RE: Letters from Iwo Jima

RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Mac67 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 11:27:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freder quote: ORIGINAL: kafka well, after reading a couple of threads today, I'm more than convinced that matrix' forums are best left to their US american customers, sorry but I cannot bear such arrogance any more Exactly my point[&o] What exactly is arrogant about American's stepping forward to defend their country when they feel it is being slighted? [&:]

freder -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 11:34:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mac67 quote: ORIGINAL: freder quote: ORIGINAL: kafka well, after reading a couple of threads today, I'm more than convinced that matrix' forums are best left to their US american customers, sorry but I cannot bear such arrogance any more Exactly my point[&o] What exactly is arrogant about American's stepping forward to defend their country when they feel it is being slighted? [&:] I think you mix up defending with attacking.

Mac67 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 11:55:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freder quote: ORIGINAL: Mac67 quote: ORIGINAL: freder quote: ORIGINAL: kafka well, after reading a couple of threads today, I'm more than convinced that matrix' forums are best left to their US american customers, sorry but I cannot bear such arrogance any more Exactly my point[&o] What exactly is arrogant about American's stepping forward to defend their country when they feel it is being slighted? [&:] I think you mix up defending with attacking. No, I don't think I do. quote: My guess is that deep down, he knows the days of American global dominance are counted; China and India will take over soon. It makes him bark at the moon and everything that's not representative of that fine exquisite American high culture. That looks like an attack to me. I would say that the arrogance being shown here is on your part.

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 11:59:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Doggie quote: Just a question btw, what sort of education do you have doggie? More than enough to run rings around some Swedish College kid who presents himself as a "lawyer". Ah yes, "being able to run in circles" is about the educational level I had you pegged at. But apart from that, does this education have some sort of formal degree? quote: If this were a courtroom, your case would have been thrown out. Well no s hit? You mean a court would not take a case where I wanted to explain to you how racial stereotyping is wrong? Shocking. quote: Is this the kind of stuff you learned in "Law school"?: No, there we learned lots of other stuff, you know...like laws and stuff. But I hardly think you would find that interesting. quote: what if we were to stereotype the US based on the horrible atrocities committed against the native americans? You'd think they would advise against revealing yourself as a hypocrite with contradictory statements on the same page. Brilliant legal strategy there.[8\|] I guess I got to spell it out for you left wing genuises. The above is a perfect example of how Hortland the Intellectual does exactly what he claims to find objectionable. When he realizes he has no case, he deflects to something else. Asked to back up his arguments, he changes the subject. Then he throws in the usual vicious personal slanders, all the while objecting to "ad hom". Textbook troll tactics. First, "my case" is that racism is wrong, stereotyping is the tool of the stupid, and guilt is individual not collective. You have not even begun arguing "my case", instead you have been trying to deflect the discussion into Swedish behavior in ww2, what is a concentration camp, and generally call me names. To see you then return here and say that I cant back up my arguments so I try to shift subject is priceless. Stalin would be proud if he saw you, because that is a reality-escaping argument that I thought only the most brainwashed communists were capable of. One of my arguments as to why stereotpying is wrong is to hold up examples that the US has done which no one should be proud of. Then I have asked you what would happen if we based our entire image of the US on those examples...like you have done with Japan. The question is an excellent example as to why stereotyping is retarded. If you base your stereotypes on the wrong premises, you'll end up with all sorts of weird conclusions. Clearly this is something you want to avoid admitting, since you have based your stereotype on an entire nation on the actions of a few during a limited period of time. Heaven forbid that you would have to admit that maybe there were innocents who died during the firebombing of Tokyo in 1945. Wait, let me guess your reply to that the Japs brought it on themselves, they started the war, and their army did much worse things in China. That Jap civilian wasnt innocent because...eh...she was japanese...and in Japan.

