sometimes I do agree...)
I'm not interested in 'my atrocity story is worse than your atrocity story', but for context, I had a family member who was a member of the Royal Australian Navy, aboard HMAS Perth, sunk in Sunda Strait with the USS Houston and others. He survived, ended up in Japan, sweeping the streets - I never knew him personally - he died an alcoholic, and the family's stories about what happened to him are graphic, vague, demonstrably true and untrue. They were, on occasion used as excuses for bad behaviour towards Japanese people who were born well after the war - racism, plain simple and nasty. That generation's attitude to the Japanese was understandable and fair enough for them. However, I'd also like to hear what life back in Australia was like for the Australian soldier who married a Japanese bride as part of the occupation forces and brought her 'home' to Aus. It's not 1950s Australia here, it's the 21st century, and thanks to a remarkably enlightened American reconstruction of Japan - miles from your relative's view - we did not have another war with Japan 20 years later. However, you aren't helping now.
mustangdriver wrote:And for the record, I don't believe them to be heroes. That would be the same as saying that the guy that used to gas Jewish people in a concentration camp is a hero. I think not.
'Them' Which 'them' are we talking about? The soldiers on Iwo? Mostly the last dregs conscripts. Hardly the same as the guards in the vivisection camps, nor are 'they' those American-Japanese (and Canadian, too) stupidly, cruelly, and wastefully imprisoned throughout W.W.II in America and Canada. Of course it's not the same - but it was hardly 'truth, justice and the American way'; and leaving aside any moral position, it was a dumb thing to do. One German Jew Alien in Australia was reporting in weekly so we knew what he was up to - which happened to be designing Australia's only indigenous fighter aircraft because we had nothing else to defend ourselves with. I wonder what America lost in the internment camps?
Speaking in general - You are right because of what you do, not who you are, or which flag you wrap yourself in or cause you 'know' to be right. Great deeds are done for bad causes, including heroism, just like terrible acts are carried out by the just. If you can't differentiate, and understand the concept of individual justice, yes, you are as bad as anything you condemn. A Japanese farm boy conscripted soldier on Iwo Jima is not the same as an SS thug. Some Japanese on Iwo were appalling, but letters was based on the true story of a man who wasn't - who liked the Americans, knew he was fated to be annihilated, yet did his duty, even though it was in vain. Admirable? A hero? I don't know, but he wasn't the one-dimensional enemy you need so badly. How about the view of United States Marine Corps General Holland Smith: "Of all our adversaries in the Pacific, Kuribayashi was the most redoubtable" .Never mind the film, see here:
http://ww2db.com/person_bio.php?person_id=21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tadamichi_Kuribayashi
Japan paid a high price for it's aggression and dreadful anti-humanitarian war. Enough or too little doesn't matter now, history is to be learnt from, and that requires learning, rather than retaining an old animosity.
You've obviously skipped most of my previous post because I've stood up and said I don't agree with you. You've not thought about what I said; fine, your prerogative. However, I'd recommend the War Diaries of Weary Dunlop or 'Hellfire' (Cameron Forbes) - both vitally important accounts of the experiences of POWs. The work of Ronald Searle is also very interesting, artistically and socially. None of these are your family member. To ignore his view would be insulting, and I wouldn't do that - he earned respect, understanding and the right to anger. However to ignore those in return is to cherish ignorance.
Do yourself a favour, see the film. At the absolute worst, you'll have wasted a couple of hours. Of course it's got biases, and tries to tell a story too simply - but so have you (And so have I although I've gone on too long.) There is more to be said, and different views are needed, otherwise we are on the road to armageddon.
Hopefully, before then, we'll be able to meet for a beer and a discussion on one of our counties, or if you prefer, I'm up for keyboards at 20 paces.
