RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/22/2007 8:01:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund


To claim that the gulf war was not combat is pure idiocy. Drop this moronic line of reasoning, cut your losses and move on.


You're telling a combat vet from GW1 how he should characterize his own war. I'd say he's earned the right to describe it any darn way he wants to - and I can understand how he might feel that it just doesn't compare to fighting in the PTO. Seems to me to be an example of humility rather than idiocy.

I'm grateful for his service as I would hope your fellow countrymen would be of yours, combat vet or not.



mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/22/2007 8:09:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

I'll leave you to your delusions. I'm outta here.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWKdokcvM7A



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/22/2007 10:33:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428
You're telling a combat vet from GW1 how he should characterize his own war. I'd say he's earned the right to describe it any darn way he wants to - and I can understand how he might feel that it just doesn't compare to fighting in the PTO. Seems to me to be an example of humility rather than idiocy.


Like I said, I dont think a Tornado pilot would characterize GW1 as "non-combat". Nor would any of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties. Now, if you want to jump on the retard-bandwaggon, be my guest, but his statement was as idiotic as your defence of it.



06 Maestro -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/22/2007 11:21:51 PM)

Back to the movies; I watched FOOF in the comfort of my home a while back. I was really let down by C. Eastwood; the whole story was useless (IMHO), and the combat portions-all of them, absolutely sucked-it was almost a comedy. I am not interested in supporting such rag films; it's too bad the other movie sounds almost good, as I'm not interested in giving any more of my money.

As for the other subject here of "collective guilt"; I'm not sure if the writers are speaking from a philosophical point of view, or are stating what they perceive as reality. The reality is that "collective guilt" is alive and well. Regardless whether it is right or wrong, it has been a normal part of life for a long. long, time. Does anyone know haw many billions of dollars that German taxpayers have paid in restitution to Jews since 1945-and continue to pay to this day? How much Germany doles out to Israel every year? How many Germans were slaughtered or driven from their ancestral homes in eastern Europe, and was that because they suddenly became bad neighbors? Italians booted out of Libya due to??? Anyone heard from a Tatar recently? Seems like they had their own little diaspora arranged by good old "uncle Joe" after the Great Patriotic War.

Is Zionism racism? It appears that there are a few billion people that think so-they may be right, but what about the Jew who just wants to live in peace in Israel? If he believes in Israel, then he is a Zionist, and you know what we should do with those Zionist, don't you? What about those nasty khafirs that support the Zionist? I have read OBL's statements justifying attacks on civilians in America; "they are tax payers that support our enemies" (or words to that effect). White Americans loosing jobs to minorities (even if those "minorities" are a majority) due to past wrongs committed by people of the same skin color is what? Paying a restitution as a group for something someone else did from the same group. long, long, ago, is what?

Collective guilt does seem wrong to me, but it exists-always has, and most likely, always will.

One more note, I had the honor of knowing dozens of WW2 vets from my membership in an American Legion post. To a man, the ones that fought against the Japanese hated them with a passion-40 years after the fact. The fellows that fought in Africa, and Europe had a completely different outlook on their foes. The Japanese are largely responsible for the way people around the world look at them. There may have been W's of thousands of Japanese that just wanted to go home to Mommy, or their honey, but that does not change the reality of the brutality that the Japanese forces engaged in on every front.

Although I know that American and Allied forces did commit some atrocities during that war, those actions are really quite insignificant compared to what the Japanese dished out.



mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 5:03:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Like I said, I dont think a Tornado pilot would characterize GW1 as "non-combat". Nor would any of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties. Now, if you want to jump on the retard-bandwaggon, be my guest, but his statement was as idiotic as your defence of it.


You just don't have a clue. You're telling someone that was actually there how he should characterize GW1. I'm sure there are GW1 vets that would take issue with Sarge, but they don't need you to defend them.

I seriously doubt a GW1 Tornado pilot would be bragging about his combat record to a BoB Spitfire pilot. Obviously GW1 was combat but it wasn't Iwo. Also, no doubt it was very real combat for the Iraqis. It's the only war I'm aware that got called off because too many of the enemy were being killed (Highway of Death).






mjk428 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 5:10:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro

Back to the movies; I watched FOOF in the comfort of my home a while back. I was really let down by C. Eastwood; the whole story was useless (IMHO), and the combat portions-all of them, absolutely sucked-it was almost a comedy. I am not interested in supporting such rag films; it's too bad the other movie sounds almost good, as I'm not interested in giving any more of my money.


