The next HBO/Spielberg/Hanks WW2 miniseries is a go...

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

All I want to do is fly in the military.

Now that I can relate to. I dreamed of being a fighter pilot, at least until I was ten and my eyes went wonky. Having the goverment pay for that expensive schooling is a good thing, and then if they do send you off to war at least you get to fly aeroplanes instead of being a grunt or a swab. That's a worthy goal.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

All I want to do is fly in the military.

And my goal was to serve in the U.S navy as a leg up in my future career in the maritime industry. I also wanted to do what i loved while serving my country. But they dont take people with asthma, no matter how mild and with few exceptions. (ive also heard something about peanut allergies being a 4F too but i dont know if thats true). But aside from my asthma i began to realize more and more of what that meant. Just because i wouldnt necessarily be the guy with his finger on the trigger, id be a part of it. In the military you dont have the luxury of deciding where you go, how long you go, and in the vast majority of cases, the weapons you fire and the people you kill. If you are given an order, by god you follow that order or they'll throw you in jail and not even hesitate. Killing another man doesn't become quite as difficult when it becomes a question of his life or yours. Kill or be killed.

Being in the military flying aircraft doesnt and shouldnt detach the reality that there is a very real possibility where you may be pitted against another man and be ordered to take his, and possibly many others, lives.

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

And again Skybird's penchant for heavy-handedness backfires. The rest was actually a very good post, and well worth reading.

I went back to read it because of this and just can't come to the same conclusion. My main point was that wars are difficult to sell to the public because of real people dying. He takes an example from the feudal era when such thing as public opinion didn't exist and says history proves otherwise. The rest didn't seemingly relate in any way to what I said.

I don't even disagree with most of what that rest was. I just can't see myself having a discussion with someone who addresses the quoted post briefly and then goes on to have a monologue. To paraphrase a little: I think history has proven well enough where it would have went from there on had I actually replied.

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

At least Adolf had manners back then

Thanks for the laugh

[joea]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

And again Skybird's penchant for heavy-handedness backfires. The rest was actually a very good post, and well worth reading.

Agreed, it reflects my thinking on war now.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

Your first priority is to win the war.

Strange, when I say that in such totality, I take flak.

Hartenstein had sunken an enemy vessel. Check.

Unaware of its loading: 300+ passengers, and over one thousand Axis prisoners.

Your second priority is your men's safety.

Strange, when i say that it is second priority only, I take flak.

Hartenstein radioed the Allies, informing them of the situation. Check.

He did. idiot. He seriously beliueved the enemy would cooperate and cease the war because Hartenstein did a radio transmission: "Don't shoot, I mean no harm, I will start to fire at your ships again not before I unloaded my passengers." He wanted to ease his conscience which probably was disturbed. Still, what he did was naive.

Your third priority is the safety of Civilians and captured enemy personnel. Hartenstein gave them food and water. Check.

No, along with the second priority it is the maintaining of your combat efficiency and the maximising of your available combat power in times of combat powers. Foreign civilians and prisoners shall not make you compromise your logistic situation and your tactical and strategic situation if you allow that, you would violate your priorities one and two. And that is what Hartenstein did.

Civilians and prisoners are a burden you only shall take into your fomrula when you have the luxury of being in oversupply of goods and items, and your military situation is such that you can afford that generosity. While civilians that do not participate in supporting the enemy for sure must not be seen as a military target and thus can be saved from being targetted, presence of civilians shall not stop you to fire at the enemy if he is there. While prisoners you took must not be targetted, this is onmly as lonmg as there is no risk that they become a threat to your own effort and forces and logistics - by overwhelming the guards and breaking out, forming suddenly a potent threat in your middle or your rear.

If the Allies had informed the Ascencion Island base that a U-boat was rescuing survivors, it would have all worked out.

That's what you want to believe. A German sub is a German sub. It kills ships, and this shipkiller's position now was known. So...

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

I'm going to say this good and clear. I do not admire the enemy. I do not see fame and glory in going to war. I highly respect those that do go to war. I have a good amount of family members in the military. I even have military family members in Germany. I respect those who defend my home. Let's face it. World Peace is impossible. War is inevitable. If you want to cut me down for wanting to defend my fellow citizens so that they can sleep safe and sound at night and see their kids off to school the next day, go ahead. If you want to shoot down my argument and tell me that I love war and I am wrong, go ahead.

I will not care. I will not be bothered by this. I want to protect freedom and what I believe is good. I want to give back to my country. I want to see to it that the Average Joe has the right to walk down the street without fear of being arrested/killed/deported/etc...


Try all you want, but I am me. You cannot change that.

Your desire to protect freedom and your country are okay. But I think you run a good risk of being send instead into a war in defence of corporate interests and profit digging. Iraq 2003 being the prime example.

My initial reply to you was about your display of showing a very romantic attitude towards duelling yourself with the enemy, and my point was that doing like this would turn you into a risk for your own comrades. Not only plans but also ideals are amongst the first victims of war, and once you are in the middle of it all that counts is not your ideals, but your efficiency in killing and destroying, or supporting others in becoming that, if you end up somewhere not in the fighting force but in the supply chain or desktop work.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

August quote comes from a speech by T. Roosevelt generally called "The man in the Arena" he may be thinking of what Sailor Steve was saying to you because Steve has experienced war and you have not.He might also be trying to say ignore Skybird(he is the critic and your in the arena)

Am I? To me it seems I am much more in care for own side'S fioghting soldiers than quite some others, it also seems to me that I have far lkess illusions about the nature of war and thus are at the same time more unforgiving in detemrination how to fight wars - but also are far more hesitent to get wars started over questionable motives. Some of the military opoerations and wars you have seen since 2001 would not have happened if it would have been up to me. And the fewer wars/operations still being carried out - let'S say they would hjave been fought very very differently.

