A Product of Where We've Been
Thoughts on a dynamic focus on history58 total reviews
Comment from Janie King
This is very interesting..I just watched a CD called "The Help"...it really gave me such an odd feeling to realize the black people were being treated that way when I was a child...not when my mother was a child....you have made some very good points...ones we need to think about...and change our attitude in the process...I have a black pastor, married to a white Mississippi girl...never happened when I was a child..thank God some things change. God bless.
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
  |
This is very interesting..I just watched a CD called "The Help"...it really gave me such an odd feeling to realize the black people were being treated that way when I was a child...not when my mother was a child....you have made some very good points...ones we need to think about...and change our attitude in the process...I have a black pastor, married to a white Mississippi girl...never happened when I was a child..thank God some things change. God bless.
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Hi Janie - my wife and I watched "The Help" and loved it. I can so clearly remember my grandmother rushing to my side when I was trying to drink from the fountain that said colored only. I mean, drinking white water didn't seem nearly as exciting to me. Warm regards, Bill
-
Isn't that wild...my parents never ever made any difference in color..we were to treat everybody equal and with respect..it was such a strange feeling the first time I realized that blacks were treated differently because of their color. I'm glad some things have changed. Still ugly in some places. God bless.
Comment from BethShelby
It was a pleasure reading your well-thought-out and well researched essay. I agree we're not perfect. Rather than seeing the difference in other cultures, I more amazed at the simularities. When I've traveled abroad and gotten to know some the natives on a more personal level I find they are not so different from me. I grew up in a state which in order to keep blacks from voting, they were given tests designed in such a way that only a very educated person was likely to pass. They were also required to pay a tax in order to vote. The poor couldn't afford it. Not cool. Restaurants as late as the eighties gave those they didn't want to serve a different menu with much higher prices. Some of us are just as bad as those we criticize but it is learned behavior passed down to us. For other countries it is the same.
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
It was a pleasure reading your well-thought-out and well researched essay. I agree we're not perfect. Rather than seeing the difference in other cultures, I more amazed at the simularities. When I've traveled abroad and gotten to know some the natives on a more personal level I find they are not so different from me. I grew up in a state which in order to keep blacks from voting, they were given tests designed in such a way that only a very educated person was likely to pass. They were also required to pay a tax in order to vote. The poor couldn't afford it. Not cool. Restaurants as late as the eighties gave those they didn't want to serve a different menu with much higher prices. Some of us are just as bad as those we criticize but it is learned behavior passed down to us. For other countries it is the same.
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Hi Beth - the sad thing about FS is that I would love to just sit down sometime and talk. You are so right. I live in North Carolina, and a big legal issue right now is compensating people for State sponsored Eugenics. NC was sterilizing people who they felt shouldn't "reproduce". This wasn't 100 years ago, more like 30. That was the whole intent of my essay. Stop and look around. Very warm regards, Bill
Comment from Aunt Mame
Your essay is fascinating. As an Australian and of similar age to yourself I find the younger generation here are very critical of anything American - it almost seems fashionable! However there were crimes committed by all nations and people in 'yesteryear' - most the our aborigines died as a result of 'war' or disease. You use the present tense when discussing 'use of nuclear weapons' - lets hope it is in the past. Strangely enough this country copies much of anything from the US - we have even been described as 'pseudo-American'. Interesting discussion of time and what it means to China. Great read!
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
Your essay is fascinating. As an Australian and of similar age to yourself I find the younger generation here are very critical of anything American - it almost seems fashionable! However there were crimes committed by all nations and people in 'yesteryear' - most the our aborigines died as a result of 'war' or disease. You use the present tense when discussing 'use of nuclear weapons' - lets hope it is in the past. Strangely enough this country copies much of anything from the US - we have even been described as 'pseudo-American'. Interesting discussion of time and what it means to China. Great read!
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thank you very much. I've been to your Country twice and loved it! Regards, Bill
Comment from Dingus-Maghee
Very good writing and enjoyable lesson. You have raised thoughts and ideas. Excellent work bhogg!
