RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2

RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

mikemike -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/27/2007 10:15:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wdolson There were many people in the US profiting off of the Axis, especially Nazi Germany. Some are considered among America's "elite" families today. Bill Including the Bush family, from what I've heard. But don't overlook big business. Both Ford and GM built big truck factories in Germany after 1933 that contributed the majority of trucks needed for the mechanization of the Wehrmacht. You might say that the Soviet Union depended on Lend-Lease trucks imported from the USA, while Germany depended on US trucks built right in Germany. Another story is that ITT apparently received compensation from the US government for bomb damage to their properties in Germany, which included Lorenz, one of the leading German avionics companies (they built a large part of the German RADAR equipment). I think there must have been other US corporations that were also compensated.

Apollo11 -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/27/2007 10:27:56 PM)
Hi all, quote: ORIGINAL: mikemike Both Ford and GM built big truck factories in Germany after 1933 that contributed the majority of trucks needed for the mechanization of the Wehrmacht. Are you sure about this? I am 99% certain that I read that US build factories were very very little used in WWII by germany (German trucks were strange mixture of all kinds of models - that was really big problem for logistics and supply and it was never solded in war). quote: You might say that the Soviet Union depended on Lend-Lease trucks imported from the USA, while Germany depended on US trucks built right in Germany. The Russians build the tanks but truckes were US made (i.e. "Land Lease") and those trucks played vital role in Russian advance in 1944 and 1945 (all those breakthroughs without proper supply and amlost "endless" columns of truck would be impossible)! For Germans I doubt - they had really really serious truck problem entire war and their war machine was, at best, just 5-10% mechaniezd / truckized IIRC... Leo "Apollo11"

Mike Scholl -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/27/2007 11:20:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apollo11 quote: ORIGINAL: mikemike Both Ford and GM built big truck factories in Germany after 1933 that contributed the majority of trucks needed for the mechanization of the Wehrmacht. Are you sure about this? I am 99% certain that I read that US build factories were very very little used in WWII by germany (German trucks were strange mixture of all kinds of models - that was really big problem for logistics and supply and it was never solded in war). quote: You are correct. Ford's huge Adam Opel Plant wound up producing a few "camp stoves" before being bombed. The Nazi's were absolute idiots at "industrial mobilization" (for which we must all be greatfull). They didn't even make much intelligent use of the new VW plant that they themselves had created.

witpqs -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/27/2007 11:26:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apollo11 For Germans I doubt - they had really really serious truck problem entire war and their war machine was, at best, just 5-10% mechaniezd / truckized IIRC... Leo "Apollo11" Yep - I have read over and over again that the German Army was largely horse-drawn in WWII, much contrary to the popular image.

wdolson -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/28/2007 1:53:15 AM)
The German army always made heavy use of horses. After Stalingrad, it was even more demechanized. Virtually all their support vehicles became horse drawn. It was necessary to conserve oil. Plus most of the trucks they started the war with had worn out. The thrust into southern Russia in 1942 was to capture Russian oil fields and it failed. Before Germany invaded the USSR, they were getting all the oil they needed from Stalin. They used trucks to transport troops and other support tasks during the Blitzkrieg as well as some during the first phases of the invasion of the USSR. I can't recall if it was something I read from Len Deighton or John Kegan comparing the quality of equipment between armies. Most armies around the world recognized the need for a truck to support their operations in the late 30s. Germany, the UK, Italy, Czechloslovakia, and the US all built military trucks. The Europeans had a well developed railroad network which serviced almost every corner of their countries. Everything was close together and population densities were high, so it was feasible to do this. Because of this, there was virtually no domestic market for commercial trucks. Military trucks had to be designed from the ground up and purpose built. The US had a lot of rural areas with low population densities where the railroads didn't go. There was a thriving private market for trucks that could drive on dirt roads all day, day after day and keep going. When the US Army decided it needed a truck, it went to the big 3 auto makers, who militarized trucks already in production. Not only was this cheaper, but it was starting with a proven design. Today, American 6X6 military trucks are very cheap on the collector's market. France didn't retire the last of their WW II trucks until the mid-70s and some 3rd world countries are still using WW II vintage US built trucks. Collectors pay top dollar for anybody else's trucks from the WW II era because they are rare. Most of them fell apart before the war was over. By the time Germany was defeated at Stalingrad, most of the truck fleet Germany had at the beginning of the war was gone. Mostly due to mechanical failure. Their factories were producing few replacements, since other vehicles had a higher priority. Since oil was getting to be a precious commodity, they didn't put any priority on producing more trucks and focused on horse trnsport. Bill

