Looking Back Into History

[The Wingnut]

Maybe it is, but let's let a bartender decide.

I'm a U.S. serviceman and both of my grandpas served in WWII...I'm positive neither would have ever committed such acts. However, I'm still not ready to throw reetpleat out on his ear.

 

[scotrace]

Let's keep it civil, ladies and gentlemen. We can agree to disagree, and discount some opinions altogether if they don't seem to jibe with our own in any way. I'd like to keep this open.
The best response post when you see something that you feel is beyond reasonableness is no response at all. You can generally be assured that you are not alone in your assessment among our membership. No need to point it out.


(My father was in The Bulge)

 

[reetpleat]

To imply that I am out of line for my opinions is both counter to the open minded, fair handedness of the lounge and the American way. I should the one thing that shod get a member banned is personal attacks and I have made none.

Honestly, I think this points out my whole objection to the original premise of the thread. there are many differing opinions and we are all entitled to our own. There are facts and there are opinions on those facts. Every person is entitled to as many facst as possible, and exposure to differing opinions on same. To suggest that there is no room for differing opinions or new opinions based on changing times, new facts, or changing social standards is to suggest we should all just blindly accept what we have alwasy been told. That is exactly waht led the Germans and Japanese into the war. So, if you are so sure that your opinion is the right and valid one, then welcome a discussion of opinions confidant that yours will carrry the day.

So, while we will never agree, you are entitle to your opinion and I claim the right to mine.

I do not have much else ot say on this thread. Perhaps we should return to less controversial issues such as abortion, gun control and weather it is okay to wear brown shoes with blue or grey suits.

 

[Teekay44]

At no time in our history of the last 150 years or more, has the us been under any threat of invasion which might result in any infringement of said right.

I feel that an invasion of the physical United States is not the only way that might result in an infringement of your right of fee speech. My feeling is that the veterans held the line in the threat of invasion and in many other ways defended all our freedoms and liberty's while giving them to many others.

Your augments again do not make a convincing case. Many points are rehashed. It is your right to have such opinions and I do support your right, but not you opinion.

TK

My avatar is my Grandfather. USMC WWII

 

[reetpleat]

Well, thank you to those who have supported my right to an opinion even if you strongly disagree with me.

For the record, I at no point suggested that US soldiers killed babies, kittens or puppies.

Still, atrocities and war crimes happen in all wars. To think that no war crimes or atrocities happened on the part of American troops or their allies is naive and goes against proven fact.

That said, I do believe that the US military has alwasy endevored to hold their soldiers to a high standard or ethical treatment, and I am sure the fathers and grandfathers of lounge members were good honorable soldiers and came home with no guilt on their hands.

 

[A.R. McVintage]

Let's keep it civil, ladies and gentlemen. We can agree to disagree, and discount some opinions altogether if they don't seem to jibe with our own in any way. I'd like to keep this open.
The best response post when you see something that you feel is beyond reasonableness is no response at all. You can generally be assured that you are not alone in your assessment among our membership. No need to point it out.


(My father was in The Bulge)

Fair enough, though I do hope such behavior is noted even if the member tries to obfuscate and backpeddle later.

I thought about asking for an ignore feature, but poking out one's eye because of something patently, inexcusably offensive doesn't remove the offense. It only blinds oneself.

 

[Ben]

And his opinion is that US soldiers=Baby slaughterers/head severers and he doesn't care about what a vet has to say on that matter or any other.

It's against forum rules and is trollish behavior.

You should look at Paul Fussell's "Thank God for the Atom Bomb and Other Essays." He has some photos in there of U.S. Soldiers and Marines boiling the severed heads of Japanese soliders so they could send the skulls home as souveniers.

Fussell was U.S. Infrantry Captain in WWII who fought in the European theatre and then was sent to the pacific for the invasion of Japan. He was glad the bomb was dropped because it meant he didn't need to go into battle. But he never sugarcoats the war or says it was really keen.

Read his book 'Wartime' for another look at the war.

 

[Story]

You should look at Paul Fussell's "Thank God for the Atom Bomb and Other Essays." He has some photos in there of U.S. Soldiers and Marines boiling the severed heads of Japanese soliders so they could send the skulls home as souveniers.

They chop the heads off the still-living prisoners (like the Japanese did countless, countless times), or just chop up a corpse?