Now, how can I remain silent?
And sooooo.....
The America Indian, Mayan and Aztec civilization's had cities in ruins long before Columbus came here. He didn't discover America, yet we still celebrate Columbus Day. (Will we ever learn?)
The European attitude: Only us! It's our religion, dress, speech, laws, customs and everything else about us, that we think matters. The rest of the world are wrong. They're pagans, backwards, illiterate, un-clean, not to be trusted or respected. Then, we have the other side of the coin. Tribal warfare, inhuman and brutal treatment towards women, children, the poor and the weak and soon...retaliation. All Mankind imply their way of life is the only proper way forcing their beliefs down another's throat. There is no, 'Live and let live" and few good people left on earth.
Yeah, so the world hates America, so what: The poor hate the rich, Arab's hate Egyptian's, Moslems hate non-Moslems and Sunni Moslem's hate Shitte Moslems. Catholic's hate Baptist and the Britt.s hate the French. New York hates Los Angeles and West Hollywood hates Eastside LA, and on and on and on.... It's never ending! It shouldn't be important since it doesn't keep our kids feed, the rent paid or the house warm.
YIKES bhogg, what have you done to me?
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
Very good writing and enjoyable lesson. You have raised thoughts and ideas. Excellent work bhogg!
Now, how can I remain silent?
And sooooo.....
The America Indian, Mayan and Aztec civilization's had cities in ruins long before Columbus came here. He didn't discover America, yet we still celebrate Columbus Day. (Will we ever learn?)
The European attitude: Only us! It's our religion, dress, speech, laws, customs and everything else about us, that we think matters. The rest of the world are wrong. They're pagans, backwards, illiterate, un-clean, not to be trusted or respected. Then, we have the other side of the coin. Tribal warfare, inhuman and brutal treatment towards women, children, the poor and the weak and soon...retaliation. All Mankind imply their way of life is the only proper way forcing their beliefs down another's throat. There is no, 'Live and let live" and few good people left on earth.
Yeah, so the world hates America, so what: The poor hate the rich, Arab's hate Egyptian's, Moslems hate non-Moslems and Sunni Moslem's hate Shitte Moslems. Catholic's hate Baptist and the Britt.s hate the French. New York hates Los Angeles and West Hollywood hates Eastside LA, and on and on and on.... It's never ending! It shouldn't be important since it doesn't keep our kids feed, the rent paid or the house warm.
YIKES bhogg, what have you done to me?
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Well, at least you and I are okay! Regards, Bill
-
Oh...I hope so. You really have me thinking. And isn't that what good writing is suppose to do for the reader? I believe it does. I know I got pretty wordy there, but you woke me up. For that I do thank you.
Comment from HPicasso
Great job with this piece and the message it sent. Good, clear historical accounts complete with analysis. You did a great job writing about the history of our country that we aren't proud of; war is never fair on either side. Excellent use of illustrative anecdotal examples to prove your point.
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
Great job with this piece and the message it sent. Good, clear historical accounts complete with analysis. You did a great job writing about the history of our country that we aren't proud of; war is never fair on either side. Excellent use of illustrative anecdotal examples to prove your point.
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thanks for reading and your great feedback. I appreciate both. Bill
Comment from rzubey
You support your arguments well, bhogg. I really enjoyed reading your story. I know that living in the United States gives us great freedom, but the things you mentioned in your article are why I don't practice what I call blind patriotism. We have done many things wrong. And we have done many things right. Keep going with your articles. They are really well done.
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
You support your arguments well, bhogg. I really enjoyed reading your story. I know that living in the United States gives us great freedom, but the things you mentioned in your article are why I don't practice what I call blind patriotism. We have done many things wrong. And we have done many things right. Keep going with your articles. They are really well done.