VSWG -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/28/2007 9:00:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Apollo11 I am 99% certain that I read that US build factories were very very little used in WWII by germany (German trucks were strange mixture of all kinds of models - that was really big problem for logistics and supply and it was never solded in war). The Ford factory in Cologne (completed in 1930) continued to build trucks for the Wehrmacht until 1945. Only 2 bombs fell on it during the war. Why? Because officially it was still US property, so the United States Strategic Bombing Survey made sure that it would not be destroyed... quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl You are correct. Ford's huge Adam Opel Plant wound up producing a few "camp stoves" before being bombed. The Nazi's were absolute idiots at "industrial mobilization" (for which we must all be greatfull). They didn't even make much intelligent use of the new VW plant that they themselves had created. 1. Opel was acquired by General Motors, not Ford. 2. Can you reference this information? Opel build the famous Blitz 3-ton truck throughout the war, although I don't know in which factories.

Mike Scholl -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/28/2007 10:09:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VSWG quote: ORIGINAL: Apollo11 I am 99% certain that I read that US build factories were very very little used in WWII by germany (German trucks were strange mixture of all kinds of models - that was really big problem for logistics and supply and it was never solded in war). The Ford factory in Cologne (completed in 1930) continued to build trucks for the Wehrmacht until 1945. Only 2 bombs fell on it during the war. Why? Because officially it was still US property, so the United States Strategic Bombing Survey made sure that it would not be destroyed... quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl You are correct. Ford's huge Adam Opel Plant wound up producing a few "camp stoves" before being bombed. The Nazi's were absolute idiots at "industrial mobilization" (for which we must all be greatfull). They didn't even make much intelligent use of the new VW plant that they themselves had created. 1. Opel was acquired by General Motors, not Ford. You are correct (that's what I get for using my memory instead of looking it up). What's worse, it was the VW plant at Wolfsburg that was wasted building campstoves and foot warmers (less than 1/5th utilization). As for Opel, the Nazi's and the German military first wanted to break it up (Hitler didn't like Opel because they offered a competing model to his "dream car", the VW). Opel's plants were barely used before 1942, and half the workforce was dispersed. Source is Overy's WHY THE ALLIES WON. 2. Can you reference this information? Opel build the famous Blitz 3-ton truck throughout the war, although I don't know in which factories.

VSWG -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/28/2007 10:28:12 PM)
Yes, that's in line with what I know about the German war industry (not much).

mdiehl -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/28/2007 11:03:17 PM)
I've been watching it as time permitted. The narrative seems "slow" because much of it focuses on the home front. I'd say the accuracy is very good, but since much of the narrative features interviews with veterans, who are sharing recollections, experiences, and statements of how it all looked and felt, much of it is subjective. That's a good thing mind you. Most of anyone who cares to watch it at all has already, probably, a general knowledge of the sequence of events. I have found it to be quite interesting. Not overly politically correct. The only obvious instance of PC was in the half-hour extension on the first episode in which there is a segway to a Mexican American veteran. As I recall, Burns was pressured into adding a special emphasis on Hispanics.

Bearcat2 -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/28/2007 11:38:06 PM)
Someone forgot to tell the US Army[not to mention Bomber cmd] as they shelled the plant with artillery; the major reason it was not targeted was that it was insignificant to the war production of Germany, other Ford plants, ex; in Hungary and Rumania were targeted and Ford was compensated for their destruction after the war. The Ford plant submitted claims of 12million RM to the German govt for bomb damages during the period 1942-45, while the main factory was not hit, some of it's other buildings were. quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl The Ford factory in Cologne (completed in 1930) continued to build trucks for the Wehrmacht until 1945. Only 2 bombs fell on it during the war. Why? Because officially it was still US property, so the United States Strategic Bombing Survey made sure that it would not be destroyed...