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 12:04:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Reiryc You've also been shown that this is wrong and even agreed. Thus it is not always individual. No I havent, yes it is. For your argument to work, you would have to make the case that on a moral level, the female switchboard operator at the Reichstag is just as much to blame as the "soldier" in the einzatsgruppe who personally butchered tens of thousands of jews. The hotel receptionist at the holliday resorts run by the SS (yes, they had those too, check it up) is just as guilty as the mass murdering scum in Dirlewanger brigade. Now, if you want to try to make that case, then go ahead. State your arguments. And, whats even more sad, you havent even read the Nurnberg-documents. You have no idea what you are talking about. If you had read them, you would have noticed that there is one part of the SS that escaped the collective guilt-brush. Care to venture a guess as to what part, and why they escaped being bunched in with the others?

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 12:21:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund And, whats even more sad, you havent even read the Nurnberg-documents. You have no idea what you are talking about. If you had read them, you would have noticed that there is one part of the SS that escaped the collective guilt-brush. Care to venture a guess as to what part, and why they escaped being bunched in with the others? This has nothing whatsoever to do with my views, or this argument, but, just as a a quiz-point, can I have a guess at SS Wiking Division, which did, I believe have Scandinavian members? Incidentally, when Korsun Pocket came out, I did look them up, and I think there were some suggestions that they were responsible for a number of atrocities, but the cases were hard to prove, and were on nothing like the scale of other SS Units. I don't have the knowledge to comment further. This is not intended as defense of SS Wiking Division. I'm just trying to win the competition.

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 12:49:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mart This has nothing whatsoever to do with my views, or this argument, but, just as a a quiz-point, can I have a guess at SS Wiking Division, which did, I believe have Scandinavian members? Incidentally, when Korsun Pocket came out, I did look them up, and I think there were some suggestions that they were responsible for a number of atrocities, but the cases were hard to prove, and were on nothing like the scale of other SS Units. I don't have the knowledge to comment further. This is not intended as defense of SS Wiking Division. I'm just trying to win the competition. Hehe, sorry, but you are wrong. All Waffen SS division share the guilt with the rest. Wiking is relatively unique though as you point out, in that they have never been found guilty of a warcrime. All other Waffen SS divisions did something. The closest they came to my knowledge is when accusations surfaced a few years ago that a few soldiers from the bakery train of the division had helped to round up some civilians in some soviet town in 1941. I havent seen any of those claims proven however, but it was a while ago I read about it.

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 1:24:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund Hehe, sorry, but you are wrong. All Waffen SS division share the guilt with the rest. Wiking is relatively unique though as you point out, in that they have never been found guilty of a warcrime. All other Waffen SS divisions did something. The closest they came to my knowledge is when accusations surfaced a few years ago that a few soldiers from the bakery train of the division had helped to round up some civilians in some soviet town in 1941. I havent seen any of those claims proven however, but it was a while ago I read about it. Hey, come on. Don't be such a smart-arse! I'm on your side here. Be nice to me. [;)]

Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 3:48:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: Reiryc You've also been shown that this is wrong and even agreed. Thus it is not always individual. No I havent, yes it is. For your argument to work, you would have to make the case that on a moral level, the female switchboard operator at the Reichstag is just as much to blame as the "soldier" in the einzatsgruppe who personally butchered tens of thousands of jews. The hotel receptionist at the holliday resorts run by the SS (yes, they had those too, check it up) is just as guilty as the mass murdering scum in Dirlewanger brigade. Now, if you want to try to make that case, then go ahead. State your arguments. And, whats even more sad, you havent even read the Nurnberg-documents. You have no idea what you are talking about. If you had read them, you would have noticed that there is one part of the SS that escaped the collective guilt-brush. Care to venture a guess as to what part, and why they escaped being bunched in with the others? Yes you have been shown to be wrong that guilt is always collective. Either your memory is short or you are deliberately lying. I will politely assume that your memory is short on the issue. Let's go back to your post in which you agree and were shown to be wrong: Panzerjaeger Hortlund: Indeed, congratulations for having genuine knowledge on this topic. At Nuremberg it was decided that the SS shared a collective guilt, meaning that every member of the SS shared the same guilt. This of cource meant that the female switchboard operators at the Reichstag (who were members of the SS) were as guilty of warcrimes as the members of the einzatsgruppen who massacred tens of thousands of civilians. That this is a ludicrous and indefensible position is quite clear, which is why the collective guilt-idea is a non-starter. But you are correct. And the one example I was referring to earlier was this desicion at Nuremberg. This was post #135 which can be found here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1623210

Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 3:50:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mart quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund Hehe, sorry, but you are wrong. All Waffen SS division share the guilt with the rest. Wiking is relatively unique though as you point out, in that they have never been found guilty of a warcrime. All other Waffen SS divisions did something. The closest they came to my knowledge is when accusations surfaced a few years ago that a few soldiers from the bakery train of the division had helped to round up some civilians in some soviet town in 1941. I havent seen any of those claims proven however, but it was a while ago I read about it. Hey, come on. Don't be such a smart-arse! I'm on your side here. Be nice to me. [;)] Instead of being on someone's 'side', maybe you should just be arguing on the merits of a position? Just a thought...

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 4:01:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Reiryc quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: Reiryc You've also been shown that this is wrong and even agreed. Thus it is not always individual. No I havent, yes it is. For your argument to work, you would have to make the case that on a moral level, the female switchboard operator at the Reichstag is just as much to blame as the "soldier" in the einzatsgruppe who personally butchered tens of thousands of jews. The hotel receptionist at the holliday resorts run by the SS (yes, they had those too, check it up) is just as guilty as the mass murdering scum in Dirlewanger brigade. Now, if you want to try to make that case, then go ahead. State your arguments. And, whats even more sad, you havent even read the Nurnberg-documents. You have no idea what you are talking about. If you had read them, you would have noticed that there is one part of the SS that escaped the collective guilt-brush. Care to venture a guess as to what part, and why they escaped being bunched in with the others? Yes you have been shown to be wrong that guilt is always collective. Either your memory is short or you are deliberately lying. I will politely assume that your memory is short on the issue. I take that to mean two things a) you dont know the answer to my question, and b) you dont know how to find the answer to my question So...I'll help you out. The only part of the SS that was cleared at Nuremberg was SS-reiter, a sort of riding club. It started out as the mounted arm of the SS, but later the more warlike parts were transferred to the Waffen SS, while the riding club remained. The reason for this units absolution at Nuremberg was because there were several members of various European royal families who were members of this riding club, and it was decided that it would be better to "let that one slip". Considering that the original SS-Reiter had both an armed (Waffen) part, as well as a Totenkopfverb�nde (yes, thats the concentration camp guards) there is no logic whatsoever behind the courts desicion to let the SS-reiters off the hook, while deciding that the female switchboard operators and the hotel staff were to be punished. It is somewhat sad, although perhaps not surprising, to see that you havent even tried to make the case as to why guilt should be collective and not individual. I take that to mean you have no answer, or at least you lack the will/ability to articulate your reasons, therefore I am forced to accept that you yeild this part of the debate. Pity, it could have been interesting. But I have been trying to argue and put forth real arguments, and all you have replied with is stuff along the lines of "nah-haa, you are wrong" without ever trying to present some sort of argument or underlying philosophy behind your position.

