Warbird Information Exchange

There is a Grand Canyon's worth of difference between "patriotism" and any party affiliation or blindly accepting that what "your country" does is infallible.

I don't believe that everything the US has done in the past (or is doing currently) is right. Believing that the US is infallible somehow isn't patriotic, it's just plain ignorant. In fact, thinking that "our" side has exclusive use of being "right" or "good", and that others are exclusively "wrong" or "evil" is equally ignorant.

It's not a black and white world. Nor is it a red, white, and blue world. Like it or not, it's shades of gray. The American shade of gray has sometimes been pretty close to white, and sometimes pretty close to black. I'd venture that, among civilizations in history, that's pretty close to how most others have looked, too, at various times.

In fact, I personally believe that it's a very high form of patriotism to question what your country does and has done -- after all, the Minutemen questioned THEIR government, and when they didn't agree with it, they acted to change it. I'm not advocating acting out with a musket (or rifle), but I am enthusiastically advocating being intelligently engaged with the civil process of our republic. Blindly following some party's political agenda doesn't count, in my book. Thinking for yourself and acting in accordance with the ideals laid out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights does, though. The most basic and important form of engagement is simply VOTING. IMHO, if you don't vote, you are bypassing your most basic responsibility as an American.



A couple things:

1) Having served in the military doesn't make anyone's opinion more valid than anyone else's, but it cetainly shows that they value the Republic and are willing to actually participate in defending it. That DOES count for something in my book...but it is not the only method of being an engaged American citizen, by a long shot.

2) Just because someone isn't a flag-waving, U-S-A chanting person doesn't automatically make them a clueless tree-hugging, blame-America hippie. Nor does it make them a 'cancer'. You can't possibly have read (and understood) the same Bill of Rights that I did, and seriously believe that.

3) There is no #3

4) Final thought: If this were a one point-of-view-is-right country/culture/civilization, it wouldn't be America. It would be fascism.

Thanks for the philosophy lesson. Anyone who wants to paint a picture of the Japanese in WWII being just your average G.I. Jun is either ignorant or a revisionist. You can say all you want about atrocities in the past, present and future, on balance the US had the moral high road in WWII. Anyone who wants to debate that is wrong.

A thoughtful and eloquent argument. I have great aunt who spent most of the war in a Japanese concentration camp in Indonesia. To this day she has difficulty talking about what happened and is wary of Japanese people. Myself, I've lived in Japan and would be hard pressed to find a more hospitable and friendly people than the Japanese.

How do you reconcile the one experience with the other? I suppose you just have to be willing to accept that there is complexity in life and that to pigeon-hole any race or people based on a period in history is to unfairly short change them.

That is a very to the point way of saying what I was getting at. Thank you.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Anybody who wants to claim that anybody in this thread is trying to debate that is being paranoid. Find a single line in this entire thread where anyone has claimed that. We HAVE noted that we have done "evil" things as well. Was Hiroshima anywhere as bad as what the Japanese were doing? I don't think so, personally. Was it horrific? yep. Was it necessary? yep.

The only reason US actions that were less than nice was brought up was to point out that we were just as capable of doing "evil" as the Axis. The only real difference was that they did it because they could. We did it because we had to. (that is a huge difference of course)

Was GIs shooting prisoners (clearly murder by any set of laws) evil or did the prisoners deserve? Probably neither. It was usually done because the GIs had to move on and nobody to turn them over to. Are they evil because they had to commit an act of legal murder? All I can anaswer is that I would have done the same. (that's not just posturing--I have been in similar circumstances)

We are not saying that the average GI Jun (lol!) was holding jebus' hand in life. We are saying that there were individuals who were decent people. And there were individuals who were heroic. And individuals who were able to see what their people had become. And they were all washed into the sea, unable to resist the tide. To me, THEIR story is worth telling. If only as a lesson to those of us today who refuse to stand up and be heard. In nations where you aren't allowed, things like Japan and Nazi Germany happen.

In very recent times in the US, this was called for by conservatives. We were told "if you aren't behind the president you are an enemy" and that is almost a quote. I believe the lesson of Japan is particularly important today. The war we are in must be won. But who will we become to win it?

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

There is no universal absolute here...that's the problem with this debate.

I don't think anyone here will debate that the US was on the moral high ground in the Second World War. I think the problem is, at least for me, is to make the universal claim that All Japanese Were Evil.

Please note the word ALL.

I'm reading a book called 'Lightning Strike' about the mission to shoot down Yamamoto's flight. It refers to an incident on Guadalcanal where a Japanese soldier surrendered, claiming to be sick. A Marine officer knocked the profferred weapon out of the enemy's hands, and another marine calmly blew his head off with a shotgun.

Before anyone gets up in arms about it, I am in no way, shape or form denigrating my country or the marines in question. My point is this. Just as there are heinous acts commited on one side in a war, there are also heinous acts committed on another. More importantly, just as there are laudable, moral individuals on one side, so are there on another. Acknowledging the existence of Count von Stauffenberg does not excuse Hitler.

