RE: Letters from Iwo Jima

RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Ike99 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/6/2007 9:41:07 PM)
quote: None of them are saying it didn't happen and none of them are excusing it. That is your mistaken defensive stance at being taking to task for your prejudiced efforts to hold them up on a balance sacle and proclaim them EQUAL. One was doctrine...one was not. It is simple fact you continue to bury your head in the sand in denial of. Wow Hans, your pretty good at sounding intelligent but at the same time being completely wrong. No one is denying? What´s this? quote: If I am wrong and you have records to link up confirming wide spread killing of POW's at the hands of Americans please enlighten away. Or is it you have a hunch of a Yank Dog conspiracy and Marts post is conformation That´s all they have done on here Hans is to deny, try and minimize or simply lie about the atrocities of the Allied troops in the Pacific. Monkey see, hear and do no evil you know? quote: One was doctrine...one was not. It is simple fact you continue to bury your head in the sand in denial of. My hands not in the sand, yours? When one looks at the interment of the Japanese Americans in the USA, the dehumanizing propaganda meant to instill racial hatred in the average 19 year old Marine. The widespread overlooking of killings of POWs. Japanese skulls on magazine covers. Hmmm...seems pretty much doctrine to me.

mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/6/2007 9:50:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: That doesn't make barbaric behavior by US Marines or anyone else right but it sure was understandable under the circumstances. [:D] Yeah ¨OK¨ there chief. We got the picture. Anything the USA does barbaric, cruel & criminal is....¨understandable under the circumstances.¨ and anyone else doing the same is murdering and savage and they get what they deserve. I think your position is pretty clear. Hey, have you waterboarded anyone lately? [;)] [:D] What were the circumstances that made the wholesale slaughter of innocents throughout China, Southeast Asia, the East Indies, the Phillipines and everywhere else the Japanese military set foot understandable for you? As for waterboarding, are you volunteering? I know quite a few people that have gone through the ordeal unscathed. BTW, just so you know, you're really pushing the boundaries of the forum rules with that comment. If I had the choice of being captured by US Marines, The Japanese or Apaches - no matter what my ethnicity I'd surely choose the US Marines. However, if I had recently butchered one of their buddies, they'd likely be my last choice. "Your best friend or your worst enemy".

morvwilson -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/6/2007 10:21:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: morvwilson-Thanks for the above Ike, your source explains a lot about your positions. To be perfectly honest with you, "observer.guardian" is not a credible source. Not a credible source?! What the hell does the link have to do with anything?! [&:] It is a V-I-D-E-O. You know ¨Film¨, moving pictures and stuff? The source is combat cameramen from the Pacifc Theatre. Credible enough for you? No, it is not good enough. As far as video's go, I remember the gas tank on a pick up truck being rigged to blow up in a crash for the benifit of the evening news broadcast. The same sort of hoax was done for the Ford Pinto (a rear end accident makes them blow up if you remember). Maybe I am dating myself with those two examples, but there are plenty of other examples of how news media lie to us. Now, as to the examples of how some wounded Japanese soldiers were killed, some of that I am sure happened. That is war. I will try to explain this one more time for you: The difference between the Western powers was that killing prisoners was the exception where as with Imperial Japan, it was routine. The reasons why, I think, would be fodder for another thread. However, you did not answer my other question. Did you see Letters from Iwo Jima and did you like it?

Rune Iversen -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/6/2007 10:26:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: timtom [image]local://upfiles/8484/7488F8FE3F6D4275BE8E8CFF9CF815E8.jpg[/image] A note upon the statistics: Since there is no indication of whether or not those polled can be regarded as "representative" (some infantrymen spent the entire war guarding Dutch Harbor and to them the question of whether to shoot a "Jap" or not might have been purely academic) it can at most serve to indicate a possible "tendency" ("Tendens") instead of an actual trend. I would also imagine that the dating of the questionaire would influence the possible result (it isn´t apparent from the posted excerpt). quote: Similarly, of the 220 Korean labourers present on Makin at the time of the assault on that island, a minimum of 116 were killed (54%). On neighbouring Tarawa, 1,069 out of 1,198 Korean labourers wer killed (89%). Apparently the Japanese were not alone in fighting to the death (Crowl & Love 1955, p.71-73, p.125, p.156.). The lower number of "Non-Jap" Asian prisoners in allied custody might also reflect japanese indifference towards their fate in the face of the heavy allied naval and air bombardments.