robpost3 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 5:04:12 PM)
Good morning all and welcome to the doorway to the weekend... @Hortlund The question is an excellent example as to why stereotyping is retarded. agreed to the point where in general daily use it is usually derived from imposed character stereo-typing drawing on predjudice resulting in bias most of the time but without it much criminal pathology would be moot. Drawing Modus Operandi and second guessing the next move would be near to impossible without sterotyping of racial traits, psychological propensity to certain reactions in situations recorded, data etc., ad nuaseum. Also the media uses it as a powerful tool every day all day long everywhere, every product is designed, packaged and presented based upon it. Mostly Bad- Sometimes Good-at our present point in species developement-Enevitable. One of my arguments as to why stereotpying is wrong is to hold up examples that the US has done which no one should be proud of. Then I have asked you what would happen if we based our entire image of the US on those examples...like you have done with Japan. Most would think that we are butting our heads in where it does not belong for purely selfish reasons like the aquisition of resources or key territory a so called conquest of the world-fair enough. America is stereotyped into into being the worlds police force and when we show abit of feeling or bad choice we are summerily held responsible by everyone globally we are judged like that all the time. Like it is fine and dandy to whip and imprison a women for being raped or for teaching children, or its really okay to saw heads off or pay off families so their kid can perform a "hit" in a crowded market place. The world can take that with a grain of salt but sack someones head and make them bark like a dog to extract information that may avert any of the aforementioned atrocities and everyone swoons in horrified disbeliefe questioning the humanity and wanting justice served hard and cold?!?-Meh... We play cop because where in the world will you find a place and an ideal where every people/race/creed can live together and only be held back in life by just how much they can dream of what a true nation can be and have the power to do it in simple worded terms and laws...that is what "America" is and we all can be a part of it everywhere-sounds bold but once again where does some at least some folk everywhere in every country strive to go not so much geographically but hopefully; if you really dig what I am saying it is not just pride I am expressing but a universal hope for the future. Thats why I think our men and women in the armed forces willingly paint the target on their backs everyday and proudly. you would have to make the case that on a moral level, the female switchboard operator at the Reichstag is just as much to blame as the "soldier" in the einzatsgruppe who personally butchered tens of thousands of jews. switchboard operator passes information obtained by eavesdropping on a call from a "safe house" to einzatsgruppe and extermination measures are taken in response. Swithcboard operator in court later is questioned and admits to knowing that the owners of the house would be imprisioned and the Jews hidden within where going to sterilized. If through questioning she can be persuaded to say she had full knowledge of the cause and effect of her actions perhaps then...This is very hypothetical and hinges on certain pyscholigical reactions through intense questioning perhaps the switchboard operator can be brought to admission to being a part of the cause. On the other hand she may simply feel guilty after the fact that her actions were wrong and the result of propaganda and bad doctrine be imposed on the will of the people. In any case if I could properly devise a method of legal questions that would set precedence for the establishment of conviction of a crime to inividuals who share the guilt of the perpetrators through cause and effect I would not be a simple farmer who manages a moving and storage company[;)] (though perhaps I would still...good clean honest job!)

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 5:16:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: robpost3 switchboard operator passes information obtained by eavesdropping on a call from a "safe house" to einzatsgruppe and extermination measures are taken in response. LOL, no. Switchboard operator answers phone when someone calls to the reichstag, and then direct the call to the correct reciever. But this was fun. What does the hotel receptionist do to earn herself a spot with the mass-murderers?

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 5:26:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Reiryc quote: ORIGINAL: Mart Hey, come on. Don't be such a smart-arse! I'm on your side here. Be nice to me. [;)] Instead of being on someone's 'side', maybe you should just be arguing on the merits of a position? Just a thought... As far as I can see, the merits of the position probably got lost somewhere back in the first 3 pages. So why don't you be nice to me as well? [:)] I'd say "Group Hug" but then I'd have to puke! Seriously though, this discussion has moved on a massive amount from where it started, and whoever is to blame, it started with a series of ill-fated exchanges. I'm really not sure where it's all leading now. This is not an opportunity for anyone to say "then why are you writing this reply?" as I may well have to consider the merits of the puke option. How about just starting a new thread on a completely different topic.

robpost3 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 6:05:18 PM)
LOL, no. Switchboard operator answers phone when someone calls to the reichstag, and then direct the call to the correct reciever. But this was fun. you missed the eavesdrop: intent with a devious method to extract private inforamation (my new law term)...my dear Watson... What does the hotel receptionist do to earn herself a spot with the mass-murderers? process a room service request for Chianti and Fava beans and then accept a seat at the table without questioning where all the Liver came from.[:D]

Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 6:42:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund I take that to mean two things a) you dont know the answer to my question, and b) you dont know how to find the answer to my question I guess you're wrong on another issue then. You should take it to mean that I don't care to be sidetracked with your question as it wasn't relevant to the point I addressed, which is that guilt is not always individual. quote: It is somewhat sad, although perhaps not surprising, to see that you havent even tried to make the case as to why guilt should be collective and not individual. I take that to mean you have no answer, or at least you lack the will/ability to articulate your reasons, therefore I am forced to accept that you yeild this part of the debate. Actually, I have made the case already in this very thread. Again we find ourselves in the position of you either have forgotten this or that you are lying. I will be charitable once more and assume you have forgotten. quote: Pity, it could have been interesting. But I have been trying to argue and put forth real arguments, and all you have replied with is stuff along the lines of "nah-haa, you are wrong" without ever trying to present some sort of argument or underlying philosophy behind your position. The argument was presented in the following posts of this thread starting with: #133, #136, #138, and #149. You also have agreed that guilt is not always individual as I have reminded you and proven with a link to your post. What is truly sad however is to see that your childish antics are continuing. I had pointed this out in post #184 in which I wrote: "The only thing closed seems to be your mind and your willingness to have a rational discussion without resorting to childish antics as you have just done. I am clearly not in agreement with 'you' about the context of his words and his meaning, but for some reason, that doesn't stop you from making this ridiculous assertion to the contrary of my already stated view." It appears that you are continuing with these kinds of childish tactics.

Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 6:45:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mart As far as I can see, the merits of the position probably got lost somewhere back in the first 3 pages. So why don't you be nice to me as well? [:)] I'd like to be nice to you, but then, as you can see from my post to you here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1629448 you make it kind of difficult. quote: How about just starting a new thread on a completely different topic. I'm the type that sees no reason not to continue in this thread as all the posts to reference are easy to find. Topics drift and imho, that's the nature of an online conversation just as much as it is the nature of a face to face conversation. [:)]

06 Maestro -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 6:54:59 PM)
Here is another prominent case of �collective guilt�. Some years ago the head of the Aryan Nations in the U.S. was put on trial for complicity in a murder case. He was convicted, and the assts of the organization seized. The Aryan Nation had been given a death blow. The cause of this legal action was the murder of someone by a group of individuals that had publications of the Aryan Nations at their residences. The individuals that participated in the attack resulting in the death of a young man may not have even been members of the Aryan Nations, but the organization was held culpable. How would the Treaty of Versailles be characterized? It appears rather obvious to me as a punishment handed down to an entire nation. All of the citizens of that nation are sharing in the punishment, ergo; they are sharing in its guilt. One could refer to that as �collective punishment�. In the business world there are many such examples. I am not an attorney (lawyer?[;)]), however I am aware of a legal term �judicial notice�. A judge does not have to waste time listening to arguments as to whether the sun rises in the east or west-he can, and will, issue a judicial notice, acknowledging the fact that the sun rises in the east to put an end to the nonsense. It is clear to me that a judge could, and would (unless very bored) would issue a judicial notice in his courtroom to end silly arguments that there is no such thing as collective guilt. It is likewise obvious that individuals trapped in a collective guilt situation; do not have to have the exact sentence/punishment given to them as the primary culprits. Even though there is guilt, a punishment is not mandatory for all involved. This is another situation which would warrant a �judicial notice�. For an attorney to argue there is not such thing as �collective guilt� is disingenuous at best. The evidence is really quite overwhelming-it is not just an �American thing�, but is world wide. PZJ Hortlund, perhaps you could explain to me why �collective guilt� does not exist. I have stated why it obviously does, more than once, yet you continue to deny it. Do we have a language problem?