Does this make me a war monger or a warner of war?

In literature and movies, there is sometimes this cliche brought up, the proud warrior drawing blank his knife, but not needing to fight this time and so cutting his own hand so that it bleeds before putting the blade back into its shed. But actually, the symbolism in this often used idea to me makes sense, if you interpret it this way: do not be easy in pulling your weapon, do not ready yourself for lethal fighting and war if you are not determined, unforgivingly, to indeed shed blood.

In other words: be careful and be not easy about calling for war. But once you draw your blade, than be determined, and not be about theatralic gestures.

The dilletancy of the Bush administraiton about Iraq was the one crime they committed. The other was their easymindedness and carelessness and the intolerable motives by which they unleashed it. That's why I have called Bush a traitor to his own soldiers back then: he abused the naivety of many soldiers who got blinded over their well-meant willingness to serve their country and defend freedom and democracy (oh with this magic spell you can catch the souls of young men so very easily, can't you) and all that. The war was about anything but that.

You hear that, Red-October-who-wants-to-serve?

Be aware of the treacherous master you are willing to give the power to decide over your life. It's precious, you should not accept just any criminal dirtbag to play around with it. You said you "know" about the horror of war, due to the stories told by your grandfathers. You do not know the horror because you read a book about it, or hear somebody talking about it. You know nothing as long as you have not been there and have seen it yourself - and then horror is staring back and deep into yourself. Don't be so eager to meet it. And don't be so foolish to think you are prepared for it. When you return home, you bring some of it back with you, hidden inside of you for the rest of your life. If that is still worth it for you, then at least be certain of the cause for which you make that sacrifice. By not differing between your idealistic desire and the real-political intention of your masters - politicians and corporations - you not only sell your soul and life under value, but you also could easily end up as a helper for the cause of "evil", helping right the opposite of what you hoped you would achieve.

Serving you can in so many functions. btw. As a Autobahn emergency ambulance medic, those guys see terrible things, I can tell you. As a firefighter. Policeman. Doctor. And so many other, less sensationally sounding jobs. Not to mention voluntary engagements and wellfare projects you can pick up. Soldiers are not the better humans, nor are they worse.

What'S more precious to you: serving the needs, or your hunger for glory deriving from your exclusively military definition of "serving"?

And finally, a question for which some will hate me again or attack me over my "cynism" again. You should ask yourself whether the higher cause or community you want to serve - indeed deserves your engagement. That point is often too much taken for granted so that it must not be questioned at all. And I found not questioning it to be very bad advise. Maybe that is the reason why I am such a grim comrade today, but I refuse to cry over the death of illusions I formerly had, for the only solid basis to make decisions, is realism - not wishful thinking, exaggerated hopes or irrational fears.

[Hottentot]

Case in point.

[Red October1984]

Okay Skybird...I can admit to romanticizing war a little bit sometimes. Everyone does. I have heard many stories of the horrors of war but have not personally experienced them and I see what you mean about me being dragged into another "Iraq 2003." That war lasted entirely too long. But how do you effectively fight an insurgency quickly without help from the native government?

My Coast Guard remark was supposed to be a kind of joke. I respect those men and women who defend the oceans and shores of Coastal America.

I don't have much time to post now. I'm in a hurry. I'll post more later!

@Steve, If you dreamed of flying then how did you end up on destroyers? I had to ask.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

I usually avoid GT topics that lead to me getting riled up.

Don't. Always be challenging your beliefs. Read the things that rile you up. Analyze why they rile you up. Re-examine your assumptions. Be open to the fact that what you know to be true may not be true. Enter every discussion with an open mind. You don't need to be wishy-washy in your beliefs, but you do need to be aware of the fact that they may be based on false, incomplete or misleading information.

I constantly try to work on this every day. It's a journey, and it takes work.

[Bilge_Rat]

strange... I thought this thread was supposed to be about a new HBO mini-series.....

A few months back, I received the bluray version of "12 O'Clock High". It was made in 1949, but had a surprisingly adult script. They used 12 actual B-17s, crashed one and most of the combat footage in the film is actual combat footage shot during the war. I also found out many of the extras/crew had also served in combat during WW2. A good film to put you in the mood while we wait.

[Crécy]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

strange... I thought this thread was supposed to be about a new HBO mini-series.....

I had to check if I had opened a wrong thread. Twice.

I heard rumors of this 'sequel' a couple of months ago and was under impression that this was supposed to be about the air war in the Pacific Theater. Nevertheless, as long as we get more yummy from mr. Hanks and mr. Spielberg, I'm content.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Red October1984

@Steve, If you dreamed of flying then how did you end up on destroyers? I had to ask.

I already said: 20/200 in the right eye, 20/275 in the left. I only joined the Navy because I was afraid I would be drafted into the Army, and the Navy wouldn't even let me on a submarine because of my eyesight.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I take flak.

He would have too, but we were too busy giving it to him over something else. Also, we recognize that he's repeating what he's read, however true it may be, and is still learning. You, on the other hand, spend so much time preaching and beating people over the head with it that everyone has grown tired of hearing it, however true it may be.