Interesting article and debate

[DavyJonesFootlocker]

Read here:

http://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/mostpop...ese_uboats.php

[sharkbit]

Is it any different than having a Luftwaffe fighter or bomber in a museum in England(or any other country for that matter)? They caused quite a bit of death and destruction as well.

I don't think a museum piece or display "glorifies" the Nazi regime. It is part of history and needs to be looked at as such.
I doubt the U-Boat display has any type of glorification type plaque to the heroism and memory U-Boat crews or Naziism. It is just an artifact that the curious can look at and see a weapon used in the past.

Now, I'm a 44 year old American with a love of history and the study of WWII, so Europeans may have a different take on this since the war was so much closer to home. I'd be interested in hearing other opinions on this.

I've always found it interesting how U-Boats have been so villified while the American submarine offensive against Japan can be glorified at times. America was trying to do the same thing as well and not all American and British submariners came out of the war smelling like roses. I guess a lot depends on if you're on the winning side or not.

Just my $.02.

[Raptor1]

I completely agree with sharkbit, the U-Boat war was no less destructive then the Pacific Submarine War, a preserved U-Boat doesn't glorify the Nazi regime in any way, it's just another piece of history that should be kept intact rather then destroyed, just as much as any Fleet Boat deserves to be preserved as a museum...

[M. Sarsfield]

Any time someone says you're glorifying this or that, just tell them that "It's History, Not Hate". This includes confederate and nazi flags. People that want to hate or glorify hate and abusive regimes don't need a museum or flag to rally around to do so. It's amazing that some people are pro freedom of speech as long as you agree with them. Rant over...

[AVGWarhawk]

To me it is not glorification to restore any machinery from WW2 or any other war for that matter. It is a rememberance that these things did occur and here is hard evidence. It is called history. It is a part of human history as ugly as it was, but here it is. Sounds like this gentleman is upset because he is paying a bit extra to restore the uboat. A lot of people pay extra for things they do not agree with. Check out your tax contributions and you decide.

[mookiemookie]

I agree with the sentiments here. History is history. And while the winners write it, it's important to remember that there was another side of history...a side full of human beings fighting for their ideals. Whether or not those ideals are noble and worthy can be judged separately from the evidence that this war was fought, which is precisely what this U-boat represents. I do see it as a tribute - not to the Kriegsmarine, but to history and the preservation of it so that future generations will have tangible reminders of what their forefathers experienced.

[ReallyDedPoet]

It is what it is, part of history. History is the good, bad and all points in between.


RDP

[tomoose]

....of changing Mr Clarke's letter just a wee bit (my changes in bold). I agree with everyone here that history is history, if we don't learn from it (in all it's forms), we are destined to repeat it.

I'm in a state of horror after reading your article on the Lancaster bomber (Work starts on bomber scheme', Globe, February 6).
At 82 years of age, I remember clearly the weekly reports on the amount of civilians killed in World War Two by bombers.
Many lives were lost and I suspect that a great many of the civilians who lost their lives were from insert city here - why should insertcityheretravel glorify bombers and at the same time spend a great deal of public money to create a tribute to the squadrons of the insert Air Force name here?
Is this why tunnel fees are to be increased?
Do people know that the bombers nearly brought this country to its knees?
This is crazy . . .

I didn't change the context of his letter just replaced certain words. A wee bit of a stretch I admit but I think it echoes your points above.

[Ducimus]

If something is being glorified or not, all depends on how its being presented and handled.

War trophy?
Mechanical Marvel?
Monument?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

If something is being glorified or not, all depends on how its being presented and handled.

War trophy?
Mechanical Marvel?
Monument?

Historical artifact as well.

[Ducimus]

I'd toss that in the "mechanical marvel" category. The things i listed, i was being very general.

As everyone proceedes to tear the author of the article up, who dare insinuates that folks are glorfiying uboats; keep in mind that for some people, WW2 isn't something they read about in history books, they lived through it.

Human nature really. If you live through the time period of WW2, your going to have your own opinions. You either saw it first hand, or read the news as it happend and maybe even saw the effects of it. Bodies of your countrymen washing up ashore along the eastern coast during operation drumbeat for example. That would make anyone angry. Meanwhile, we, who weren't even a glimmer in our daddies eyes yet (who might not have even been born yet himself), have the luxury of casting judgement over something we only read about, but have never seen, tasted, or experienced.