It's really a shame that "Flags" wasn't focused on the battle. Basically "Letters" from the US side. Especially after all the terrible WW2 movies from Hollywood lately. Still, "Letters" is worth a rent. The studio (& Clint) won't see much from that. ;)

quote:

As for the other subject here of "collective guilt"; I'm not sure if the writers are speaking from a philosophical point of view, or are stating what they perceive as reality. The reality is that "collective guilt" is alive and well. Regardless whether it is right or wrong, it has been a normal part of life for a long. long, time. Does anyone know haw many billions of dollars that German taxpayers have paid in restitution to Jews since 1945-and continue to pay to this day? How much Germany doles out to Israel every year? How many Germans were slaughtered or driven from their ancestral homes in eastern Europe, and was that because they suddenly became bad neighbors? Italians booted out of Libya due to??? Anyone heard from a Tatar recently? Seems like they had their own little diaspora arranged by good old "uncle Joe" after the Great Patriotic War.

Is Zionism racism? It appears that there are a few billion people that think so-they may be right, but what about the Jew who just wants to live in peace in Israel? If he believes in Israel, then he is a Zionist, and you know what we should do with those Zionist, don't you? What about those nasty khafirs that support the Zionist? I have read OBL's statements justifying attacks on civilians in America; "they are tax payers that support our enemies" (or words to that effect). White Americans loosing jobs to minorities (even if those "minorities" are a majority) due to past wrongs committed by people of the same skin color is what? Paying a restitution as a group for something someone else did from the same group. long, long, ago, is what?

Collective guilt does seem wrong to me, but it exists-always has, and most likely, always will.

One more note, I had the honor of knowing dozens of WW2 vets from my membership in an American Legion post. To a man, the ones that fought against the Japanese hated them with a passion-40 years after the fact. The fellows that fought in Africa, and Europe had a completely different outlook on their foes. The Japanese are largely responsible for the way people around the world look at them. There may have been W's of thousands of Japanese that just wanted to go home to Mommy, or their honey, but that does not change the reality of the brutality that the Japanese forces engaged in on every front.

Although I know that American and Allied forces did commit some atrocities during that war, those actions are really quite insignificant compared to what the Japanese dished out.


Beer!



Doggie -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 5:26:38 AM)

quote:

Actually I am calling BS on your claim that Sweden had concentration camps. Its a lie. Period.


Actually, It's not. If you were not a pathological liar you would not ignore what is common knowledge. Nice try the with the"I won't lower myself to the level of Ad Hom personal attacks like the racist, ignorant, warmongering American fascists" hypocrisy.[8|]

quote:

Doggie would not be able to fight his way out of a wet paper-bag, much less defend his own views. Have you actually been looking at his posts in this thread?


Looks to me like you're the guy who can't defend his own views, that's why you got nothing outside of "you're a racist doo doo head". That's what you're left with when it's obvious to everyone you have no clue what you're blubbering about.

quote:

His views on world are,maybe,slightly better than hitler or stallin views. Fortunately his backward views are in minor in USA


Another "expert" on the United States from eastern Europe.[8|]

quote:

But ok, I was a squadleader in the Swedish army 1992-1993, and Ive been in the Swedish National guards from 2000 to now.


Bahahaha. A squadleader in an army that hasn't fired a shot in 600 years. You got a merit badge in "pissing in fijords"?

quote:

As for the British, we lost more to friendly fire from the Americans.


Because the stupid yanks killed any Iraqis before they could get close enough to shoot at any British troops. Hundreds of British troops who would be dead are alive today because of American airpower. Compare to the Falkland Islands, where there was no American airpower. Another college boy "military expert".[8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

And you do personally know what it's like? You're a combat veteran?



Unlike some people, I'm entitled to wear U.S. Army division patches from the First Infantry Division and the XVIII Airborne Corps. But you don't see posting an avatar pic of Audie Murphy and commenting on things I know absolutely nothing about.
Unlike some people, I actually was a member of the United States Army aviation company starting in 1972 and another combat aviation company of the NCARNG during 1991. I do not represent myself to be something I'm not, such as a United States Marine.