I want to know about those guys. I want to read about the man in combat who does not succumb to its lowest common denominator, if only because I can't understand how evil can exist without its own antithesis.

_________________
"Anyway, the throat feels a bit rough...the legs have gone...but I'm still able to chant, so let's get going."

Joe Strummer, 1999

There is a difference between saying that there were some normal guys in the Japanese Army, and saying that the typical fighting man in the Japanese Army was just the average Joe. The normal guys in the Japanese Army are the exception not the norm. I just want to make sure the movie portrays that right.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

I may have made that statement and I can see how crazy it sounds. It was far closer to what you just described. By average joe I meant: pretty uneducated guys who were at the mercy of their superiors and system. Mostly they were just the product of the social system. I don't believe they were inherantly evil. They certainly were not American soldiers, who were by and large the best educated, healthiest, and most liberal thinking in the world. Certainly our soldiers were better human beings than most of the Japanese. Just not perfect. I sort of see the Japanese and americans as diametrically opposed on the scale of common decency. We had evil aberations. They had decent aberations.

And yes, the ones who saw how crazy it was, who tried to act with decency (or just get home) were the exception, not the example.

_________________
"I knew the jig was up when I saw the P-51D-20-NA Mustang blue-nosed bastards from Bodney, and by the way the blue was more of a royal blue than an indigo and the inner landing gear interiors were NOT green, over Berlin."

rwdfresno...your childish comments about Spitfires certainly does nothing to further your agenda, but rather shows quite nicely the depths of fanaticism in this great country of ours! To lower yourself to the level of a third grader and make a comment like that is truly pathetic.

_________________
Earn my respect and never lose it.
Demand my respect and never gain it. -Me

...just another plane dreamer.

Sorry guys, but nuking two cities isn't the "moral high ground" no matter how you want to look at it.

_________________
Remembering those that served in Bomber Command!

www.bombercrew.com

What do you know!? Your from Canada!

I disagree. If we had not done so, more lives would have been lost. We went with the route that had fewer deaths. That is the moral high ground.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager

Making a childish comment has nothing to do with fanaticism. Was it a childish comment, absolutely! You obviously have no room for humor in your life. I hardly think that saying Spitfires are gay is a hard lined fanatical point of view. I am far from a fanatic and the fact that you make such an obtuse comment shows that you have little or know understanding of me or my point of views. I think that people like you are dangerous, people who have no tolerance for another point of view, and who can not even stand back and laugh at the situation. Time after time it has been asked that no more political discussions be made on this board and time after time people start them. It is frustrating because I feel strongly about my point of view and have a hard time keeping my opinions to myself when I see other people engaging in debate. To be honest a lot of you have really soured me on this board (you are one of them) and it is becoming less and less fun to visit the site.

Ryan

As evidenced by this comment it is under debate by many in this forum and throughout this country.

I guess the real issue here is that there are just some people in the world that no matter what will not take a side. For every serial killer there is some person who wants to understand them, and discuss how him being dressed up like a girl by his sisters was the cause of his insanity. They talk about how he was really just a nice misunderstood guy down the street that was bullied in high school, a victim himself, that just had no other way to express himself.

There is evil in this world and some are not able to fess up to that fact. Evil isn't resigned to one country and there are plenty of times, such as during the 150 years of black oppression that we didn't have the moral highroad. There are also many times throughout modern history when people in our government have more than likely committed atrocities, most of which we probably know little about. Sometimes in dealing with horrific circumstances you have no other choice than to do the unthinkable. There are times when you you have to realize that your enemy is the enemy and killing 1000 of his people is better than killing 10 of yours. Your goal in a war is not to have the fewest amount of casualties, it is to destroy and demoralize your enemy to the point which they are either dead or give up. Keeping your country safe is a very dangerous, brutal, and horrific job, It isn't a gentleman's sport.

When it comes to the Japanese I simply don't care enjoy a movie or a story that attempts to humanize their cause. I don't need a movie or book to understand that these were human beings that had families and lives back home. I am of the opinion through 20 years of study, listening to dozens of first hand accounts that the Japanese were a band of loyal, brutal, ruthless, fanatical, and unprovoked pirates that were offensively attacking their neighboring countries. I know what their side of the story was, I read it in a book published in Japan in 1946 by the Japanese government. I know their motivation and I really don't care about G. I. Jun's personal tale of woe.

If you all want to do so then great but as much as you want me and those of my opinion to respect your ambitions to discuss the merits of he story, why don't you all extend the same consideration to those of us who want to discuss our dislike of the movie or subject. Instead we are accused of being fanatics.

The fact is the intolerant group on this site are the ones who claim to be the most open minded and unbiased.

I have to say I agree with your last comments word for word.

_________________
Chris Henry
EAA Aviation Museum Manager