ORANGE -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 12:30:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro PZJ Hortlund It is clear that you don’t like Doggy; I would venture a guess that you two have met before. But that is not what this thread is about. This thread is about your attacks on, and/or slanderous comparisons of the U.S, be it in 1850, 1945, or 2006. LOL, no. This thread is about how racism is wrong, stereotyping is a tool of the stupid, and that guilt is always individual, never collective. This is quite simple really. Did My Lai happen? Judging from the venomous outrage displayed by certain posters when the topic was brought up one wonders if this is disputed or if you (reluctantly, and with much attempt to sidetrack the subject to something else) agree that the massacre did indeed take place. If we agree that it did happen, then my question becomes "what would happen if we would stereotype the entire US army based on this one incident?". I use this as an example to show why stereotyping is indeed stupid. It will lead to all sorts of weird conclusions, see. Now, if you read the above a couple of times, then maybe...maybe you'll see that the discussion really isnt focused on any attack on your precious nation, but instead it is about racism, stereotyping and guilt. quote: Because of your unending, venomous attacks on America, I can’t help but to wonder if you are longing to do a little “strafing”, yourself. Maybe you are too highly evolved to desire such a thing, but I wonder. LOL yeah...anyone who ever dares to point out that the US track record isnt exactly spotless must be a terrorist. It would be fine to use My Lai to stereotype the entire US Army. People do it all the time. Do to a letter from a US Army soldier My Lai was investigated and people were tried. That is how a civilized society handles criminal actions. That is the correct way to do it. Criminal actions will occur and it is up to the justice system to decide guilt and punishment if necessary. I am unaware of any Imperial Japanese cases that were similar. The fact that you even know about My Lai is a triumph of the US Army and the United States, not a conviction of it.

ORANGE -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 12:40:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro PZJ Hortlund It is clear that you don’t like Doggy; I would venture a guess that you two have met before. But that is not what this thread is about. This thread is about your attacks on, and/or slanderous comparisons of the U.S, be it in 1850, 1945, or 2006. LOL, no. This thread is about how racism is wrong, stereotyping is a tool of the stupid, and that guilt is always individual, never collective. This is quite simple really. Did My Lai happen? Judging from the venomous outrage displayed by certain posters when the topic was brought up one wonders if this is disputed or if you (reluctantly, and with much attempt to sidetrack the subject to something else) agree that the massacre did indeed take place. If we agree that it did happen, then my question becomes "what would happen if we would stereotype the entire US army based on this one incident?". I use this as an example to show why stereotyping is indeed stupid. It will lead to all sorts of weird conclusions, see. Now, if you read the above a couple of times, then maybe...maybe you'll see that the discussion really isnt focused on any attack on your precious nation, but instead it is about racism, stereotyping and guilt. quote: Because of your unending, venomous attacks on America, I can’t help but to wonder if you are longing to do a little “strafing”, yourself. Maybe you are too highly evolved to desire such a thing, but I wonder. LOL yeah...anyone who ever dares to point out that the US track record isnt exactly spotless must be a terrorist. If stereotyping is a tool of the stupid are you not stupid for using this stereotype?

Doggie -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 1:34:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 The film, shot in colour, was taken by an unknown combat cameraman in 1944 during fighting on the Pacific Island of Peleliu. It includes scenes of American soldiers shooting Japanese wounded as they lie prone on the ground.... So you expect them to call an ambulance?[8\|] These are the guys who wave surrender flags and them throw grenades at medics when they come forward to tend to them. So you expect combat marines to share their C-rats with Japanese soldiers who would literally skin them alive if given half a chance? There's a big difference between finishing off wounded Japs who had a documented history of playing possum so they could shoot some Marine in the back as he went by and torturing prisoners to death for entertainment.

