Ghosts of Bataan

Ducimus · 05-17-08, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

Another good one to watch out for is, Hell in the Pacific. History International will run all 4 hours in two parts, where as the Military Channel ran a paraphrased 2 hour version of it.

I didnt know that. I just saw part 2 on the military channel. Bummer.

At the least, heres the paraphrased part 1 i posted elsewhere.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...KoSwrAPV0dSIDg

Hylander_1314 · 05-17-08, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

Another good one to watch out for is, Hell in the Pacific. History International will run all 4 hours in two parts, where as the Military Channel ran a paraphrased 2 hour version of it.

I didnt know that. I just saw part 2 on the military channel. Bummer.

At the least, heres the paraphrased part 1 i posted elsewhere.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...KoSwrAPV0dSIDg

Keep an eye out for it with Memorial Day coming up. Alsao watch out for it on Veteran's (Armistice) Day.

That's one I wish was left as original, as it signalled the end of WWI. The 11th hour, of the 11th day, of the 11th month, all hostillities will cease on the Western Front. VE-Day, and VJ-Day, and all the others should be individually respected too. Not combined into one, so as to dilute the meaning of each. It ruins and makes insignificant each of it's importance in our history, and what was sacrificed. But that's just my take on it.

I remember as a youngster growing up, we would celebrate each individually, for our family members who served. And if it fell on a school day, my folks would excuse me from school for it. And on Armistice Day, we kids in school would sell paper poppies for a buck each and donate the procedes to the veteran's hospitol in Detroit.

Ducimus · 05-17-08, 01:07 PM

Watching these documentaries really opens ones eyes to the collective picture. One common misconception i think alot of people have (myself included at one point) was that the pacifc war was primarly America vs Japan. That simply isnt true. If one watchs the above linked 48 min documentary you'll see there were alot more countries involved then just America. The brutality at the hospital towards the end in above linked URL really is just... hard to comprehend.

Overall, i think its important to understand the entire theater, because then when you look again at the Pacific submarine war, suddenly all the pieces start falling into place once you have the larger picture and the role it played. Overall though, comparitvely, the submarine war was probably considered brutal by atlantic moral standards but tame compared to the rest of the pacific theater.

It really is a shame that the pacific theater doesnt get as much coverage as the European theater. Its almost like a forgotten war within WW2 itself, most certainly however, there is nothing glamorous about it at all. It's arguably the ugliest war ever fought.

Hylander_1314 · 05-17-08, 01:36 PM

And don't forget that the "lion's share" of men and material was sent to fight European War as Hitler was considered more dangerous than Tojo, and the Japanese Warlords.

You are correct that it wasn't just America's war. There were lots of others involved from the European countries who had established trade routes and colonial holdings, or post colonial holdings but remained on trading terms with the mainland and island countries. Austrailia and New Zealand were fighting for their lives in the Pacific. America had such an importance to the effort, as America provided a means of manufacturing that the Axis Partners just couldn't compete with. And America was out of range of the bombers that the Axis used. So while the Axis was bombed to rubble, America kicked into high gear, and by July of '43 outpaced all the Axis countries in production combined.

But for America, the Pacific War was personal. America was blindsided by an enemy who was thought to be treacherous in it's attitude of conducting war, from the initial attacks, to how the war was conducted to the end. The U.S. was also supplying it's Pacific Allies with material too. So that they cold continue the fight until the American forces were up to full potential.

The film, Letters from Iwo Jima, shows the American industrial power at it's height with all the ships from the task forces used to pommel the island into submission. It was a far cry from just 3 years earlier, when the U.S. didn't even have enough B-17s to mount a real bombimg mission. As they were considered too expensive for the war department's budget to mass produce in the numbers that were actually needed.

05-17-08, 01:36 PM	#4
Hylander_1314 Sea Lord Join Date: May 2006 Location: 5 Miles Inland West Of Lake Huron Posts: 1,936 Downloads: 139 Uploads: 0	And don't forget that the "lion's share" of men and material was sent to fight European War as Hitler was considered more dangerous than Tojo, and the Japanese Warlords. You are correct that it wasn't just America's war. There were lots of others involved from the European countries who had established trade routes and colonial holdings, or post colonial holdings but remained on trading terms with the mainland and island countries. Austrailia and New Zealand were fighting for their lives in the Pacific. America had such an importance to the effort, as America provided a means of manufacturing that the Axis Partners just couldn't compete with. And America was out of range of the bombers that the Axis used. So while the Axis was bombed to rubble, America kicked into high gear, and by July of '43 outpaced all the Axis countries in production combined. But for America, the Pacific War was personal. America was blindsided by an enemy who was thought to be treacherous in it's attitude of conducting war, from the initial attacks, to how the war was conducted to the end. The U.S. was also supplying it's Pacific Allies with material too. So that they cold continue the fight until the American forces were up to full potential. The film, Letters from Iwo Jima, shows the American industrial power at it's height with all the ships from the task forces used to pommel the island into submission. It was a far cry from just 3 years earlier, when the U.S. didn't even have enough B-17s to mount a real bombimg mission. As they were considered too expensive for the war department's budget to mass produce in the numbers that were actually needed. __________________ A legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law. -John Marshall Chief Justice of the Supreme Court ---------------------

05-17-08, 01:07 PM	#3
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	Watching these documentaries really opens ones eyes to the collective picture. One common misconception i think alot of people have (myself included at one point) was that the pacifc war was primarly America vs Japan. That simply isnt true. If one watchs the above linked 48 min documentary you'll see there were alot more countries involved then just America. The brutality at the hospital towards the end in above linked URL really is just... hard to comprehend. Overall, i think its important to understand the entire theater, because then when you look again at the Pacific submarine war, suddenly all the pieces start falling into place once you have the larger picture and the role it played. Overall though, comparitvely, the submarine war was probably considered brutal by atlantic moral standards but tame compared to the rest of the pacific theater. It really is a shame that the pacific theater doesnt get as much coverage as the European theater. Its almost like a forgotten war within WW2 itself, most certainly however, there is nothing glamorous about it at all. It's arguably the ugliest war ever fought.