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thank you for reading and for your great feedback. I appreciate both. Regards, Bill
Comment from viaux
Very well stated. I read with particular interest your section about the B29 bombers as I'm now reading The Unbroken--which tells about the raids on Tokyo, etc. I never before knew about the Japanese--more about Hitler, etc. (My dad died in WWII. By the way, when you pluralize Americans, you don't need the apostrophe.
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
Very well stated. I read with particular interest your section about the B29 bombers as I'm now reading The Unbroken--which tells about the raids on Tokyo, etc. I never before knew about the Japanese--more about Hitler, etc. (My dad died in WWII. By the way, when you pluralize Americans, you don't need the apostrophe.
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thanks for reading and your comments. I thought I had corrected your spot, so will turn around and do so. I'll have to check out the book you're talking about. Regards, Bill
Comment from Patrick G Cox
Hi Bill,
Applause, applause. This article probably won't win many friends, but it will, hopefully, open a few eyes. Like you, I've done business in the Far East, like you I came to realise that they think in times scales of generations, not days, weeks, months. Westerners in general have this fixation with getting things to happen immediately, which often leads to disaster.
Our strategy in Iran is going to lead to catastrophe for everyone I think. We're dealing with a people who were civilised and building cities when our forefathers were hunter gatherers - yet we treat them as if they have no history. It's not just America, it's the whole western culture. We want our reward now! Don't plan more than a Quarter ahead, because that's as long as the financial markets look ahead.
China has a civilisation going back 3,000 years. Its had its bad moments, but that continuity of peoples, rulers and government means they have a long view on everything. They will be the next men on the moon, and probably the first men into the stars, while we squabble about the cost of every paper clip.
Patrick
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
 |
Hi Bill,
Applause, applause. This article probably won't win many friends, but it will, hopefully, open a few eyes. Like you, I've done business in the Far East, like you I came to realise that they think in times scales of generations, not days, weeks, months. Westerners in general have this fixation with getting things to happen immediately, which often leads to disaster.
Our strategy in Iran is going to lead to catastrophe for everyone I think. We're dealing with a people who were civilised and building cities when our forefathers were hunter gatherers - yet we treat them as if they have no history. It's not just America, it's the whole western culture. We want our reward now! Don't plan more than a Quarter ahead, because that's as long as the financial markets look ahead.
China has a civilisation going back 3,000 years. Its had its bad moments, but that continuity of peoples, rulers and government means they have a long view on everything. They will be the next men on the moon, and probably the first men into the stars, while we squabble about the cost of every paper clip.
Patrick
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thank you Patrick - first for reading and the gift of stars. Your response is as good an essay as my post. Warm regards, Bill
Comment from Herb
Refreshing.
It always amazes me how people only see what they want to see and history is written by the victors. I think I once heard an American describe slavery as a learning curve.
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
Refreshing.
It always amazes me how people only see what they want to see and history is written by the victors. I think I once heard an American describe slavery as a learning curve.
Comment Written 25-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thanks Herb - I very much appreciate you reading and for the six. Both are appreciated. Had either Germany or Japan won WWII, can you imagine the war crime trials? Regards, Bill
Comment from Allezw2
Master bhogg,
"Boss Hogg" ?
Your essay was reasoned and would be acceptable to most as more or less correct, if we use the morality as based on the politically correct stance required of us in this second decade of this last century of this millenium.
As you know, and implied, we have not progressed that far from the law of the claw and fang. Seventy years ago, were were even closer.
When unreasonable people assert their right to others properties, it is still unacceptable behavior.
The apologists mourn the loss of life suffered by the axis powers in WWII.
Indeed, from this point in history, with a better understanding of the horrors of that campaign, with the benefit of more accurate history and an enlightened morality, we can, and should regret the circumstances that led to these horrific consequences.
Not mentioned was the British desire to avenge their losses to German bombing. Great Britain had a far superior air force than the Germans. The commander of the British Bomber Command, Vice Air Marshal Harris, sat at his desk and stated quite bluntly that the Germans had sowed the storm and would reap the whirlwind.