Doggie -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 1:46:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund Sure, why not...lets play your little "I wish I was a lawyer so I knew what I was talking about"-game. [8\|] Why not? You've been playing it. I've seen absolutely no evidence that you know what you're talking about or graduated from any law school. Given that all you got is "I'm better than you" and "you're a racist", I seriously doubt you're out of high school.

Doggie -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 1:56:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: timtom The text below is lifted from my MPhil thesis (slightly edited). It's a social history of American Infantry in WWII. I briefly touch upon the issue of atrocities within the wider context of the psychological effects of combat on the individual, including his normative habitude. It follows upon a section dealing with incidents of prisoner-killings in Europe. What's missing is the fact that race was not the only difference between the Japanese and the Germans. American airmen would bail out over German held territory because there was a good chance they would be treated decently and survive the war. Thousands of Allied airmen prefered to go in with their planes rather than risk being tortured to death by the Japanese. After Bataan, nobody willingly surrendered to the Japanese. So if an American soldier prefered Italians to SS troopers, would that make him a "racist"? They hated the Japanese because they were sadistic, brutal killers, not because of their race.

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:10:48 AM)
Is that the sign of a canine licking his testicles I notice? [>:]

timtom -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:27:59 AM)
Merrill, Marty, All good points and I would tend to agree. My only excuse is that the paper focused solely on the American experience to the exclusion of all other, that the bit you've seen represents but a minor part of the paper taken out of context, and that in being constricted to just 30,000 word incl. footnotes, I had to be quite selective about how to "spend" those 30,000 word in trying to span a wide range of topics. Rune, IIRC, the 4,064 infantrymen questioned in the Pacific were from the 7th, 25th, 27th and 43rd ID's. The European poll is of members of 1st & 9th ID. The 120 individuals polled in the US were infantry replacements awaiting shipment overseas. All three polls were conducted during the war. It's unclear from the text exactly what the MOS of those polled were, but given that several chapters in the "American Soldier" is dedicated to the combat troop/service troop relations, it seems likely that the researchers weren't so naive as to just poll the HQ lot. And indeed the high casualties among the Korean labourers probably reflect a number of factors. It's been a while, but IIRC casualties among Japanese civilian labourers were of similar proportions.

Ike99 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 6:49:45 AM)
quote: What were the circumstances that made the wholesale slaughter of innocents throughout China, Southeast Asia, the East Indies, the Phillipines and everywhere else the Japanese military set foot understandable for you? The same circumstances mjk428 that drove the US out in the Pacific. The desire for Empire and spoils. Let´s look at the Phillipine here...hmmmm... NAME OF CONFLICT: The Philippine-American War BEGAN: February 4, 1899 CAUSES OF CONFLICT:The basic causes of the Philippine-American War can be found in the U.S. government's quest for an overseas empire and the desire of the Filipino people for freedom. In other words, this war was a clash between the forces of imperialism and nationalism. CASUALTY FIGURES: U.S.-- 4,234 dead and 2,818 wounded. Philippines-- 20,000 military dead and 200,000 civilian dead. (approximate numbers). Some historians place the numbers of civilian dead at 500,000 or higher. http://www.historyguy.com/PhilipineAmericanwar.html So bash away at the Japanese all you want but any objective person can clearly see the American have no moral high ground whatsoever.