Joe D. -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 6:15:24 PM)
Is it just my local cable provider, or has anyone else noticed the increased amount of WW II shows run by rival TV stations during the PBS Ken Burns documentary this week? AMC has been showing The Longest Day and Midway over and over again, and Turner broadcasting just premiered the movie re the raid led by Col. Henry Mucci -- whom we named a section of Route 8 after here in CT -- on an IJ POW camp in the Phillipines. And now that I'm almost done reading Shattered Sword, it's getting harder to watch Midway w/o shaking my head.

Big B -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 6:23:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TommyG Did anyone watch this highly touted thing? I got bored after 10 minutes and turned back to football. It seemed slow, politically correct, and not terribly accurate. But, I didn't give it much of a chance. What say you all? Nope, and with Ken Burns I would be not surprised at your comments. quote: ORIGINAL: Andvari Yes, it is slow, but what did you think was inaccurate? As to being politically correct, are you saying the internment camps and racism in the U.S. isn't relevant to a program about WWII? Should that part be skipped? ... Quite simply - Yes. If you want a documentary on WWII, fine. If you want yet another stinging condemnation of our civilization - fine, but advertise it as such. My point of view is that not every documentary is obligated to dwell upon 'social injustices'. Would a study of Wellington in the Peninsula Campaign have to include social injustices that England committed upon the Irish, or Indians in India, or the class system? To me it's the same.

Mike Scholl -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 7:06:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B As to being politically correct, are you saying the internment camps and racism in the U.S. isn't relevant to a program about WWII? Should that part be skipped? ... Quite simply - Yes. If you want a documentary on WWII, fine. If you want yet another stinging condemnation of our civilization - fine, but advertise it as such. My point of view is that not every documentary is obligated to dwell upon 'social injustices'. Would a study of Wellington in the Peninsula Campaign have to include social injustices that England committed upon the Irish, or Indians in India, or the class system? To me it's the same. Well.., you're wrong. The English "class system" and the "Irish Problem" were there before Napoleon and after him..., so they really don't need to be considered in a study of the Penninsular Campaign. US participation in WW II was the direct cause of Japanese Internment; and the dislocation and migration of workers and their families taking jobs in War Industries resulted in many "social problems" being brought into the "light" as well. So they have a place in Burns' program---which never claimed to be a strictly military history of WW II. Sweeping these facts "under the rug" would have been ignoring the truth of the matter..., something we find irritating in the Japanese. Could it have been delt with differently, or in a less "PC" manner? Certainly.., and from my perspective more entertainingly. But it couldn't be ignored and still be an "American perspective and memory of WW II".