Here's a Japanese hero beheading an American prisoner on Bataan.

Institutionalized and widely accepted behavior within the Japanese Imperial forces far outweighs the actions of a few individuals.

 

[Feraud]

Fair enough, though I do hope such behavior is noted even if the member tries to obfuscate and backpeddle later.

This is an extremely uncalled for request especially when the member in question states he is giving an opinion and does not intend to give personal offense. No one is obfuscating nor backpeddling. Give it a break.

As has been noted before, let us all respect the other guy's opinion and discuss the issue.

 

[A.R. McVintage]

This is an extremely uncalled for request especially when the member in question states he is giving an opinion and does not intend to give personal offense. No one is obfuscating nor backpeddling. Give it a break.

As has been noted before, let us all respect the other guy's opinion and discuss the issue.

"Your father acts like a rapist."

That's an opinion, and an extremely ugly one.

"The soldiers of the United States did not fight for my rights nor were they any more moral than their enemies who went into civilian populations and raped and mutilated thousands of innocents."

That's another extremely ugly one.

If a member wants to state an opinion but can not do it in any other way than to be as insulting as is possible than they need to refrain from sharing it or do some serious research into basic English usage to make it not offensive. Saying something patently ugly and adding the disclaimer, "No offense," does not remove offense. Not being offensive removes offense.

My message was perfectly called for.

 

[Ben]

They chop the heads off the still-living prisoners (like the Japanese did countless, countless times), or just chop up a corpse?

Institutionalized and widely accepted behavior within the Japanese Imperial forces far outweighs the actions of a few individuals.

First off, why are you calling the Japanese doing this 'heroes'? It is an awful thing to do.

Sorry, I don't have any scans to match yours, but look at the book, the photos are nearly as grisly. And yes, it was sometimes live prisoners -- not including the ones that had their gold teeth knocked out and were otherwise brutalized.

But, here is some more textual evidence:

In 1943 Life magazine published the picture of a U.S. sailor's girlfriend contemplating a Japanese skull sent to her as a gift - with a note written on the top of the skull. Referring to this practice, Edward L. Jones, a U.S. war correspondent in the Pacific wrote in the February 1946 Atlantic Magazine, "We boiled the flesh off enemy skulls to make table ornaments for sweethearts, or carved their bones into letter-openers."

Wait, I found the Life photo in question:

On occasion, these "Japanese trophy skulls" have confused police when they have turned up during murder investigations. It has been reported that when the remains of Japanese soldiers were repatriated from the Mariana Islands in 1984, sixty percent were missing their skulls."

Source: Kenneth V. Iserson, M.D., Death to Dust: What happens to Dead Bodies?, Galen Press, Ltd. Tucson, AZ. 1994. p.382.

So, "widely acepted" is a good way to describe the practice. A friend of mine in high school had an older father who served in the Pacific Theatre and told of driving around in a Jeep with Japanese skulls on the headlights.

It is also interesting to note, no German skulls were sent home.

War is an ugly thing and does bad things to people. Our guys weren't always the good guys who fought bravely and died nobly. The sooner we recognize that the better.

As for banning people with differing opinions, does that mean we can ban those who seek to shut down freedom of speech?

 

[Feraud]

"Your father acts like a rapist."

That's an opinion, and an extremely ugly one.

"The soldiers of the United States did not fight for my rights nor were they any more moral than their enemies who went into civilian populations and raped and mutilated thousands of innocents."

That's another extremely ugly one.

If a member wants to state an opinion but can not do it in any other way than to be as insulting as is possible than they need to refrain from sharing it or do some serious research into basic English usage to make it not offensive. Saying something patently ugly and adding the disclaimer, "No offense," does not remove offense. Not being offensive removes offense.

My message was perfectly called for.

Listen buddy, you message is uncalled for and straight out unwanted.
Once again you miss the point. You are too new a member to be calling for any else to be "noted" by the bartenders of the Lounge. We do not need to "take names."

I suggest you quit the semantics and post nicely and back on topic. You will have more fun this way.

 

[A.R. McVintage]

I suggest you quit the semantics and post nicely and back on topic. You will have more fun this way.

This has nothing to do with semantics, it has to do with being insulted. And a member should not have to be here a long time to call bad behavior when it is plainly given. It was also a response specifically directed toward scotrace and not intended for your vendetta against my person.