And like many other people here who are not European college boy "experts" on military history, I knew hundreds of people who actually were combat marines, sailors, and soldier in the Pacific during world war II, and to a man, every one of them despised the Japanese and not one of them regretting killing them in mass quantities. Most regret they did not kill more of them.

quote:

To claim that the gulf war was not combat is pure idiocy. Drop this moronic line of reasoning, cut your losses and move on.


To claim you know more about the Gulf War than people who actually participated is the absolute height of imbecilic arrogancance. Perhaps Mjk and Sarge should tell you what it's like to engage in homosexual orgies in a Swedish Army barracks? The difference between them and you is they don't make habit of designating themselves as experts on subjects they know nothing about. You, however, may feel free to enlighten us as to your distinguished service in a military organization that has not awarded a decoration for combat valor in centuries.

quote:

Like I said, I dont think a Tornado pilot would characterize GW1 as "non-combat


That pilot would be one of less than a dozen Tornado pilots that actually pickeled a bomb.
The overwhelming majority of combat air sorties were flown by American naval and airforce aircraft. And even their experiences were a day at the park compared to world war II. The United States armed forces lost more men in a single day on
Tarawa than all the coalition forces put together have lost in six years of combat in both Gulf wars and Afghanistan.







Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 10:46:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Actually, It's not. If you were not a pathological liar you would not ignore what is common knowledge. Nice try the with the"I won't lower myself to the level of Ad Hom personal attacks like the racist, ignorant, warmongering American fascists" hypocrisy.[8|]

No, doggie. Its still a lie. Sweden never had concentration camps. We had internment camps for foreign airmen who were shot down over Sweden, but that is not the same thing, and we never put swedish citizens in them. I guess this goes to show how dangerous it is for someone to try to wikipedia his way to knowledge.

quote:

Bahahaha. A squadleader in an army that hasn't fired a shot in 600 years. You got a merit badge in "pissing in fijords"?


He asked if I had served. I told him the answer. The fact that my service does not impress you is something I shall have to live with.

quote:

To claim you know more about the Gulf War than people who actually participated is the absolute height of imbecilic arrogancance.

Actually, here we are arguing semantics "what is combat", "what action should be considered combat" etc. To fail to understand that, and the difference between that and some personal recollection of gw1 must be considered remarkable.

quote:


Perhaps Mjk and Sarge should tell you what it's like to engage in homosexual orgies in a Swedish Army barracks?

Nah, that is something the three of you can talk about in your msn-conversations or whatever.

quote:

That pilot would be one of less than a dozen Tornado pilots that actually pickeled a bomb.
The overwhelming majority of combat air sorties were flown by American naval and airforce aircraft. And even their experiences were a day at the park compared to world war II.


Keep digging yourself deeper into that hole, you are only putting your own ignorance on a brighter display for all of us to be dazzled by. To the rest of the world, the question "was gw1 combat?" can be answered without comparing gw1 to ww2.

quote:

The United States armed forces lost more men in a single day on
Tarawa than all the coalition forces put together have lost in six years of combat in both Gulf wars and Afghanistan.


Heh, so the definition of combat depends on how many US troops were killed?

Have you noticed, btw, what has happened when you ran out of arguments to defend your outrageous position on japan in ww2? Have you noticed that you havent even tried to counter the arguments I put forth. Instead we get this rubbish? Its funny, in a sad and pathetic way.



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 10:50:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mjk428

You just don't have a clue. You're telling someone that was actually there how he should characterize GW1. I'm sure there are GW1 vets that would take issue with Sarge, but they don't need you to defend them.

I seriously doubt a GW1 Tornado pilot would be bragging about his combat record to a BoB Spitfire pilot. Obviously GW1 was combat but it wasn't Iwo. Also, no doubt it was very real combat for the Iraqis. It's the only war I'm aware that got called off because too many of the enemy were being killed (Highway of Death).


Well, it seems we are in agreement. GW1 was combat. Thank you.



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 11:05:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie
Perhaps Mjk and Sarge should tell you what it's like to engage in homosexual orgies in a Swedish Army barracks?


This is too funny. Going into my sigline.



martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 11:40:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

This is too funny. Going into my sigline.


Thanks Panzerjaeger. It's good to get the funny bits of doggie without having to read the rest.

The other thing, is that I notice that someone said that allied soldiers didn't have combat stress during GW1(or something similar). Well, it's true I wasn't there, but I have seen allied soldiers that DID get combat stress. You can get combat stress for a whole variety of reasons. Among those is the fact that it's not only what you "they do to you" as "what you do to them". There REALLY is no wider point being made here, honestly. It's just that I've seen people who were just as good soldiers as anybody else.