Big B -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 7:55:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl quote: ORIGINAL: Big B quote: As to being politically correct, are you saying the internment camps and racism in the U.S. isn't relevant to a program about WWII? Should that part be skipped? ... Quite simply - Yes. If you want a documentary on WWII, fine. If you want yet another stinging condemnation of our civilization - fine, but advertise it as such. My point of view is that not every documentary is obligated to dwell upon 'social injustices'. Would a study of Wellington in the Peninsula Campaign have to include social injustices that England committed upon the Irish, or Indians in India, or the class No, system? To me it's the same. Well.., you're wrong. The English "class system" and the "Irish Problem" were there before Napoleon and after him..., so they really don't need to be considered in a study of the Penninsular Campaign. US participation in WW II was the direct cause of Japanese Internment; and the dislocation and migration of workers and their families taking jobs in War Industries resulted in many "social problems" being brought into the "light" as well. So they have a place in Burns' program---which never claimed to be a strictly military history of WW II. Sweeping these facts "under the rug" would have been ignoring the truth of the matter..., something we find irritating in the Japanese. Could it have been delt with differently, or in a less "PC" manner? Certainly.., and from my perspective more entertainingly. But it couldn't be ignored and still be an "American perspective and memory of WW II". No, I don't think it's a matter of sweeping facts under the rug, it's merely the deconstrunctionist attitude of typical Ken Burns documentaries. As far as I see, it's a matter of relativism. If it is mandatory to unearth all sins, so no one feels too good about themselves, then for balance - EVERY sin committed by ALL sides must be equally covered so one can put things in perspective and understand Everyones feelings. Every single accusation Japanese treachery from the Philippines to California should be accounted for and proven or disproved. Treatment of all conquered peoples by Imperial Japan must be diligently cataloged so the viewer my understand the basis of America's paranoia at the time. It should be brought out that Japanese religion mandated that the Japanese Emperor IS God on Earth and commands 1st loyalty to all good Japanese - further adding fuel to the fires of suspicion. It should be documented that many Japanese Americans refused to take a loyalty oath at the time (look up 1942 issues of the Los Angeles Times). Then a thorough accounting of all interments of enemy aliens during the war should be presented so that the viewer understands the Government was looking at everyone they deemed a potential threat at the time, especially with all the critical industry on the West Coast. It would also help to show that Japanese Americans were enlisted in the Armed Forces during the war and gave good service, and that they were honored by America - at that time. So that early war jitters may be put into perspective. To fail to do this leaves the impression that Americans were a bunch of boorish bigots...which I believe IS the intent of certain quarters of society today. http://www.foitimes.com/internment/fallon2.htm http://www.internmentarchives.com/intro.php My POV anyway.

witpqs -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 9:14:54 PM)
Certainly injustices were done to many Japanese-Americans and others (I am particularly unhappy over the various property seizures, both official and unofficial). Even still, political correctness is almost always way light on correct and way heavy on politics. BigB, Thanks for that link, very informative. Also find your perspective on the history quite logical and fair.

Mike Scholl -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 9:35:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl quote: ORIGINAL: Big B quote: As to being politically correct, are you saying the internment camps and racism in the U.S. isn't relevant to a program about WWII? Should that part be skipped? ... Quite simply - Yes. If you want a documentary on WWII, fine. If you want yet another stinging condemnation of our civilization - fine, but advertise it as such. My point of view is that not every documentary is obligated to dwell upon 'social injustices'. Would a study of Wellington in the Peninsula Campaign have to include social injustices that England committed upon the Irish, or Indians in India, or the class No, system? To me it's the same. Well.., you're wrong. The English "class system" and the "Irish Problem" were there before Napoleon and after him..., so they really don't need to be considered in a study of the Penninsular Campaign. US participation in WW II was the direct cause of Japanese Internment; and the dislocation and migration of workers and their families taking jobs in War Industries resulted in many "social problems" being brought into the "light" as well. So they have a place in Burns' program---which never claimed to be a strictly military history of WW II. Sweeping these facts "under the rug" would have been ignoring the truth of the matter..., something we find irritating in the Japanese. Could it have been delt with differently, or in a less "PC" manner? Certainly.., and from my perspective more entertainingly. But it couldn't be ignored and still be an "American perspective and memory of WW II". No, I don't think it's a matter of sweeping facts under the rug, it's merely the deconstrunctionist attitude of typical Ken Burns documentaries. As far as I see, it's a matter of relativism. If it is mandatory to unearth all sins, so no one feels too good about themselves, then for balance - EVERY sin committed by ALL sides must be equally covered so one can put things in perspective and understand Everyones feelings. Every single accusation Japanese treachery from the Philippines to California should be accounted for and proven or disproved. Treatment of all conquered peoples by Imperial Japan must be diligently cataloged so the viewer my understand the basis of America's paranoia at the time. It should be brought out that Japanese religion mandated that the Japanese Emperor IS God on Earth and commands 1st loyalty to all good Japanese - further adding fuel to the fires of suspicion. It should be documented that many Japanese Americans refused to take a loyalty oath at the time (look up 1942 issues of the Los Angeles Times). Then a thorough accounting of all interments of enemy aliens during the war should be presented so that the viewer understands the Government was looking at everyone they deemed a potential threat at the time, especially with all the critical industry on the West Coast. It would also help to show that Japanese Americans were enlisted in the Armed Forces during the war and gave good service, and that they were honored by America - at that time. So that early war jitters may be put into perspective. My POV anyway. I understand your POV, and agree with much of the above. Burns does tend to get wrapped up with the "hand-wringer" crowd and ignore some of the reasons why many Americans were paranoid at the time. But the "bigotry was there as well. Ask the black workers in Mobile and elsewhere. As for the Japanese and their criminal and inhuman acts, maybe someone will do a similar "documentary" on the Japanese experiance in WW II someday. I wish he had gone into it..., but can't fault him because he didn't as that really wasn't his subject matter. I don't want to end up "defending" Ken Burns as I find a lot to fault him for as well. I just didn't feel he was "guilty" as you charged because he never claimed that was his goal.

