the one thing that angers me the most about that day is the lack of longterm understanding on side of the Japanese . they lost the war on day one. The event itself - militarily it has my admiration. I never bought any pathos or understood why the slaughtering and mass killing of war is more civilized if there is papers traded before. If it comes to death, these things do loose all importance. In war I would not hesiate to shoot my enemy in the back when he sleeps and lies on his belly - no method is more safe. Everthing else is just empty words to me. If someone don't like it - he better don't go to war.

"If you made the decision to draw your sword, make drawing and hitting your opponent one and the same action." (my old teacher. He was a master with the sword.) It saved me three times so far.

I also don't see much difference between the Japanese action back then, and contemporary politics today. It's always about hiding your strike.

I genarally agree with that sentiment but the point was that we weren't at war.

Although they weren't attacking japan, but everytime i watch Saving Private Ryan, i never get sick of it. The scene where they're landing on the beach is exciting and an eye opener. Guys drowning cos of there heavy gear, getting mowed down, on fire, blown to bits, and still they manage to keep there cool and push forward. I know its only a movie but its probably the closest thing a director could ever get to the real thing. And it convinced me! I still watch that movie and Enemy at the Gates all the time.

But they were, for sure.

But you, yourself, has just made an extremely short-sighted statement! Just don't get angry with yourself. :rotfl: :arrgh!:

You believe Japan lost the war? The Emperor lost his absolute powers, facism was burried and Japan became the second economy in the world, how can this be a loss? If Japan never attacked maybe today it would be a feudal xintoist monarchy, stuck back in time like some regions in the interior of China, or Tibet. The military war may have been lost, but the national war, the political war, was definitely won, even if not a victory over any other country, but a victory against Japan itself.

Now if you look at Russia, the Soviet Union "won" the war, but what can Russia say they've gained from the WW2 victory? They were saved from extermination? Were they? Or did their own kind continued to exterminate themselves? Can Poland cheer the Russian victory?

Military victory or defeat means nothing but a waste of life and material, what looks like a defeat can be a victory and a false victory can be in fact a defeat.

Because there was a time when men went to war for hobby, or because they didn't really spoke each other's language to try to understand their differences and similarities, and if you're going to war, why not make it less of a hell? Why ban explosive bullets then? Why ban gas bombs? Why sign the geneva convention? Why should we avoid to target the civilian population if WW2 proved it was so effective? In the least it is POLITE to give a declaration of war, we are all humans, not slaughtering mass killing machines of doom.

In peace the safest method is not to go to war at all, but your method is good if you want to exterminate the enemy, but how about getting prisioners? Wouldn't you rather capture one or two to trade for one of your own? Who would you consider your enemy? The enemy soldier? What makes the guy dressed in a different uniform your enemy? If you come to a war where you have to shoot your enemy in his back and kill him when he sleeps and lies on his belly your only enemy is yourself, for allowing this situation to happen, where you are already defeated by having to shoot your enemy in the back.

Better than paper-less slaughtering mass killing conflicts isn't it? :-j

It was a day of infamy but also a day that the sleeping giant America awoke.

It would have been nice to have a modern day Pearl Harbour film that did justice to those from that time. Ben Alfeck and co :down:

I talk about war. And you answer with a digression on the worthiness of a policy of politeness. :doh:
Queer reply of yours. You also mix up different time scales. We think in completely different categories.

If we were in a duel, I already would have decided your defeat, and while you would still discuss the conditions for the duel to take place, I already would have cut you into two pieces with my first strike - that is my policy, you see.

Your polite words from the beginning already would have been forgotten before your funeral begins. War is no heroic adventure movie with noble heroes and educated gentleman. It's not Clark Gable versus Errol Flynn. It's biting dogs, nothing else.

I wasn't using that phrase with Yamamoto in mind. I was simply inferring that the United States underwent a massive transformation economically as a result of entering and ultimately being victorious in WWII in which it came out as a superpower with an economy that was booming unlike say Great Britian.

On that sidenote you mentioned however I would also agree that it is just a myth regarding the alleged comments attributed to Admiral Yamamoto.

Bad analogy, and what you're describing is not a duel but cold blooded murder. Besides, conditions for dues are always arranged beforehand by "Seconds".

Tora! Tora! Tora! still rules, plus real planes were used. :up:

Hairsplitting. Dead is dead. Life is written by the living. The question if killing in war is murder or not has been discussed since aeons. Victors say No, victims say Yes.

One of my favourite poems:



Der Samurai

Was zum Überfluß Worte machen,
was soll das?
Es steht die Sache
auf diesem Schwerte,
auf dieser Klinge allein.

Yosano Hiroshi Tekkan

Of course, us bystanders would have cried "Foul!" and cut you down at once.