I do not know what it is I have done for you to single me out a second time (the first being the "Our Vintage Town" thread), but if you have a personal issue with me, I simply ask that you take it to personal messages and not air grievances in public nor try to intimidate me.

 

[A.R. McVintage]

First off, why are you calling the Japanese doing this 'heroes'? It is an awful thing to do.

I believe he is saying that to the Japanese these people were heroic in deed and not reviled for their actions.

 

[Feraud]

This has nothing to do with semantics, it has to do with being insulted. And a member should not have to be here a long time to call bad behavior when it is plainly given. It was also a response specifically directed toward scotrace and not intended for your vendetta against my person.

I do not know what it is I have done for you to single me out a second time (the first being the "Our Vintage Town" thread), but if you have a personal issue with me, I simply ask that you take it to personal messages and not air grievances in public nor try to intimidate me.

I have personal issues with no one but am attempting to tell you there is no reason for Reetpleat to be "noted". Is this clear enough for you?
We have absolutely no reason to p.m.

No one has a vendetta against you so do not play the martyr nor add any backhanded insults like you did in the other thread.

My well intentioned suggestion is to take Scotrace's advice (which you are actively not doing) and keep it civil.

Just in case you missed it, here are scotrace's words

Let's keep it civil, ladies and gentlemen. We can agree to disagree, and discount some opinions altogether if they don't seem to jibe with our own in any way. I'd like to keep this open.
The best response post when you see something that you feel is beyond reasonableness is no response at all. You can generally be assured that you are not alone in your assessment among our membership. No need to point it out.


(My father was in The Bulge)

Clear enough?

 

[A.R. McVintage]

No one has a vendetta against you so do not play the martyr nor add any backhanded insults like you did in the other thread.

My well intentioned suggestion is to take Scotrace's advice (which you are actively not doing) and keep it civil.

I didn't backhandedly insult you. When I told you I do not think you understand all the nuances of English as is evidenced by much of your misunderstanding , I meant it. That's an opinion based on reasonable evidence.

What is being uncivil to you? Making a suggestion about someone based on their behavior or comparing your forebearers to people who committed horrific attrocities and then adding ,"No offence?" I simply made a suggestion, one which was probably redundant seeing as scotrace already indicated a shared feeling on his father being insulted.

Again, if you have grievances to air with me, I am wholeheartedly asking you to please do so in private so that both of us can quit muddying the thread.

 

[Teekay44]

War is an ugly thing and does bad things to people. Our guys weren't always the good guys who fought bravely and died nobly. The sooner we recognize that the better.

There are many examples of our guys doing this. True enough. But this was not policy or even done by the vast Marjory. War in the Pacific had a colder edge to it. Whether it comes from the physical difference of Asian vs Caucasian or the difference in fighting such as no quarter given is hard to say. Everyone says fight to the last man. The Japanese did. The Japanese attitude on Prisoners also was a factor. Over 90% of Axis POWs lived. Over 90% of the Western Allied POWs captured by the Germans lived. Less than 69% of Allied POWs captured by the Japanese lived. POW to the Japanese code of honor were sub human and treated as such. This was Policy. We had no such policy. To compare actions that were not common with a policy that was is not a valid argument.

Fussel has interesting books but he is but one opinion in a multitude of first person stories. I like Charles MacDonald in Company Commander. (I met his radio operator)

 

[scotrace]

Twitch, My friend, I respect your thoughts and work. This was a good thread for an interesting discussion. I'm sorry it has gone to hell in a hand basket.

I hope those still interested will continue in PM. As it is, my PM box is full of complaints, so "click" it has to go.

Feraud - thanks for your excellent help.

A R McVintage - please hang around and get a feel for the place. The bartenders have all been here long enough to have a good overall feel for 90% of the active members. We've all debated Reetpleat in numerous threads and know where he's coming from, and how to take or leave his words.

Reetpleat, I wish you had just stayed out of this.

One further note: The actions of the Japanese Imperial Army in the early 20th century are in no way to be taken as indicative of the Japanese people we know today. This discussion certainly meant no disrespect for Japanese members - I would also point out that discussing wartime Japanese behavior was not the point of the thread Twitch started.

 

[Feraud]

You love the nonsense huh?
A p.m. is most unnecessary.
If you need the last word, please take whatever odd satisfaction you need from it. Future comments should be on topic.

Regards