OTH - now you know we rarely agree - but I will say this - your dead on when you say that modern "infotainment" about history tends to deal with the "shinier" parts of war (as if there really was such a thing).

It concentrates on the victories, on the demonization of the foe (whether the foe at the time, or a politicaly expedient current one) as well as glosses over the horror and true cost of a real war.

Now part of that is because there is no entertainment value in being brutally honest and depicting war in its totality. The other part of that is the current climate of "political correctness" which states that the deaths of civilians or other non-combatants (like WW2 merchant crews who, while not military, were crucial to the war prosecution on both sides), is an evil under all circumstances. While this is a noble position to take, the reality is that you cannot fight a true war and do so in a politically correct manner. Skybird states as much above, and in that he is right. The prosecution of war done correctly does not and cannot be "moderated", due to the capability of a non-symmetrical force to blend into the civilian population.

If your not fighting to win, you will lose.

However, and this is the biggest problem, its important to remember that it is not the military that STARTS wars - it is POLITICIANS. Unfortunately, Pindar was correct when he stated that "War is sweet to those who have no experience of it."

The Dresden bombing was the central theme to the Kurt Vonnegut novel Slaughterhouse Five and the 1972 movie of the same name.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaught...ive_%28film%29

I was wondering if anyone was going to pick up on that. I've never seen the movie, it's pretty rare to get and it's pretty much never shown on tv over here. I tried to read the book and Vonnegut's style of putting all kinds of 'humour' etc. never really appealed to me. I was kind of hoping for a more matter of fact -type approach but, oh well.

"History is written by the victors." :yep:

The movie flopped, probably because it followed the same meandering approach Kurt Vonnegut did in the novel. I do remember one scene were Billy Pilgrim is convalescing in hospital and an arrogant patient in the bed next to him is boasting about writing a book about Dresden to downplay the "cry-babies" who claimed it as some sort of war-crime. This convinces Pilgrim to write about his actual experiences of having survived the tragedy. I also recall the scene where his war-time buddy is dragged off and shot as a looter for picking up an intact porcelain statue while helping clear the debris after the raid.

Of course, then there were the weird scenes on another planet. :doh:

Vonnegut is hard to follow even for native English language speakers.

Firstly:

good for Dresden - standing up for themselves like that

Secondly:

Bad for Dresden - stifling free speech

Personally, i think that as long as violence is not involved... "White supremacist satanic abortion doctors with ties to al quida in favor of Black Power" should have the right to form a march if they want to.

but maybe im just weird

Yes, I remember trying to read some other works by Vonnegutt and being similarly, well not dissappointed but kind of irritated. And I don't mean that I would prefer a "Sgt. Rock" - type approach to war literature, on the contrary. I've enjoyed reading very ponderous and meandering works that were about all kinds of subjects and not just about war.

I guess what I would like to read from Vonnegutt would be an autobiography that would focus on his time in the WW 2.

But anyway, I guess I have to concede that Slaughterhouse 5 book & film is infact a western work on the Dresden bombings although IMO not fully satisfactory and not really a "Saving Private Ryan" - type block buster.

I believe it was a tea pot (without a cozy as Balz was still wearing it at the time) and yes it was a bit difficult to read for us in the 12th grade.:doh:
Interesting book nonetheless.

@Golden Rivet

Free speech ends for me when it is abusing the death of at least 25.000 people to support a criminal regime that caused havoc all over Europe. Besides a lot of the Nazis (just like the counter demonstrators from the black block) were only there to "see action". There have been plenty of fights between the police and them outside of Dresden.
Would you allow Al Quaida to demonstrate in New York in the name of free speech?

Could it be done without the incitement of violence?

just as i said with the neo-nazis... * IF *it could be done without violence i say... "Why not?"

i dont agree with either message, but i agree with their rights.

what happens 20 years from now when it becomes illegal for Christians to gather publicly for fear it might incite violence?

food for thought.

I will (and have) fought for the right of anyone to speak peaceably their views - even the idiotic ones. That is what free speech is.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. - Voltaire

They wanted to promote a regime that doesn't grant free speech. So in a way they got what they wanted, didn't they?;)

I believe you refer to the event listed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Front

It was about 15 miles from where I was living in Vallejo, CA at the time. I went to the counterdemonstration and here were some of my memories.

1. Hanging out with the Jewish Vietnam Vets.

2.The property the Aryan Woodstock was held on was abut 3 miles up Hwy 12 from the freeway on the road to Napa so people had to walk up the whole way. It was cold, damp and gray and the agricultural fields were all muddy. There was a police cordon of Solano and Napa County Sherrif's Deputies, California Highway Patrol, Cordelia, Vallejo and Napa Police officers along the entire route to the property.

3. There were two counterdemonstration contigents who came by bus caravan from San Francisco and Berkeley. Many locals came too including WW2 vets.

4.Most of the organized groups were various communist front groups including the John Brown Anti-Klan Committee who organized the counter demonstration. Even I had no idea there were so many DIFFERENT Communist Parties.

5. The SF group, the first to arrive about 3,000 strong, does their obligatory agiy-prop and Kabuki rushing of the barricades while a few skinheads watched from the top of the hill doing the Sieg Heil salute.

6. After they finish, they march down Hwy 12 to the parking lot just as another 3,000 from the Berkeley contingent come marching up. So who gets caught between 6-8,000 angry leftists?

7. Two Dumb-Ass Klansmen from Modesto in full white robes, including a Modesto Klan chapter patch, who didn't get the report of the entrance being closed. As they come around the turn and get spotted simultaneously by both mobs, two roars go up from the respective crowds as they swarm towards the hapless racists gathering muddy dirt clods as the rain of mud gets launched towards them. They immediately run directly towards,

8. The only BLACK Cop on the route, a Highway Patrolman who's linked arms with his fellow officers to keep the idiot crackers outside the police line. He waited until the crowd got within about 50 feet of the hapless racists and their white robes were turned a muddy brown, both inside and out, before finally relenting and letting them through to safety. So they had to go home to Modesto and admit that it was a Black Man who saved them from certain lynching. It was on the local news channels at the time.

So that was my experience.