morvwilson -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 9:02:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: What were the circumstances that made the wholesale slaughter of innocents throughout China, Southeast Asia, the East Indies, the Phillipines and everywhere else the Japanese military set foot understandable for you? The same circumstances mjk428 that drove the US out in the Pacific. The desire for Empire and spoils. Let´s look at the Phillipine here...hmmmm... NAME OF CONFLICT: The Philippine-American War BEGAN: February 4, 1899 CAUSES OF CONFLICT:The basic causes of the Philippine-American War can be found in the U.S. government's quest for an overseas empire and the desire of the Filipino people for freedom. In other words, this war was a clash between the forces of imperialism and nationalism. CASUALTY FIGURES: U.S.-- 4,234 dead and 2,818 wounded. Philippines-- 20,000 military dead and 200,000 civilian dead. (approximate numbers). Some historians place the numbers of civilian dead at 500,000 or higher. http://www.historyguy.com/PhilipineAmericanwar.html So bash away at the Japanese all you want but any objective person can clearly see the American have no moral high ground whatsoever. But who killed the civilians? How did they die? Why do you assume it was only the US military that did it? The article you present does not say that. It was a guerilla war. Many times the insurectionists kill those they think are cooperating with the other side in order to intimidate the populace. This is why I always cross check in other sources. The one you present is inconclusive on the number of deaths. Truth be known, I don't think you will find any records of how many people died at that time. Most Philipinos of the time were illiterate (one of the many infrastructure type things that had to be made right). The churches kept what records there were (birth, marriage and death) and those were destroyed during the Japanese occupation. (I found that out when I tried to research my wife's family back ground) So, as far as exactly how many died in the fighting (even during WW2) will never be known. The Spanish did not even do a census of the islands so before the US took over we don't even know what the population started at. But your article did allude to one point. The islands by design were built up to become independent. 3. Following the conclusion of major hostilities, the U.S. did it's best to "Americanize" the Philippines. Through successful civilian administration, the Islands were modernized and the nation prepared for eventual independence. The Philippines became an independent nation on July 4, 1946. How many other nations on this earth go to this kind of trouble?

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 12:23:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mjk428 No, I understood perfectly that you applied a racial stereotype to muddy the water. Heh, this is too funny. First, I think its blindingly obvious that I added the gang-variable to (try to) explain to you what would need to be changed for this to be a case of collective guilt. Second, why would "gang" be a racial stereotype? Are you implying that only a certain ethnicity is involved in gangs? LOL. quote: Do you have any evidence that the "gang" they belonged to was larger than the four of them? Nope, and that is indeed completely irrelevant. BUT you tried to hold this up as an example of collective guilt. Now, since all four guys took part in the break-in, that means they are all guilty of the "original" crime that led up to the murder. That means your collective guilt-theory crumbles into pieces before your eyes (not that you understand it though). For it to be collective guilt, someone else (that means other than these four) who was not part of the original crime, must be convicted for the murder. Now if you feel incomfortable with adding the gang-parameter to fill the equation, feel free to add another parameter...family perhaps, ethnicity if you want to make the Japan-comparrison, friend, spouse, whatever. quote: I understand the legal reasoning and it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck but you insist it's not a duck. LOL, yeah, you understand the legal reasoning alright...at least as far as google will take you. I like the duck-analogy however, maybe I'll try it in court some day. But your honor, I think this looks like a duck, and Im quite sure it quacks like a duck too... lets leave all those pesky paragraphs aside and lets decide this case on my gut feeling instead. quote: Whatever you call it, it's quite obvious that not all guilt is determined individually as you claim - not even in a courtroom. Here is a piece of advice. Follow this case if you can. Look at the case on court-tv or whatever. Perhaps you could get a transcript of the verdict some day. When you do, ask yourself this. Did the prosecutor try to lead in evidence that all four were at the scene of the crime together. Did he try to lead in evidence that all four knowingly and willingly took part in the original break-in. Because if he does, and if the court finds that he has been able to show that, then..surprise surprise, we have tried these guys as individuals. quote: For the 3rd time: Why would an attorney need to plead for his client to be treated individually when according to you that's the only way possible? "You're not a lawyer so you don't understand" is not an answer. Sure, there is a law that says roughly this. If you are part of a group of people who decide to do a burglary into someones home, and if you know that one or more of your group are carrying a gun to be used in case someone tries to interfer with your burglary, then once you have passed the threshold into the house (once the "original crime" is committed) anything that happens is on your head aswell. The court will argue that since you knowingly and willingly took part in the original crime despite knowing that your friends were armed, then you must have been in agreement with the fact that the gun might also come to be used. You commit the crime "together and with shared intent". This is not an example of collective guilt however, since you are all tried individually for your knowledge/understanding and intent to join the original crime. quote: I really don't have to prove anything and it should be painfully obvious to boot. Every member of the Japanese military that was part of an invading force was somewhere they didn't belong. Just like a lawyer to leave out the qualifier bolded for your attention the second time around. Anyway, this line of attack was just for fun. You've already been beaten by David Brener & Procrustes. :) Actually, for your collective guilt-theory to work, you will need to show that every individual of the Japanese armed forces took part in the trespassing. If you fail to do that, then not every member trespassed, and thus, not every member can be convicted for any eventual crime that took part during the trespassing. So...if for example I can hold up one example of a Japanese soldier who never left his homeland, your case fails. And, since it is quite easy to hold up the example of some poor AA-gunner in Nagoya or whatever, who never left Japan, you fail. Now, this is actually a pretty good analogy to the break-in case you were talking about earlier, so dont just dismiss all this out of frustration of being wrong. Think of it this way. Guys doing the break in = Japanese army in China. Guy who shot the victim = Japanese soldiers committing warcrimes. Members of the gang = Japanese armed forces Members of the gang who stayed at home during this particular night = Japanese soldiers who never committed any warcrime. Now, when doggie calls for the slaughtering of all japanese soldiers (lets be nice and pretend he only meant japanese soldiers shall we..even though we both know it isnt so). He is in effect calling for the punishment of all the gang-members, including those who didnt take part in the crime. I have tried to explain why this is wrong. This made doggie angry and he called me names. It also made you angry, because you have insisted that all gang-members should share the same guilt, and you have tried over and over again to make the case that all members are equally guilty...because you think guilt can be collective like this. Now consider this. How does it rhyme with your sense of justice and you morals to have those gang-members who were at home that night playing PS3 with their girlfriend or whatever...executed for the murder someone else committed in another part of the city?

