Stereotypes (1 Viewer)

You do show up on all of them though whether relatively passive or, inputting???? I don't think these are controversial in the least. It becomes controversial as history is often seen in one sided terms.

Its also the case that it becomes heated when those who say well, its not one sided it has two sides to a story are then linked with somehow sympathising with the Axis sides.

If you look at it as good guys V bad guys then hearing about the official allowance of millions of german POW's to die or millions of women and children raped and murdered by the allies is going to dent that vision of the allies somehow being the supermen saving the world. Now, I am glad we won and hold dearly the principles that we fought for in WWII. However, there is no doubt that we undertook our fair share of atrocities, war crimes whatever one wishes to call them. Does that upset me? not anymore than what the germans and japanese did to our troops and civillians but, I accept that it happened.

That shows that at a base level, whatever uniform one is wearing, crappy things can be done and, that humans are relatively the same. some don't like that but, sadly it seems to be a truism

Its why the US tried to supress the russians power and input at Nuremburg due to the dispicable way they treat german civillians, things like the Katyn massacre which, was used in defence in the trials, as it was they who perpetrated the action against the poles. Its also sadly, why the trials have been tarred with the ''victors justice'' label because of issues mentioned.

Its why german admirals were not hanged for the actions of the U-Boat men and the orders about treatment of ship survivors as the allies did exactly the same during WWII.

Its not about changing someones mind or opinion as, others have tried to do in other threads about prices etc its nice to debate these things without ''your just not getting it'' or, no matter how many people tell you'' its showing that there are two sides to a conflict. There are good german and bad germans, good japs and bad japs and, there are good allies and bad allies.
Mitch


Yeah, that's true and since then I've decided it's not worth it. Since then I've not gotten involved in anything controversial. Finally learned my lesson. Nothing like a reformed person, e.g. smoker :smile2:

On any historical discussion that could be considered controversial, be it Vietnam, LAH or American Civil War, does what we say really change other's mind. Not in the least. So, why bother and get yourself worked up.

Lastly, why would you offend me ^&confuse I've never used the feature. I like to know what everyone says, even if I don't agree with them. Does the fact that we stick someone on the ignore list mean that the person goes away. No, they're still there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lastly, why would you offend me ^&confuse

Sorry, I was speaking more in generalities- not yourself per se. I am under no misguided dillusions I am on several ignore lists on this forum, probably making a lot of people's lives better. {sm4}
 
You do show up on all of them though whether relatively passive or, inputting????

Since the SA dustup, I would say more passive, although it's nice to know you're reading my comments carefully ^&grin

Yes, it's nice to debate but it seems that can't be done in a dispassionate style, unfortuanately.
 
Since the SA dustup, I would say more passive, although it's nice to know you're reading my comments carefully ^&grin

Yes, it's nice to debate but it seems that can't be done in a dispassionate style, unfortuanately.

You can debate, you can be passionate about it and still not be offensive. I do that for a living^&grin...

Paulo
 
Someone posted a quote in this Forum that went something like this, "When the world is wrong, right yourself". There's a lot of bad in the world, then we as individuals have to be better. Best thing I learned on this Forum.
 
All war is wrong. And all people (individually, as groups or whole nations) are capable of the most heinous acts including the act of indifference which allows evil to be done.

No one nationality has a gene that makes them commit odious or barbarous acts. Indiividuals are conditioned to do good and do evil.

I'm intrigued this thread largely focuses on stereotypes arsing from WWII. I suspect other eras would create some equally interesting debate on what is acceptable in war and how we might stereotype behaviours of some soldiers or nations that today we would consider the "good guys". From an Australian perspective there are dark moments.

I had family on both sides in WWII. My grandmother and mother were unfortunate to be in Dresden in February 1945 having escaped Breslau on one of the forced civilian treks to escape the oncomig Russians. I had great grandparents in Posen when the Russians arrived and they then went "missing". On the other side I had a great uncle with the Australian 8th Division who became a "guest of the Emperor" in Thailand following the fall of Singapore in February 1942. And many other examples. They and much of mankind all suffered terribly because of "stereotypes".

I suspect some of the debate on this thread in itself continues to stereotype people and nations.

Great sobering post. We all (starting with myself^&grin) should probably remember that there are people here who have personal links to this conflict. They know more about it from first hand experience than many of us. Respect is in order.

Paulo
 
Chris,

Regarding your comments to Jules :

"So help me out Jules? You mention the fact that My Lai wasn't the only ruthless killing of civilians in Nam? Feel free to elaborate (for the edification of the rest of the forum as I for one am slapping you on the ignore list). I happened to serve with several Nam vets and both my grandparents were Nam vets- one serving 6 tours- were they out killing innocent Vietnamese Children?? Don't bother answering as I couldn't care less what your answer is."

You seem to be taking this a bit too personally. Nobody has said anything about your family members. If you wish to think My Lai was the only example of killing civilians in Vietnam then that is your right. I am certainly no expert on Vietnam but last year I read a book called Tiger Force by Michael Sallah. It won the Pullitzer Prize ( it was originally a series of newspaper articles later put into book form). I would have thought the story of that unit has attracted quite a bit of press in the USA over the years. You might find it interesting as it goes into what happened in great depth and relates to a number of incidents over a period of time and the lack of leadership. Can't recall for sure but I may have seen a documentary or TV movie on it as well as the images of the story are fairly vivid in my mind.

I can understand your pride in your service and that of your family members but unfortunately not everybody lives up to the standards of behaviour expected.

Regards
Brett
 
The personal from which this thread is about were combatants in WWII I don't see where respect comes into it nobody has been disrespectful just commenting about the notion that whatever the uniform one wears they are capable and, have committed acts which, are deemed as war crimes etc when its the axis powers but, slightly washed over and accepted when its against those powers.

Breslau's family was part of the barbarity and cruelty of the russian army which, IMO was as cruel as anything the germans or japanese did. we are not talking a few people or a few hundered but, millions.

The sobering points for me, are not so much the posts on here but the written and proven history of what nations in war are capable of doing.
Mitch

Great sobering post. We all (starting with myself^&grin) should probably remember that there are people here who have personal links to this conflict. They know more about it from first hand experience than many of us. Respect is in order.

Paulo
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top