Joe D. -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (9/30/2007 10:35:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B ... If you want yet another stinging condemnation of our civilization - fine, but advertise it as such ... I think the History Channel was more open and even-handed re race and injustice in America in its documentary on Gen. Sherman and his "march to the sea"; almost anything PBS presents leans left of center.

Big B -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/1/2007 1:12:37 AM)
Well, If I could tell Ken Burns directly, I'd say:[;)] SHOUT! Shout, Let it all out, These are the things I can do without, Come on, I�m talking to you, Come on - (repeat) In violent times, You shouldn�t have to sell your soul, In black and white, They really, really ought to know, Those one track minds, That took you for a working boy, Kiss them goodbye, You shouldn�t have to jump for joy, You shouldn�t have to jump for joy - Shout Shout, Let it all out, These are the things I can do without, Come on, I�m talking to you, Come on - They gave you life, And in return you gave them hell, As cold as ice, I hope we live to tell the tale, I hope we live to tell the tale - Shout, Shout, Let it all out, These are the things I can do without, Come on - I�m talking to you, Come on - Shout, Shout, Let it all out, These are the things I can do without, Come on - I�m talking to you, Come on - And when - you�ve taken down your guard, If I could change your mind, I�d really love to break your heart, I�d really love to break your heart - Shout, Shout, Let it all out - These are the things I can do without, So, come on, I�m talking to you, Come on - (repeat 4 times) Everybody wants to rule the world.....

crsutton -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/2/2007 12:15:17 AM)
The camps came about as a result of fear and hysteria as much as anything else. However, in 1941 the US was rampant with racism, and there is plenty of historical evidence of American racism against the Japanese-ever since they arrived in the 1800s to help work on the railroads. Racism had to be a factor with any policy decisions and was a factor all throughout the war. One only needs to look at the allied propaganda posters aimed at the Japanese. That said, Japan was and still is today to some effect a highly racist society. They did not treat foreigners too nicely. Perhaps we have a long way to go but at least there is a sense today in the US that the Japanese-Americans did not get a fair deal. The Japanese themselves as a people have had quite a bit of difficulty coming to terms with their own war policies. Nobody was wrong. It was war and war is a preversion on any society. "War is cruelty and you cannot refine it"

AW1Steve -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/2/2007 1:17:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crsutton The camps came about as a result of fear and hysteria as much as anything else. However, in 1941 the US was rampant with racism, and there is plenty of historical evidence of American racism against the Japanese-ever since they arrived in the 1800s to help work on the railroads. Racism had to be a factor with any policy decisions�and�was a factor all�throughout the war. One only needs to look at�the allied�propaganda posters aimed at the Japanese. That said, Japan was and still is today�to some effect a highly racist society. They did not treat foreigners too nicely.� Perhaps we have a long way to go but at least there is a sense today in the US that the Japanese-Americans did not get a fair deal. The Japanese themselves as a people have had quite a bit of difficulty coming to terms with their own war policies. Nobody was wrong. It was war and war is a preversion on any society. "War is cruelty and you cannot refine it" [:)]Yeah , anyone who's visited can tell you about the "no forgeigners" signs on the doors of some restruraunts and shops.[:@]