HansBolter -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 1:55:41 PM)
PJH The fact that you avoided addressing my last post couldn't be more revealing. You persist in attempting to define guilt in legal terms while many of us here endeavor to get you to use your brain outside the legal box and comprehend the reality of collective guilt outside the courtroom. You persist in supporting the stereotype that lawyers cannot think outside the legal box. Collective guilt exists. It's a reality, not a legality. I realize that may be difficllt for you to grasp given your educational handicap. The more you doggedly argue against the simple fact of reality, the more you undermine your credibility. Pursuing the argument for the argument's sake has already become counterproductive for you so why do you continue? Ike became a laughing stock of these forums some time ago with his anti-American diatribes, why are you working so industriously to beat him out for the champion laughing stock position? Do you suffer from a self destruction complex?

Ike99 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:06:35 PM)
quote: But your article did allude to one point. The islands by design were built up to become independent. 3. Following the conclusion of major hostilities, the U.S. did it's best to "Americanize" the Philippines. Through successful civilian administration, the Islands were modernized and the nation prepared for eventual independence. The Philippines became an independent nation on July 4, 1946. How many other nations on this earth go to this kind of trouble? [:D] Your saying the US invaded and conquered the Phillipines so it could then just turn around and give the Phillipines back it´s complete independence and self determination? Really now. [:D] How sweet. Does that make a lot of sence to you? Or does it make a lot more sence to say "Americanize the Philippines¨ & ¨Prepare the Phillipines for Independance¨ are nice sounding code words saying, set up a government in the Philliines that is sure to along with the wishes of the imperialist masters? Seems you should have no problems accepting Japan was ¨Japanizing¨, ¨modernizing¨ and ¨preparing¨ Manchuria (Manchukuo) and Korea for ¨independance¨ too then. [:D] Different sides of the same coin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchukuo

martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:13:02 PM)
I think this post is number 557. Amazing how much progress you can make in 557 posts. Oh - hang on a minute - uhh - none apparently. Nurse! Get me a moderator! [&:]