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 7:25:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Reiryc I'd like to be nice to you, but then, as you can see from my post to you here: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1629448 you make it kind of difficult. Ah well - at least it's a start. Pax [:)]

Dino -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 7:34:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro Do we have a language problem? No. Collective guilt

Dino -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 7:46:36 PM)
Some snippets: Collective guilt is the controversial collectivist idea Advanced systems of criminal law accept the principle that guilt shall only be personal. This attitude is not usually shared by primitive systems of law. The principle of collective guilt is totally denounced in libertarian social thinking. Terrorism is commonly rationalized by its practitioners on ideas of collective guilt and responsibility.

mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 7:54:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dino quote: ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro Do we have a language problem? No. Collective guilt PH hasn't simply argued that collective guilt is wrong, he went further and said it doesn't exist. "There is no collective guilt, only individual guilt". That's obviously false but it hasn't stopped him from repeating it. Even after acknowledging its existence on a couple of occasions in this thread. Hence the concern that something is being lost in translation. He's more than entitled to think it wrong. I sure don't think collective guilt is "right" and in most cases I too think it wrong. However, I think it needs to looked at on a case by case basis because sometime it's necessary. And also because the number of people on the planet that think it is A-OK, outnumber the rest of us. As for people that think it doesn't exist at all so far there's only one (for sure). :)

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 8:02:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dino Some snippets: Collective guilt is the controversial collectivist idea Advanced systems of criminal law accept the principle that guilt shall only be personal. This attitude is not usually shared by primitive systems of law. The principle of collective guilt is totally denounced in libertarian social thinking. Terrorism is commonly rationalized by its practitioners on ideas of collective guilt and responsibility. Hi Dino, I'm not making a counter point, and I'm also no lawyer. But isn't there a case for saying that if a large number of people benefit, even if they just haven't thought about the injustice of it (though they should have), from the behaviour of others, then they share some degree of culpability if they take no action. To try and drag this away from too much politics, then an example might be something like the benefits we get from cheap products which are made in sweatshops in poorer parts of the world. You could make the argument a lot more political, and the argument for the notion of collective guilt (or at least blindness) would become stronger, but for the sake of a peaceful conversation, I am just raising a very general point. I'm not seeking an argument which is why I have used an example about which we are nearly all aware, and mostly sympathetic, though we don't usually act on our knowledge.

06 Maestro -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 8:08:57 PM)
This thread quickly focused on how Japanese soldiers are portrayed in a new movie. On post # 23, it took a turn of equating U.S. personal and U.S. policies with those of Imperial Japan. This is what Americans find offensive, this is what America haters love to yap about, and this is what the young and uninitiated need to consider very thoroughly, using what you have between your ears, before making any profound judgment on the subject-or just going away mad. quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge Nanking Massacre..blah blah Guilt is always individual, never collective. That is why we dont think of all Germans as concentration camp guards, all Americans as My Lai-murderers or all Japanese as Nanking massacrers. Im sure you understand this if you sit and think about it for a while. You have no shame in mentioning My Lai in the same sentence as the Rape of Nanking? The level of the crime committed by the Japanese Army is 10,000 to 20,000 times more than My Lai. On one hand a green Lieutenant, the other, multiple Generals. On one hand, one was relieved of command, prosecuted, incarcerated and dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Army, on the other, Generals went about their merry way for at least the duration of the war with the blessings of their higher command. Once again, no one has said all Japanese were or are evil. No one has said that Americans are completely innocent of some war crimes, or that Americans are a bunch of angles. What is being being said is that the crimes committed by the U.S. pale in comparison to that of Imperial Japan, and the reason for that is that the Japanese had a very brutal government (and a slightly askew culture), whereas the U.S. had a government and culture that had considerably more respect for human life and rights. The personnel insults also happened to begin with post #23.