mikemike -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/3/2007 12:43:45 AM)
Are you sure about this? I am 99% certain that I read that US build factories were very very little used in WWII by germany (German trucks were strange mixture of all kinds of models - that was really big problem for logistics and supply and it was never solded in war). Leo "Apollo11" [/quote] What you say about German truck production is correct in general, which is why Hitler was so anxious to get modern truck plants built by US companies. Opel (GM) built a giant, state-of-the-art truck plant in Brandenburg, close to Berlin, that built the Opel Blitz 3-ton truck, which became the standard 3-ton truck for the Wehrmacht. Opel built about 100.000 of them during the war, and more were licence-built by other companies. One source puts the total at about 400.000. Just google for "opel blitz". It is true that the main Opel plant in R�sselsheim was only reluctantly used for war production, at least as long as it was still controlled from the US, but eventually the R�sselsheim plant produced parts of the Ju 88. Ford built a truck assembly plant in Berlin whose "real purpose," according to U.S. Army Intelligence, was producing "troop transport-type" vehicles for the Wehrmacht. The French Ford plant in Poissy was converted to truck production during the war, delivering 20 trucks per day to the Wehrmacht. Ford Germany produced vehicles for the Wehrmacht, but also other military products, including the turbo pumps for the V2 rocket engine. GM and Ford subsidiaries built more than 70 percent of the Reich's medium and heavy-duty trucks. These vehicles, according to American intelligence reports, served as "the backbone of the German Army transportation system." The Volkswagen plant in Wolfsburg has also been mentioned in this thread. It was not finished when the war broke out, but produced about 50.000 K�belwagen and about 15.000 Schwimmwagen (amphibious cars). Not just cookers. A US-owned car body plant in Berlin, Ambi-Budd, produced the outher shell for the G7e electric torpedo. I think they were also involved in V2 production.

Andvari -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/3/2007 1:27:06 AM)
I hardly see this program as, "yet another stinging condemnation of our civilization", i.e. Liberal Media bias, and I don't see this as Burn's goal. As I said in my original post, if you just want the battles without all that other "unnecessary" and "irrelevant" facts like what the people at home had to deal with, or civilian casualties on both sides, or the hypocrisy inherent in all wars, then watch the History Channel or read a book--then you can skip those things that don't promote your own self-righteous view of the world. Burn's said he couldn't tell all the stories, but he wanted to tell some because he knew so many of the veterans of WWII wouldn't be around much longer, thus this is largely an anecdotal history with some pretty good footage of the "big events." Some of the stories are boring or silly, but many--most are compelling. Since all of my family's veterans of WWII are now dead, I'm more than happy to listen to those that will share their experiences.

Grotius -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/3/2007 7:19:09 AM)
I have only seen a little bit of "The War" so far, but my initial impression is the same as Andvari's. It seems like a very useful oral history. Maybe not as exciting for me to watch as something focused solely on combat footage, but educational and interesting all the same.