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:18:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter PJH The fact that you avoided addressing my last post couldn't be more revealing. I think you are trying to read too much into me ignoring your posts. When I ignored your ad homs, you though that was revealing, when I ignored your funny pictures, you thought that was revealing, and now when I ignored your ramblings about me and why I post here, you thought that was revealing. Sometimes a spade is just a spade you know, it could be that Im ignoring you because I think you are just posting irrelevant and pointless "theories". You said that you apologize, that I push your buttons, and you think Im using forum to excercise my argumentative skills. I dont know what to respond to such utter nonsense. So I ignored it. In the future, I will continue to ignore you when you post random BS. quote: You persist in attempting to define guilt in legal terms while many of us here endeavor to get you to use your brain outside the legal box and comprehend the reality of collective guilt outside the courtroom. You persist in supporting the stereotype that lawyers cannot think outside the legal box. Collective guilt exists. It's a reality, not a legality. I realize that may be difficllt for you to grasp given your educational handicap. I have told you, and indeed everyone else why I dont buy the collective guilt-BS. I have also listed the reasons why we dont accept collective guilt in our society, laws or norms. You havent really responded to that, all you manage to produce here is along the line of "I think it exists". When pressed to give reasons for your position, you fail to answer. All we get is "because I think so" or "you need to think outside the box". That means it is a complete waste of time to argue this point with you. Simply because you are unable to present any sort of argument beyond your own personal emotions. I gave you an example on what such a discussion looks like earlier, and sadly, you are playing that part to perfection. Now, until you can present a thought-through and coherent argument for your side in this argument, I shall continue to ignore you. Feel free to a) theoretizise about my credibility on the forum b) post funny images c) rant about lawyers d) use your own emotions as "evidence" to support your horribly flawed position e) all of the above or whatever. It is somewhat disheartening to realize that every single post I have written in reply to you have been a gigantic waste of time and effort on my part. So, unless you make it worthwhile to discussing with you, I shall not make that same misstake again.

JudgeDredd -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:23:23 PM)
quote: PJH So, unless you make it worthwhile to discussing with you, I shall not make that same misstake again. yeehaa...the end is nigh, surely

HansBolter -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:38:52 PM)
I and others provided multiple examples of collective emotional experiences and you persist in pursuing the narrow minded definition of guilt as merely a legal status why continuing to deny the simple fact of reality that it is also an emotion that can be experienced collectively. I feel for your clients.

JudgeDredd -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:48:45 PM)
So...to summarize... in a court of law, Collective Guilt does not exist outside a court of law Collective Guilt does exist There you go. An apparently less intelligent than you lot Scot has summed it up for you. Now ffs grow up.

HansBolter -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 2:55:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd So...to summarize... in a court of law, Collective Guilt does not exist outside a court of law Collective Guilt does exist There you go. An apparently less intelligent than you lot Scot has summed it up for you. Now ffs grow up. Thanks Judge, We unruly children do need a good slap once in a while! [:D] I gues I will have to give up taunting him in the interest of civility, but I have to admit that once he demonstrated that no amount of logical argument would ever sway him that taunting him became way more entertaining.

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:03:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter I and others provided multiple examples of collective emotional experiences and you persist in pursuing the narrow minded definition of guilt as merely a legal status why continuing to deny the simple fact of reality that it is also an emotion that can be experienced collectively. Surely you understand the difference between collective guilt, which is where you are found guilty of something because of the actions of others, and an emotion you share with others, because you are observing the same phenomena or listening to the same piece of music. Surely you understand that difference.

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:05:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd So...to summarize... Dont give up your day job.

HansBolter -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:17:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter I and others provided multiple examples of collective emotional experiences and you persist in pursuing the narrow minded definition of guilt as merely a legal status why continuing to deny the simple fact of reality that it is also an emotion that can be experienced collectively. Surely you understand the difference between collective guilt, which is where you are found guilty of something because of the actions of others, and an emotion you share with others, because you are observing the same phenomena or listening to the same piece of music. Surely you understand that difference. What I surely understand is that you persist in wanting to define collective guilt as a legal status. You just presented a fine example. Surely you undertand that an "emotion you are sharing with others" constitutes a "collective" experience, ergo the emotion was experinced collectively and if that emotion happens to be guilt, then you have participated in the experience of collective guilt. How can you possibly continue to deny it's existence with a straight face?

