Thus closes another thread that went south. Thead to reopen when the heat is turned down some!

Thead now open for business. Keep the heat down. Nice discussion and does not need to be stoked.

Biggles thought it wrong to shoot pilots whilst in a parachute. But does that mean you can't shoot paratroopers?

When it comes to shooting survivors, who can say what was right.

One persons hero is anothers villain. One persons patriot is anothers terrorist. One thing for certain though, anyone who kills civillains is a murderer. (Collateral damage not included as harsh as it is.) A soldier, sailor or airmen/person (PC) knows that what they do may lead them to their deaths. The ultimate sacrifice.

Before anyone throws out something like this as something new by any stretch of the imagination, please read deeply the inhumanity suffered during WW2. Not much morality then.

//http://chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-04/27/content_861767.htm

Here is just one tidbit of information concerning morality issue. I do not see where it has been thrown out. It existed then as it does now. What, do you believe these women were in servitude for a few guys? Try a platoon. Hollywood and reality are two very different things.

Very true. More often than not, most invisioned the enemy that got away as the one to kill another day. One has to remember, whatever happened that day, Mush Morton had a deep seated vengence and large toy to vent that vengence. At sea, you are pretty much on your own to do as you wish. IMHO, I believe Morton thought he was doing the right thing, taking out enemy troops that if left adrift could possibly be picked up and fighting again. In the heighted state of excitment and adrenelin flowing, Morton saw troops that need not be in the war anymore. At least, this is how I perceive that particular piece of the patrol.

Evening all. Thought I'd throw my opinion in this debate. I served in the U.S. Navy for 10 years, and although I did not live in the WWII era I have many family members who did. Two were killed in Pearl Harbor, three on Iwo Jima and 1 in Normandy. That being said, I still get unnerved when I watch film footage from December 7th, 1941, the Islands campaigns and the European Theater. Although I served during the cold war with the U.S.S.R. I can't begin to imagine the horrors the men and women that served in the Allied forces endured from the crushing blows delivered from the Axis military.

I guess my input to this subject regarding the shooting of parachutes or floating survivers is this. Unless we, as the Subsim community were there, actually living the experience, then we can't understand the hostility, anger, probably hatred and distrust the Allies had for the enemy. Add to that the combat environment, it would seem that the every day plan-ole-plan-ole that we enjoy would be lost. So, before we, as the community judge any other on morality or "right or wrong" we should take that into account a bit I would think.

As far as shooting survivers in the game, I have visions of Saving Private Ryan in my head in regards to the German released, only to kill again another day. Just MHO

Well said Navigator. That sums it up clearly and in my opinion is case closed. :know:

For the PTO it also needs to be put in cultural context.

The japanese did not sign the GC. They did not believe in the GC. Dying was preferable to surrender. No quarter was asked by the Japanese. Little was given.

For the multiculturalists: we respected their culture, and fought them the way they fought, and wished to be fought.

I apologise for not making myself clearer.

I was referring specifically to the business of fighting in the theater of operations. It was total war of course, and a brutal and nasty business of death and killing. Yes, I also had plenty of family members who fought, died, or were murdered in the two world wars. Family members fought and died on both sides in the first world war as half my grandparents were German Jews who fled to Britain in the 1930s.

It is without question that the right side won, and that what the Nazis in particular were doing behind the frontline was the nearest thing to pure evil that the modern world has seen.

What I am arguing is that we did not win the second world war by playing nice, and to pretend that it was cricket, or baseball, by other means is disingenuous. We won by being able to throw more lead and explosives at the enemy while fielding more aircraft, men, ships and tanks than they did. Which is exactly what they were trying to do to us. The net result was lots of dead people, broken and bereaved families and devastated societies.

The theaters were characterised with different cultural norms, if you will, with regard to prisoners. The Western European theatre between Germany and the US and Great Britain was characterised with a certain respect for each other, and POW's were treated well and were able to go home afterwards.The Russians and Germans were more ruthless to each other (but not as ruthless as the russians were to their own POWs) and the Japanese and Americans were more ruthless to each other.

My guess is that this was due to senses of cultural similiarity and otherness, as well as Japanese norms.

But I will repeat that the US conduct after the war was something profoundly great. If only the axis powers could have believed how they'd be treated, they would maybe have surrendered years earlier. Who knows? It was probably beyond their imagination.

Exactly my sentiments in my last post. Young guys who felt they were done wrong (Pearl Harbor) and were correct. Guys who lied about age to get in and serve. Young guys who like you and me got a pellet gun as kid and shot anything in the woods that moved. After the action, heighten senses, almost a out of body experience. Similar to the study of police high speed chases and the policemans reaction after the suspect is caught. There is more than just a moral thought behind it, it is a psycological issue as well. If you read up on Morton and those that served with him (O'Kane, Paige), both stated Morton had a deep seated vengence.

As stated by Navigator, very like the German released only to kill a soldier later as shown in Saving Private Ryan. Probably much the same thought processes Morton was thinking at the time. It was war fellas, it is either him or me.

One of the most important things that I learned in my college history class on day 1 was to not impose modern day standards of morality on events that happened in the past. Those events were a product of the culture, the people, the events, the overall zeitgeist. There are those that try and connect events of 60-odd years ago and today, and in doing so ignore all of the changes and cultural shifts that have occurred since then, and that's wrong.

Yes, one must disconnect themselves and be a spectator looking in at all the different factors concerning time/place/circumstances. Objective observer as it were. Comparing the then and now is not the best route to take when dissecting certain events in history. It needs to be taken at face value for the time it occurred.

I guess if any comfort is to be had it's the difference between what we fought for and...what they fought for!

Survivors
 

Do like Mush Morton did, Shoot The Sunzab**ches!:arrgh!:

My Grandfather spoke of using AA guns to down paratroopers in Crete, but he never had a feeling of ill will to Germans, in fact, he said if surrender had ever been innevitable, he had no problem with German soldiers taking him captive.

On the other hand, he never spoke of engaging (and him and his comrades did often) Italians, but he said no one in his unit would ever allow themselves to be captured by them, as they couldnt be trusted, I also get the distinct feeling that the Italians may have recieved less than friendly treatment when captured by men from my grandfathers unit.

The point im trying to make here is, he didnt 'hate' any enemy he fought. He just hated them for how 'They' fought. And the way they were treated was more often than not, a reflection of their own behaviour.