[sharkbit]

I agree with what Ducimus said about it being human nature. This old gentleman lived thru that time and we do not know what he saw. He may have seen friends and family killed, may have even served on a merchantman plowing thru the Atlantic at the height of the Battle of the Atlantic. We don't know. So in that way I can understand some of his feelings. To him, that U-Boat may rekindle some of those memories and feelings. I'm sure there was a certain level of hate that the British had towards the Germans,but I don't know if it was ever at the level that Americans had for the Japanese.

My wife's dad served in the US Navy during WWII. Nothing glamorous-a radioman on a net tender(Always found it funny that he couldn't swim either-but that's another story). He was in the invasion fleet at Iwo Jima and has some interesting stories about that.

Anyways, my wife was telling me that he hated the Japanese during the war, of course, and for a long time after the war. He would never buy a Japanese car and just about had kittens when my wife bought her first Japanese car when she was a lot younger.

It seems that he has since gotten over that hatred, but according to my wife, it was there and somewhat strong. I personnaly have not heard him say anything that would be deemed hateful to the Japanese however. Now at 83, it is hard to believe he could hate anyone. He is one of the nicest men you could meet and will talk to anybody about anything.

I've heard stories of other veterans hating their enemies for a long time, and sometimes taking that hate with them to the grave. It is hard for people that were born 20+ years after the war to truly understand that without having lived through it.

I always found it interesting how there was so much hatred for the Japanese in America during the war where there didn't seem to be the same level of hatred against the Germans. There seemed to be so much bigotry and lack of understanding of the Japanese, even before the war. the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor just intensified it a 1000 times over.
Part of the difference was probably the difference in Eastern culture and the Western culture that America and Germany was part of. We could understand the Germans as a people while there was such a lack of understanding of the Japanese culture and mindset at that time.

An excellent book that explains a lot of the history between Japan and America is James Bradley's "Flyboys". He goes back to when Captain Cook(forgive me if that is incorrect) makes contact with Japan in the 1800's to explain some of what led to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Very interesting.

[Doolittle81]

Originally Posted by sharkbit

....An excellent book that explains a lot of the history between Japan and America is James Bradley's "Flyboys". He goes back to when Captain Cook(forgive me if that is incorrect) makes contact with Japan in the 1800's to explain some of what led to the attack on Pearl Harbor. Very interesting.

It was Commodore Perry of the USN who 'opened' Japan in 1854, leading to the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate and the beginning of the Meiji Restoration with its remarkable modernization, industrialization, and finally militarization of Japan.

While Flyboys is an excellent book about the US Air War against Japan in WWII, or part of it I should say, it includes a mere 10-15 pages in the Intoductory chapter(s) discussing Japan-US history prior to WWII, essentially beginning with the contacts with Japan in the few years preceding Perry's arrival in 1853. While accurate, it is really no more than an extremely cursory overview. For anyone seriously interested in the subject, there are of course many better resources.

[sharkbit]

Originally Posted by Doolittle81

It was Commodore Perry of the USN who 'opened' Japan in 1854, leading to the end of the Tokugawa Shogunate and the beginning of the Meiji Restoration with its remarkable modernization, industrialization, and finally militarization of Japan.

While Flyboys is an excellent book about the US Air War against Japan in WWII, or part of it I should say, it includes a mere 10-15 pages in the Intoductory chapter(s) discussing Japan-US history prior to WWII, essentially beginning with the contacts with Japan in the few years preceding Perry's arrival in 1853. While accurate, it is really no more than an extremely cursory overview. For anyone seriously interested in the subject, there are of course many better resources.

Thank you for the correction. Cook just didn't sound right when I typed it and I was having a major brain lock on the right name.

You are right, Flyboys gave an extremely cursory overview on contact with the Japanese. It was an interesting introduction that I knew little about. I never meant to imply that Flyboys was the definitive work on US-Japanese relations prior to WWII.

[Raptor1]

I also agree with Ducimus, But I'm sure noone here intended disrespect for Mr. Clarke, just disagreement with his point...

BTW, If anyone wants to know more about the Opening of Japan by Commodore Perry in 1854, Here's the text of the so called "Treaty of Peace and Amity" that was practically forced on the Tokugawa Shogunate by Perry using Gunboat Diplomacy: http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/jobrien/reference/ob25.html

But I think this is completely irrelevant to this thread...