Regards,
*The POW experience was certainly not heck.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 9:04 am
Very well said. I know what you mean, and it is very possible that there were soldiers like what is seen in the film. I don't believe that this was the majority though. There are stories upon stories of how the japanese enjoyed beating and killing others. Look at the stuff they did to POW's in labs. I have my beliefs and they are aimed at history, not today. I don't think less of a japanese person becuase of thier race. They more than likely had nothing to do with the war. As for getting a beer, I would love to meet up and get some warbird beer.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 10:16 am
The "Japanese are evil/heroes" is a subject covered all ready in this thread:
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... wtopic.php
Again, my opinion is being evil or a hero all depends on which side you are on. The "moral high ground" is often not as high as one might think, and for anyone that thinks we in the US have exclusive use of the high ground....
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... wtopic.php
Again, my opinion is being evil or a hero all depends on which side you are on. The "moral high ground" is often not as high as one might think, and for anyone that thinks we in the US have exclusive use of the high ground....
Thu Jun 14, 2007 10:58 am
Gee...and I liked the movie. I don't remember running out in the street afterwards screaming, "The Japanese were heroes. The Japanese were heroes."
Where did I go wrong.
Did you believe everything you saw in "Flags"? I hope not.
People...people...people...IT WAS A FREAKIN" MOVIE
!
Mudge the stable
Where did I go wrong.
Did you believe everything you saw in "Flags"? I hope not.
People...people...people...IT WAS A FREAKIN" MOVIE
!
Mudge the stable
Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:29 am
In my 58 years I have sadly witnessed the softening and down playing of what happened in WWII. There are many reasons for this, some political, some economic and I am sure a desire to forgive and forget. Guilt also plays a part. We all want to think that the other guy is just like us and if we could just sit down and have a couple of beers we could work things out. It is hard for most of us to believe that there are nasty mean disgusting people out there that really like to kill. It is hard for us to believe there are governments that will do anything including murder to further their goals. We like to think that we are all moral nice people and that given a decent childhood with loving parents we will all live together in one big harmonious family of love.
Someone in this thread talked about noble causes.
The Nazis perceived a civilization without Jews and exterminated millions of them. Oh what a noble cause!
Someone questioned if these regimes were evil. I think they were. Personally it is hard for me to define evil any better.
To equate the two atom bombs dropped on Japan with the wanton brutality and butchery of the Japanese is sickening. We killed more Japanese with firebomb raids then we did with the atom bombs. The bombs SAVED lives. American lives. They did exactly what they were designed to do. END THE WAR. We even warned the Japanese before we dropped them. The proof is that we had to drop TWO. The fanatical Japanese government actually considered continuing the war.
Arguing over what is heroic is about as useless as arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
My point. We were right! They were wrong! I’m damned glad we won!
Dan
Someone in this thread talked about noble causes.
The Nazis perceived a civilization without Jews and exterminated millions of them. Oh what a noble cause!
Someone questioned if these regimes were evil. I think they were. Personally it is hard for me to define evil any better.
To equate the two atom bombs dropped on Japan with the wanton brutality and butchery of the Japanese is sickening. We killed more Japanese with firebomb raids then we did with the atom bombs. The bombs SAVED lives. American lives. They did exactly what they were designed to do. END THE WAR. We even warned the Japanese before we dropped them. The proof is that we had to drop TWO. The fanatical Japanese government actually considered continuing the war.
Arguing over what is heroic is about as useless as arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
My point. We were right! They were wrong! I’m damned glad we won!
Dan
Thu Jun 14, 2007 12:47 pm
Dan Newcomb wrote:It is hard for most of us to believe that there are nasty mean disgusting people out there that really like to kill. It is hard for us to believe there are governments that will do anything including murder to further their goals.
Yeah, the US Gov would never do something evil like that!
Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:01 pm
Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:03 pm
Gosh I hate labels! Call me an old curmudgeon but me thinks thou art a Cynic.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:12 pm
Randy Haskin wrote:Dan Newcomb wrote:It is hard for most of us to believe that there are nasty mean disgusting people out there that really like to kill. It is hard for us to believe there are governments that will do anything including murder to further their goals.
Yeah, the US Gov would never do something evil like that!
The last time I check the U.S. never did anything even close to what the axis did.