HansBolter -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:17:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd So...to summarize... Dont give up your day job. Perhaps you should.

Ike99 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:21:16 PM)
quote: Panzerjaeger Hortlund-When I ignored your ad homs, you though that was revealing, when I ignored your funny pictures, you thought that was revealing, and now when I ignored your ramblings about me and why I post here, you thought that was revealing. Sometimes a spade is just a spade you know, it could be that Im ignoring you because I think you are just posting irrelevant and pointless "theories". You said that you apologize, that I push your buttons, and you think Im using forum to excercise my argumentative skills. I dont know what to respond to such utter nonsense. So I ignored it. In the future, I will continue to ignore you when you post random BS. Hans does this because he has a very weak position. If you take out the... quote: I realize that may be difficllt for you to grasp given your educational handicap. You might want to get a clue that the rest of your species looks down on attorneys as the truly misguided village idiots of the species. Ike became a laughing stock of these forums some time ago with his anti-American diatribes, why are you working so industriously to beat him out for the champion laughing stock position? His post would be half as long and quite possibly some could be taken out altogether. When someone makes a valid point he counters with an ¨ad hom¨ so in his own mind he is effectively countering the point. Then he tries to get others to share in his ad hom attack to solidify his own dillusional perception.

HansBolter -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:32:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: Panzerjaeger Hortlund-When I ignored your ad homs, you though that was revealing, when I ignored your funny pictures, you thought that was revealing, and now when I ignored your ramblings about me and why I post here, you thought that was revealing. Sometimes a spade is just a spade you know, it could be that Im ignoring you because I think you are just posting irrelevant and pointless "theories". You said that you apologize, that I push your buttons, and you think Im using forum to excercise my argumentative skills. I dont know what to respond to such utter nonsense. So I ignored it. In the future, I will continue to ignore you when you post random BS. Hans does this because he has a very weak position. If you take out the... quote: I realize that may be difficllt for you to grasp given your educational handicap. You might want to get a clue that the rest of your species looks down on attorneys as the truly misguided village idiots of the species. Ike became a laughing stock of these forums some time ago with his anti-American diatribes, why are you working so industriously to beat him out for the champion laughing stock position? His post would be half as long and quite possibly some could be taken out altogether. When someone makes a valid point he counters with an ¨ad hom¨ so in his own mind he is effectively countering the point. Then he tries to get others to share in his ad hom attack to solidify his own dillusional perception. When I was engaging in taunting (read ad homs) I was clearly engaging in taunting and fully and publicly admitted having done so. If your attempt at psychanalysis had come before the disclosure it might have had a chance at being a considered a credible criticsm. As it stands it has no credibility whatsoever. Nice try though.

Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 3:44:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter What I surely understand is that you persist in wanting to define collective guilt as a legal status. You just presented a fine example. I'll take that as a "no" then. quote: Surely you undertand that an "emotion you are sharing with others" constitutes a "collective" experience, ergo the emotion was experinced collectively and if that emotion happens to be guilt, then you have participated in the experience of collective guilt. How can you possibly continue to deny it's existence with a straight face? Well, what happens with the individual that does not feel that same emotion as the rest of the group? He is not experiencing that emotion that others are sharing, is he? So, in order for us to know whether an individual is feeling that emotion or not, we have to check each individual to see whether he is feeling the emotion or not. And thus, we are making an individual test to see whether the emotion is there or not. A side-effect of this of cource, is that the feeling is only collective among those who experience it, and if we translate this to the discussion we were having, then only those japanese guilty of warcrimes share the guilt of those warcrimes, or in other words, the guilt is not collective for all japanese members of the armed forces, only for those who are found guilty on an individual level. The fact that you fail to understand this is truly amazing.

JudgeDredd -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (12/7/2007 5:06:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund quote: ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd So...to summarize... Dont give up your day job. You know, PJH You truly are beautiful...and I'd find it very difficult to come up with a reason not to hump you.... but drop it

Page: << < prev 17 18 [19] 20 21 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.082031