I'm also not wanting to draw the discussion away from WW2. Personally I think that "culpability" for atrocious behaviour, among all the very many countries involved, at different times, and in different places, is something that's just too complex for me to want to dabble in here, as it's almost certain that somebody will take exception to something I might write, and then it will stop being a sensible discussion, and I don't really think I want that.



Sarge -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 3:20:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund


Like I said, I dont think a Tornado pilot would characterize GW1 as "non-combat". Nor would any of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casualties. Now, if you want to jump on the retard-bandwaggon, be my guest, but his statement was as idiotic as your defence of it.


LOL,

Now that American and its vets are the subject you have gone from Individual to Collective experience.
Wonder why that would be ?

But anyaway, nice partisan shot with the civilian death figure, civilian deaths are always collective in the context of American military.



As in your little fan boy KG aka the turd enlightened us with earlier,
quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Really? Tell the widows of the soldiers who died in that non-combat that complete BS.

I'll leave you to your delusions. I'm outta here.

I as a vet of the 1GW should offer up apologies to the family that lost a loved one in the conflicted .
After a statement like that the only thing I am going to offer is assistance in helping shove KG teeth out his a$$.







Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 3:58:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
But...and I seem to be forced to return to this again... all of the above is beside the point. The point is that guilt is always individual, never collective. And blind, racist stereotyping is not really that productive.



Unless you count being in the SS in which the entire organization was deemed a criminal organization by the international military tribunal.

"The IMT indicted the defendants on charges of crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The IMT defined crimes against humanity as "murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation...or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds." A fourth charge of conspiracy was added both to cover crimes committed under domestic Nazi law before the start of World War II and so that subsequent tribunals would have jurisdiction to prosecute any individual belonging to a proven criminal organization. Therefore the IMT also indicted several Nazi organizations deemed to be criminal, namely: the Reich Cabinet, the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party, the Elite Guard (SS), the Security Service (SD), the Secret State Police (Gestapo), the Stormtroopers (SA), and the General Staff and High Command of the German Armed Forces."

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007069

Thus this collective guilt was used as a means to deprive members of the waffen ss of military benefits after the war that were given to members of the wermacht, luftwaffe, etc.

It is clear then, that guilt was collective and not individual in this case as simple membership in an organization, regardless of a persons individual actions while in that organization was enough to merit guilt.




Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 4:00:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge

LOL,

Now that American and its vets are the subject you have gone from Individual to Collective experience.
Wonder why that would be ?

But anyaway, nice partisan shot with the civilian death figure, civilian deaths are always collective in the context of American military.


Sarge. Straight question. Was GW1 combat or not? If you answer this question with "no", then you need to tell us what sort of definition of "combat" you are using.









Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 4:04:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

Unless you count being in the SS in which the entire organization was deemed a criminal organization by the international military tribunal.


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.



Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 4:23:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 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.


Aside from one's personal view on the matter, the point is that yes, collective guilt does exist and members have been held accountable due to it regardless of personal actions.

The point here is that collective guilt does not necessarily depend upon 'racist stereotyping' as you earlier posited but rather depends on the overarching nature of a particular group -- be that the SS, the SA, the SD, or in this case the japanese army.




Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 4:34:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

Aside from one's personal view on the matter, the point is that yes, collective guilt does exist and members have been held accountable due to it regardless of personal actions.


Well, yes and no. Like I said earlier, Nuremberg is the one exception to the rule, a rule that has been at the very heart of morality and jurisprudence in the western civilization since pretty much the dawn of time.

And no, today the verdict of Nuremberg has lost all legal relevance, no one could be tried and convicted in a court of law today on the sole basis of SS membership, some form of individual culpability must exist aswell.

quote:


The point here is that collective guilt does not necessarily depend upon 'racist stereotyping' as you earlier posited but rather depends on the overarching nature of a particular group -- be that the SS, the SA, the SD, or in this case the japanese army.


I am well aware that collective guilt need not be dependent on racist stereotyping. However, in doggies case it is based on that, and that is what we were discussing.



Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 4:56:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
Well, yes and no. Like I said earlier, Nuremberg is the one exception to the rule, a rule that has been at the very heart of morality and jurisprudence in the western civilization since pretty much the dawn of time.