JWE -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 1:48:32 AM)
I'm with BigB on this one. I am quite tired of �isms�. �Isms� are constructs of people who cannot accept the realities of everyday life and who must render simple, individual, human emotions and responses into some sort of great and meaningful global intellectual, political dialectic. What we all forget, sometimes, is that we, the US of A, are different; well we were and certainly can be again if we don�t forget our founding truths. This nation was founded on the principle of individual rights and freedoms: In a perfect world, this means a man or woman may aspire to any heights they may contemplate, regardless of their color, creed, or national origin. We have no lords, we have no peons; our Constitution recognizes no dysfunction of birth. Any individual may grasp as high as their reach. Nations, particularly our nation, are made up of individuals, and individuals have and exhibit those peculiarities of ignorance and bigotry that are endemic to individuals everywhere. As we moved from a Republic to a Democracy, these democratic tendencies became more nationally prevalent. This does not mean the nation became more bigoted, just that the inherent bigotry of the �demos� became more apparent and was reflected in our national political life. All these media and politico pukes, don�t get it. They want us to be just like an extension of the Euro 19th century progression and act like the 20th century grandchild of the Victorian worldview. They went to Yale and Harvard and thought themselves equivalent to the Euros in world politics; but they just didn�t want to understand that we are different. I am an American and, thus, a bit different, and so are you. I have fast friends that are black/brown. One of my friends and top 5 sailboat racing crew members is Joseph Olongo (blacker that this text and from South Africa). I see Barak Obama as an extremely intelligent and articulate (and well worth listening to) spokesman for a particular philosophy (not my philosophy, but a valid one nevertheless: BTW did I mention he�s black?). My gardener is brown, and illegal, but when has that stopped us from sharing a Cervesa and watching a sunset and talking about our children? Riaz is from Syria and makes the best rotisserie chicken in SoCal; he likes football (soccer) and we�ve had many conversations about the Brazilians and Mohamed, and life-the-universe-and-everything. Given that, I gotta say that I have a loaded 10 Ga and 9mm that I am not afraid to use on any black gangbanger, whacko Muslim extremist, or Aztlan homeland activist that wants to pay me a visit. Am I a racist? No, I am a simple bigot. Racism is a horror: a global horror that should be dealt with by the entire weight of the military establishments of the civilized world. Racism is not something that should be passed back & forth at cocktail parties on the Potomac. The only people who truly discuss racism, in these days, are people who work in Africa, or those who work with the survivors of the Holocaust. Bigotry can be confounded by education and personal interaction. Racism can be confounded by judicious application of nuclear weapons. Yes, I am a bigot, perhaps. But if you call me a racist, I will protest. I am an American, and believe in our founding principles; I am almost 60 years old, but no matter who you are, I will face you, slap your jaws and force you to resent it.

Mike Scholl -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 2:19:25 AM)
Gotta agree with a lot of what JWE says..., though I see it from a different perspective. I worked with a fairly multi-cultural mix, and now that I'm retired on a fairly fixed income, I live with a very multicolored and multiracial mix of folks. Most of them are great... I don't think of myself as a racist..., but I'm definately a "SCUM-ist". "Scum" is easy to spot. Somewhere in every paragraph they speak is a version of "you owe me"..., and nothing is ever their fault. I will freely admit I don't like these folks one bit.

Rainer -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 3:55:20 AM)
quote: Racism can be confounded by judicious application of nuclear weapons. I do not believe this. I do believe this is a false and dangerous statement. Sorry.

JWE -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 4:05:55 AM)
quote: Rainer I do not believe this. I do believe this is a false and dangerous statement. Sorry. [quote\] OK, perhaps that was a bit hyperbolic, but true racism is even more dangerous. In a real multi-cultural world, you can kick the bigot in the butt, and hope he learns better. In a racist world ....

TOMLABEL -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 6:17:55 AM)
Very nicely said, JWE. Especially this. quote: ORIGINAL: JWE I am quite tired of �isms�. �Isms� are constructs of people who cannot accept the realities of everyday life and who must render simple, individual, human emotions and responses into some sort of great and meaningful global intellectual, political dialectic.

Snowman999 -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 7:30:05 AM)
quote: It would also help to show that Japanese Americans were enlisted in the Armed Forces during the war and gave good service, and that they were honored by America - at that time. So that early war jitters may be put into perspective. Burns did this. In fact, roughly two of the fifteen hours involved this very topic, with extensive interviews of veterans, including a long-serving US Senator who was not identified that way. He was labeled simply as a citizen. All of which you'd know if you'd watched the show you're bashing. Steve

AW1Steve -> RE: OT- Ken Burns WW2 (10/5/2007 2:50:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rainer quote: Racism can be confounded by judicious application of nuclear weapons. I do not believe this. I do believe this is a false and dangerous statement. Sorry. [:D]Actually , almost any problem can be solved by judicious application of nuclear weapons. [:D][:D]

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.75