I get his plow horse!
:arrgh!:

All major battle tragedies are marred by incomptence and general stupidity on the side of the slaughtered. Pearl Harbor is no exception. Well, perhaps an exception in that most mistakes are not so numerous in a single incident, nor no do they cause such a deathtoll by the decision of several overly confident and arrogant individuals, that believe so blindly in their country that they think themselves invincible.

It's a standard "Pride Cometh Before A Fall" scenario. It's definately an interesting case study for how-to-be-caught-with-your-pants-down.

Granted, it was a underhanded manuever, but I will not comprehend how the generals and admirals shouldn't have expected something like that. Oh, well. The US got their revenge with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

No offense anyone. Just my viewpoint. :)

I wrote this poem on the 49th anniverary of Dec. 7th. I post it here for your comments.

Mushotoku
By
Richard Scott


The essence of One Cut, We climbed Mt. Niitaka,

That bright December morning on the East Wind Rain.

Crying, “Asia for Asians!�, we stooped out of the sky over the harbor of pearls,

Like cherry blossom petals on the Kamikaze,

To slay the sleeping giant, honor our Emperor and our ancestors.

We ran wild over the Pacific for a year,

But we had only awakened the giant,

Filling him with a terrible resolve.

Our Chiburi, blood falling like rain,

Was scattered across the jungles and atolls of the Pacific,

Leaving a trail for him to follow,

Back to the home islands.

We honored our Emperor and our ancestors,

But the giant brought with him the Whirlwind,

That burned shadows into the walls of Hiroshima and Nagasaki,

And changed the Divine Showa into a human being.


Mushotoku
By
Richard Scott
Copyright © 1990
all rights reserved

Good job on the poem. :)

Death and Hell do follow the Red War Horsemen closely.

Skybird,
From your comments I'd take you as someone who would shoot prisoners
out of hand as part of war and not think twice about it. This is a new side you have coming out. Interesting.

Germans never learn it seems. Poland all over again.

3rd line. I believe the word you meant is "swooped". "Stooped" is a form of squatting.

Guys,
what I mean and what it comes down to is simply this: if someone want to wage war, he better do it full-heartly, without restriction. Else you get a thing getting stuck like Vietnam, or the Balkans, or now Iraq. Obscure assumptions about "warrior's honour" and "dignity" only lead a partisan opponent hindering a regular army to win a war - and that way winning the war for himself. I understand the rites and rituals of the military as an attempt only to enable then single man to deal with the prospect of his own death or the fact that others had been brought to death by his very own hands. It is understandable that death and dying needs such an ritualized approach, else the unthinkable cannot be dealt with by one's own mind. Death (one's own or the death of the other) must be rationalized, else you cannot bear it. This is the reason why an opponent without fear of his own death often is such a fearsome enemy, like the old Samurai, or ruthless, like many religiously motivated insurgents in Iraq.

Concerning the one-on-one duel: I only refer to that scene in the wonderful Western movie "Open Range" by Kevin Kostner, when the shooting begins and Costner says he will deal with the enemy gunslinger. "Are you that famous sniper they knew over there?" (Proud:) "Yes!" "And have you shoot this and that fella over there?" "Oho, yes, I have!" Bang! and right between the eyes. That guy had too much pride. (No word by word excerpt, but you get the idea)

another story from my set of tales, about legendary sword fighter Musashi. It's not important if it is true or not. He was guest at the castle of a feudal lord and they started to argue and finally raised in anger and said they want to have a duel the next morning. "Okay", said the lord of the place, "at the shore of the lake outside my castle, tomorrow
morning!" and Musashi left. Next morning the lord called his knights and servants and everyone was dressed according to the rites for duels, and there was a fabulous procession of officials with flags and drums, and it was a wonderful scene, the lord dressed in finest silk and golden armour, and they went to the lake. Musashi was not there. They waited. No Musashi. One hour, two hours, the lord became increasingle angry again, and started to loose patience. No Musashi. Then, after miday, the lord cooking silent and with a red face, a point on the lake, that grew bigger and bigger - a boat, Musashi in it. The lord eased his servants again to swallow their anger nevertheless and behave properly. The boat reached the sand, Musashi jumped out with a warcry, cut the man into two pieces with a single strike, jumps back into the boat and was up anbd away before anyone could react.

That's how it is done. Do it, or don't, that simple, there is no trying. If that is not for your taste, don't call for a duel too easily then.

That we first sent bombers, then nurses to treat the ones that we have bombed just illustrates the perversion that war is - always. In WWI, 90% of the casualties were soldiers, onlöy 10% civilians. Since the 70s, this ratio reads different: 10% of the casualties are soldiers/figthers nowadays, 90% of them are civilians.

You are assuming right, you would not like the way I would wage war, if I were in the position and would be willing to wage war. I do not like it myself. that'S why I am so extremely hesitent to support decisions for wars for foul reasons.

"War don't ennoble men. It turns 'em into dogs. Poisons the soul." (A Thin Red Line)

I believe in all what I said here. Because it has saved my life at least two times, maybe more.