It's actually not the exception to the rule as one can see collective guilt being applied in lawsuits all the time (at least here in the US). When a particular employee engages in illegal behavior, the company can often be held responsible in addition to the individual.

quote:


And no, today the verdict of Nuremberg has lost all legal relevance, no one could be tried and convicted in a court of law today on the sole basis of SS membership, some form of individual culpability must exist aswell.


Even today SS membership denies one from receiving military benefits, no? This is predicated upon the collective guilt of being in the SS in the first place.

quote:


I am well aware that collective guilt need not be dependent on racist stereotyping. However, in doggies case it is based on that, and that is what we were discussing.


I see nothing in doggie's post that denotes it was based upon racist stereotyping.

His first post:

"Yep, the poor Japanese were such swell guys

Too bad any movie that portrayed them as they really were would be worse than the most graphic slasher film imaginable."

He then provides a link to some despicable actions. What he does is apply the same collective guilt notion to the japanese army that is applied to the SS, SA, and so on. You'll find some people also think that all members of the SS were barbarians, but such a judgement isn't based upon race, but rather upon the actions of the organization as a whole.

Thus doggie's assertion isn't based upon race but rather upon the actions of this organization. You may not like the concept of collective guilt, but it has precedent in law.



martxyz -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 5:44:32 PM)

I think the situation regarding "Corporate Responsibilty" is a little different from that regarding "collective guilt". I am no lawyer, but there is the other thorny issue of where responsibility lies for any one particular atrocity. That is to say, at which point in the chain of command. I would use the example of the My Lai massacre as an example, for no political reason, but because I was of an age and location such that it impinged on my memory, and also the recent death of that amazing american soldier Hugh Thompson, who, along with his gunship crew, faced down the over-ranking perpetrators, and effectively stopped the massacre. The story touched me, all over again, when I heard of his death. It seems to me, that in a case like that, a lot of people managed to escape responsibility, including Lt. Calley, who though found guilty (and was arguably the fall guy, as well as being guilty) was released after only a few years house arrest. Hugh and his team (one died in combat shortly after the events), were awfully  pilloried by the establsihment, until the US got over the wounds of it's Vietnam experience, and he, and his crew, were then given the honour he desreved. The Soldier's medal, I believe.

I lived in Australia, as a teenager during these events, and that is the only reason they are so strong in my mind. The massacre was so terribly tragic, but the legal procedure that followed, and the way the Hugh Thompson's crew were treated, create a picture which is confusinfg almost beyond comprehension. It makes discussions about collective and individual guilt somehow, for me, just seem too simplistic, even if they are, as I suspect, also extremely important to discuss.

I know that may not be of much relevance, but I have to sing Hugh Thompson's praises somewhere and this time and place seems as good as any.







Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 6:20:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mart

I think the situation regarding "Corporate Responsibilty" is a little different from that regarding "collective guilt".


The idea is that the 'corporate responsibility' that you allude to has to do with a collective (the corporate organization) is responsible for the actions of it's individual parts. It's not different than the organization of the SS being held responsible for the actions of it's members (as well as it's policies).


quote:

It makes discussions about collective and individual guilt somehow, for me, just seem too simplistic, even if they are, as I suspect, also extremely important to discuss.


Can we agree that some things really are simplistic?






Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:06:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
It's actually not the exception to the rule as one can see collective guilt being applied in lawsuits all the time (at least here in the US). When a particular employee engages in illegal behavior, the company can often be held responsible in addition to the individual.


Not really, what you are talking about here is something completely different, a company becoming liable because of the actions of an employee. For your analogy to work, every single person working for the company would become personally liable if one employee did something wrong. That is clearly not how it works.


quote:

Even today SS membership denies one from receiving military benefits, no? This is predicated upon the collective guilt of being in the SS in the first place.

What is your source for the claim that no Waffen SS soldier is recieving military benefits today?

quote:


I see nothing in doggie's post that denotes it was based upon racist stereotyping.


Whatever. If you fail to see the racist stereotyping in a post where someone says that all Japanese were murderous savages...who also smelled bad, then Im afraid I cant help you.



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:10:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
The idea is that the 'corporate responsibility' that you allude to has to do with a collective (the corporate organization) is responsible for the actions of it's individual parts. It's not different than the organization of the SS being held responsible for the actions of it's members (as well as it's policies).