The first concentrated effort by the RAF was at Hamburg in the summer of 1943. They bombed the city with incendiaries in several waves concentrated within the city. It was the first occasion of the phenomenon of the fire storm as a tool of war. The German's were horrified that their military had not protected them from the sight of clumps of ashes that had been people (some 40-100 thousand by various estimates and a million displaced)or streets that burned from the intensity of the fire.
There was no pity for the million homeless by the people in England. They remembered the relentless bombing that had killed or displaced thousands in London during the blitz.
The USAF bombed in the daylight, and the RAF burned at night. Only the D-Day invasion diverted the RAF to strategic bombing until after the landing when they began their systematic program to burn Germany to the ground.
Dresden will always be a point of contention. It is a similar argument about Germany as with Japan in the last weeks of their war. Both were militarily annoying though still with the ability to interfere with the progress of the inevitable defeat.
It probably comes down to the fact that with Dresden, it was bombed because the Allies could.
Could they have starved Japan into submission. I think probably not. The army of occupation in Indo-China and on the coast of China was in place and undefeated. They were well train, organized and equipped for a lengthy battle.
As to our attitudes toward Japan: consider its history prior to WWII. We tend to forget how Japan recoiled from western civilization. With their sense of immutability based on their divine origin, they were offended that Perry's ships demonstrated technology far beyond theirs. They feared for their country and their national identity.
From that point on, they began a drive toward modernization unheard of anywhere in the world until that time. Their navy was trained and equipped with the latest and best warships the British could design and sell them well into the twentieth century. Their army bought the best and most efficient weapons worldwide until their own war industries were completed and capable of meeting their military's needs.
Forty years later, they annexed Formosa after crushing the Chinese forces.
Fifty years later, in the Russo-Japanese War, the Japanese navy summarily destroyed the Russian Baltic Fleet in a battle fought in the Straits of Tsushima.
Russia lost their Manchurian provinces in an American brokered peace.
Less than sixty years later, the Japanese annexed Korea after apparently murdering the king and members of the royal family that opposed the Japanese as protectors.
Eighty some years later, they invaded China claiming that the Chinese attacked their troops at the international border, the Marco Polo Bridge Incident.
The brutality of their occupation and treatment of captives horrified even the German ambassador in Nanking who reported the excesses to his superiors in Berlin.
Three years later, the Japanese attempted incursions into Siberia and were soundly thrashed twice by the Russians and formed an uneasy peace there in 1940.
A year later, they attacked Pearl Harbor and the European colonies in southeast Asia.
In the United States, there was horror and disbelief. The American Secretary of State excoriated the Japanese delegation purportedly seeking a peaceful solution to the controversy between the two countries.
I don't know if you really understand the dismay and the fear that Pearl Harbor generated in this country. At the time I lived on a farm in Wyoming. The news came to us over the dry-cell powered party line, neighbor-to-neighbor. Someone held their phone earpiece to a radio and the individuals holding their earpieces along that line would pass along what they heard to those waiting to hear this dreadful news.
The hysteria was rampant. In rural Wyoming, air raid wardens patrolled the small towns and countrysides making certain blackout regulations were enforced.
The war brought us to Los Angeles in the summer of 1942. Here the blackout meant cars ran at night with only their parking lamps lit. Theater marquees were dark and curtains were draped from it so that you had to wind your way through a maze of these curtains to prevent any light escaping to guide enemy bombers.
Units of the USAAF marched down the street to the local restaurants for their meals. I stood on the balcony and watched as hundreds of men went by singing their hymn of defiance.
The Secretary of War said it well for the entire country, when he thundered, "The Japanese started this war. We are going to finish it."
At first, nobody believed it possible after the debacle in the Philippines, the loss of Wake and Guam as well as the garrisons in China.
The stories of Japanese brutality in the Bataan Death March only surfaced in the newspapers two years later after survivors were found, or rescued.
As America won more of its battles in the Pacific, confidence soared.