06 Maestro -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 8:27:59 PM)
Dino While I have to agree that each one of the statements are true, it is also true that there is a huge "however..." following each one. The reality of the implementation of collective guilt is very real, which is not always a bad thing, nor a good thing, it's just a thing. Situations need to be addressed someway, even if the method is not perfect. quote: ORIGINAL: Dino Some snippets: Collective guilt is the controversial collectivist idea Advanced systems of criminal law accept the principle that guilt shall only be personal. This attitude is not usually shared by primitive systems of law. The principle of collective guilt is totally denounced in libertarian social thinking. Terrorism is commonly rationalized by its practitioners on ideas of collective guilt and responsibility.

Dino -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 8:41:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mjk428 PH hasn't simply argued that collective guilt is wrong, he went further and said it doesn't exist. I don't take the words "Guilt is always individual, never collective." to mean that collective guilt does not exist as a concept...Surely, discussing the "rights" and "wrongs" of a nonexistent concept would be pointless. Maybe it IS a language problem <shrug>. quote: He's more than entitled to think it wrong. I sure don't think collective guilt is "right" and in most cases I too think it wrong. However, I think it needs to looked at on a case by case basis because sometime it's necessary. And also because the number of people on the planet that think it is A-OK, outnumber the rest of us. They do not concern me.

06 Maestro -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 8:44:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mart Hi Dino, I'm not making a counter point, and I'm also no lawyer. But isn't there a case for saying that if a large number of people benefit, even if they just haven't thought about the injustice of it (though they should have), from the behaviour of others, then they share some degree of culpability if they take no action. To try and drag this away from too much politics, then an example might be something like the benefits we get from cheap products which are made in sweatshops in poorer parts of the world. You could make the argument a lot more political, and the argument for the notion of collective guilt (or at least blindness) would become stronger, but for the sake of a peaceful conversation, I am just raising a very general point. I'm not seeking an argument which is why I have used an example about which we are nearly all aware, and mostly sympathetic, though we don't usually act on our knowledge. Very good point. The feeling of guilt is there for some of us. We are supporting a crime.

mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 9:13:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dino quote: He's more than entitled to think it wrong. I sure don't think collective guilt is "right" and in most cases I too think it wrong. However, I think it needs to looked at on a case by case basis because sometime it's necessary. And also because the number of people on the planet that think it is A-OK, outnumber the rest of us. They do not concern me. Not everyone has the same luxury or is willing to make the same choice. It's pretty simple for me. For example, if I harm your family then I've just put my own family in jeopardy. Clearly it would be "wrong" but right & wrong might no longer be a consideration for you. If you choose the high road, then good for you (and lucky for my family). But if you don't, I've brought it down on myself. That's true justice. Something that is not usually found in our legal system. As a Christian I believe in mercy over justice. However, I don't believe it would be right of me to impose that belief on others. People have a right to justice. That's why forgiveness is so exceptional. You can say that's barbaric and it's that sort of thinking that leads to wars. That may all be true but it's also (mostly) the world we live in. People that proclaim "there is no collective guilt" have likely never been tested. If they have, their belief in such is all the more commendable. They still have no right to impose their belief system on those that think differently IMO.

Dino -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 9:24:23 PM)
quote: To try and drag this away from too much politics, then an example might be something like the benefits we get from cheap products which are made in sweatshops in poorer parts of the world. How do you determine a "guilty group" here? If I'm using these product, then it's my own guilt...Are you using those products, too? - Join the group...Eventually we'll have a group of people using the sweatshop products whose guilt was determined on individual basis. I don't see that as an example of collective guilt... To put it into perspective of our previous discussion: All Japanese that committed atrocities CAN be grouped together and labeled "murderous thugs"...I don't see any problem there.

06 Maestro -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/30/2007 9:35:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dino To put it into perspective of our previous discussion: All Japanese that committed atrocities CAN be grouped together and labeled "murderous thugs"...I don't see any problem there. OK, good. Now what about military units that are known to have "murderous thugs" in its ranks, or even as its commander? The unit might just be a regiment, maybe a division, maybe more. Every man in such a unit is surely not a monster, but when you are engaged in a battle to the death with such units, how are you suppose to go about treating them in a different/individual way, or refering to said military units after the fact?

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.546875