You really need to drop this line of reasoning because you are barking up the wrong tree. Corporate liability when an employer does something bad is based on the notion that the employer is a representative of the company, and therefore his actions can cause the company to become liable for something. Here, the company becomes liable because the employee was acting on their behalf. Now, since the company is a separate legal entity, and since the employee is doing something as a representative of the company, the company can become liable.

Collective guilt would require the employee doing something so every single employee became liable. And...as you might suspect...that doesnt happen. Why, I hear you ask? Because there is no such thing as collective guilt in our legal or moral tradition here in the western civilization.



mdiehl -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:19:17 PM)

quote:

I see nothing in doggie's post that denotes it was based upon racist stereotyping.


Agreed. Doggie's observation that no film made in the west or in Japan would dare to portray the Japanese military hierarchy (and its effects down to individual soldiers, a large proportion of them) as exhibiting the degree of sadistic brutality that they actually embraced is also correct.

And, yeah, Sweden (and also Croatia, Serbia, Netherlands, Poland, Vichy France, Finland, Slovakia, UK, &c) also had concentration camps specifically for the interment of civilians (not just airmen or prisoners of war) of the "wrong" ethnic, religious, or national group.

But there are some important differences. The only nations to operate Concentration Camps with the specific intent to murder internees were Vichy France, Italy, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovakia, Japan (in particular in occupied Burma and the Phillippines), and Nazi puppet-states. Lumping the US Japanese-American interment camps into the same category with the Nazi, Vichy and Japanese operated ones is sophomoric and uninformative.



robpost3 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:26:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
Collective guilt would require the employee doing something so every single employee became liable. And...as you might suspect...that doesnt happen. Why, I hear you ask? Because there is no such thing as collective guilt in our legal or moral tradition here in the western civilization.


If you do not exclude religion from moral tradition, then is not the Catholic religon (as well as some other religons) based on collective guilt...you are asked quite plainly "when your last confession was", and the whole premise of confession is that no one person is perfect or immune to some level of sin. We (Catholics) all collectively as a whole are to "ask for forgivness" at the end of days.
Also as you stated vis the Nuremberg Principles precedence is almost established as collective guilt for prosecution.
Being a laymen further study seems to conclude the Command Responsibility also favors a judgement of guilt shared.
I am curious as to your "personal" view: Do you beliveve that guilt can be shared collectively?



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:40:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: robpost3
Also as you stated vis the Nuremberg Principles precedence is almost established as collective guilt for prosecution.
Being a laymen further study seems to conclude the Command Responsibility also favors a judgement of guilt shared.


No, what Nuremberg tells us is two things
1) It is possible to punish a person even if he is following the law of his own nation, and would be punished by his own nation if he didnt, and
2) That "I was only following orders" is not a valid line of defence in warcrime-trials.

A prosecutor still must show how the defendant has committed a warcrime, i e guilt is tried on the individual level.

quote:


I am curious as to your "personal" view: Do you beliveve that guilt can be shared collectively?


Can you give some sort of example on what you have in mind here?



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:42:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

And, yeah, Sweden (and also Croatia, Serbia, Netherlands, Poland, Vichy France, Finland, Slovakia, UK, &c) also had concentration camps specifically for the interment of civilians (not just airmen or prisoners of war) of the "wrong" ethnic, religious, or national group.


Nope, I cant vouch for the others, but Sweden did not have camps (concentration or otherwise) for the internment of swedish citizens. Whoever told you that was wrong.



Hortlund -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:45:06 PM)

Here mdiehl. Racist remarks bolded.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie

They were stinking savages, and that's why Dutch, Australians, British, and American soldiers seldom took prisoners, and allied airmen happily strafed the miserable bastards in their lifeboats after sinking their ships. And they had every bit of it coming to them.






robpost3 -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:54:45 PM)

Can you give some sort of example on what you have in mind here?

yes,
technically I understand the complexity of assiging guilt as group in a legal procedding, but personally I see it all time in society...
as in superficial situations for ex: many people feel guilty about thier weight or lifestyle due to advertiser imposed suggestions of what the ideal person should look like.
Or sitting down to Thanksgiving dinner and pausing to reflect on the have nots and being thankful for what you have is a form shared guilt also.
There are many levels in which guilt is shared as well as assigned on collective levels.
So personally I believe guilt can be shared as a group but is it healthy or purposfull.
Yet if we passed on guilt collectively would histories atrocities repeat themselves?
Like so many lessons learned by negative stimuli, may be in some cases it is necessary.





Reiryc -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:55:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
Not really, what you are talking about here is something completely different, a company becoming liable because of the actions of an employee. For your analogy to work, every single person working for the company would become personally liable if one employee did something wrong. That is clearly not how it works.


I disagree.

Every single member of the SS was not personally held liable for the actions of the whole. Instead, they suffered through the loss of benefits. Similarly when a company that offers profit sharing as a company benefit for working there has to either lower it's quarterly/yearly payout or eliminate it altogether due to being held liable for the actions of an employee, then the corporation is being collectively held responsible.

quote:


What is your source for the claim that no Waffen SS soldier is recieving military benefits today?


Well you've changed what I wrote, which seems convenient, but let's assume for a moment this was unintentional. Let's just deal with the specifics of your question and look to this source as one:

"Controversy raged during the 1950s and 1960s as Waffen-SS veteran groups fought high-profile legal battles in the newly founded West Germany to overturn the Nuremberg ruling, and win pension rights for their members. The judgement of Nuremberg could not be overturned, but in the ensuing refighting of history, many of the former enemies of the Waffen-SS appeared to question the old black-and-white assessment of Hitler's élite troops."

http://www.germanwarmachine.com/waffenss/introduction.htm

quote:


Whatever. If you fail to see the racist stereotyping in a post where someone says that all Japanese were murderous savages...who also smelled bad, then Im afraid I cant help you.


Agreed, you can't help. If someone said the same things about members of the SS, there would be no claims to racism. Mention it about a group consisting of non-europeans and suddenly it's racism. [8|]


quote:


You really need to drop this line of reasoning because you are barking up the wrong tree. Corporate liability when an employer does something bad is based on the notion that the employer is a representative of the company, and therefore his actions can cause the company to become liable for something. Here, the company becomes liable because the employee was acting on their behalf. Now, since the company is a separate legal entity, and since the employee is doing something as a representative of the company, the company can become liable.


Sounds like some of the reasoning used for the collective guilt of the SS, SA, and other groups.

quote:

Collective guilt would require the employee doing something so every single employee became liable. And...as you might suspect...that doesnt happen. Why, I hear you ask? Because there is no such thing as collective guilt in our legal or moral tradition here in the western civilization.


Since when is christianity not a part of the moral tradition in western civilization and with it the moral argument of original sin and the 'sins of the father being put on the children'?



mdiehl -> RE: Letters from Iwo Jima (11/23/2007 7:58:10 PM)

http://www.immi.se/intercultural/nr12/meyer.htm

quote:

A German refugee who stayed in Norway in the 1930s, fled to Sweden when Norway was occupied in 1940. He was arrested in Sweden and the encounter with the police there differed a lot from what he was used to from the Norwegian police. "What I supposed was meant to be a routine series of questions and answers, ended with my being arrested. My declarations did not seem to satisfy the officers. The examination was repeated during the following days. (...) The cell was so clean, it shined. It literally smelled as if it had been sterilized."

Perhaps this jail cell was an extreme example. Still, in a wider sense, it does reflect the experiences of the German refugees in Sweden, who felt unwelcome and abandoned to the whims and dictates of arbitrary bureaucratic rule. The encounters they had with the Swedish bureaucratic apparatus led to very disempowering experiences. "Swedish was the name I gave to all of the bureaucratic experiences I had in the following years" was the concluding remark from one German refugee who now lived in Denmark. He told a story about his experiences of being arrested and being placed in a Swedish internment camp where it was forbidden to write. All of the German refugees complained about the rule forbidding them to write. The Swedish authorities running the camp finally hit upon a solution. "Some wise men in the Department of Social Affairs had, in an extraordinarily bureaucratic manner, managed to prepare a form letter to be signed by individuals who were interned in the camp. (...) I am, at present, a refugee in Sweden. I am fine. If you want to write to me, send your letters to the Department of Social Affairs, Stockholm."


Arrested and interned in Sweden in a camp full of German refugees who fled the Nazis only to be arrested in Sweden simply for being German.

Sweden also operated "concentration camps" for "Communists and other troublemakers" (Storsien).

Of course, as with Western Allied (including American) interment camps, these Swedish ones were not an element in a programmatic effort at extirpating ethnic or religious minorities. To reiterate, the comparison of western (and others') internment camps with Nazi, Nazi-allied, Vicy, or Japanese concentration camps is an absurd comparison.






Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.171875