It was after the battles on Iwo Jima, and finally Okinawa, that the U.S. strategy was carefully analyzed. The planners knew now that Japan had to be defeated by killing nearly every Japanese on the home islands. They would never surrender.
That acknowledgement, the fury that drove the country to revenge Pearl Harbor rose to white hot when American prisoners were found, and the truth of the POW camps was revealed.
It was true that high altitude precision bombing over Japan was impossible. Though stubbornly held too for far too long. You did not mention the jet stream that frustrated any such attempt. The Japanese anti-aircraft defenses included suicide pilots crashing their fighters into the B29s. The losses were horrendous. That was why LeMay relieved the commander and instituted the fire bomb raids. He stripped the bombers of all the armament save the tail gun and its operator. A crew, the minimum necessary to fly the plane, was boarded and the the weight saved was replaced by more incendiaries.
The attitude of this country was that they wanted the war over. The Allied victory in Europe made everyone anxious to end the conflict, once and for all, and bring all of our troops home.
The probable casualties from an invasion was horrific to consider. That led to the decision to begin the atomic bombing campaign as I am certain you know.
However, your essay does not emphasize the tenor of our country's absolute hatred of anything Japanese at that time.
However, we should not presume to condemn the U.S. government. This was war and the Japanese, correct by their lights, caused a violent revulsion in the largely Christian west for their brutal contempt for their prisoners' humanity and their inhumane treatment.
One fallacy that keeps arising is the plaintive cry asking why the U.S. did not bomb an uninhabited island as a demonstration?
I can only ask why is there an assumption that the Japanese would acknowledge that weapon's power and immediately surrender?
If Hiroshima was not example enough, what would be? If Hirohito had not declared that Japan must surrender after the destruction of Nagasaki, there would never have been an
end without more bloodshed. As it is, we know that there were elements in the military that even then tried to prevent the emperor's rescript from being broadcast to the empire ordering that they stop fighting.
Fantasist
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
|
Master bhogg,
"Boss Hogg" ?
Your essay was reasoned and would be acceptable to most as more or less correct, if we use the morality as based on the politically correct stance required of us in this second decade of this last century of this millenium.
As you know, and implied, we have not progressed that far from the law of the claw and fang. Seventy years ago, were were even closer.
When unreasonable people assert their right to others properties, it is still unacceptable behavior.
The apologists mourn the loss of life suffered by the axis powers in WWII.
Indeed, from this point in history, with a better understanding of the horrors of that campaign, with the benefit of more accurate history and an enlightened morality, we can, and should regret the circumstances that led to these horrific consequences.
Not mentioned was the British desire to avenge their losses to German bombing. Great Britain had a far superior air force than the Germans. The commander of the British Bomber Command, Vice Air Marshal Harris, sat at his desk and stated quite bluntly that the Germans had sowed the storm and would reap the whirlwind.
The first concentrated effort by the RAF was at Hamburg in the summer of 1943. They bombed the city with incendiaries in several waves concentrated within the city. It was the first occasion of the phenomenon of the fire storm as a tool of war. The German's were horrified that their military had not protected them from the sight of clumps of ashes that had been people (some 40-100 thousand by various estimates and a million displaced)or streets that burned from the intensity of the fire.
There was no pity for the million homeless by the people in England. They remembered the relentless bombing that had killed or displaced thousands in London during the blitz.
The USAF bombed in the daylight, and the RAF burned at night. Only the D-Day invasion diverted the RAF to strategic bombing until after the landing when they began their systematic program to burn Germany to the ground.
Dresden will always be a point of contention. It is a similar argument about Germany as with Japan in the last weeks of their war. Both were militarily annoying though still with the ability to interfere with the progress of the inevitable defeat.
It probably comes down to the fact that with Dresden, it was bombed because the Allies could.
Could they have starved Japan into submission. I think probably not. The army of occupation in Indo-China and on the coast of China was in place and undefeated. They were well train, organized and equipped for a lengthy battle.
As to our attitudes toward Japan: consider its history prior to WWII. We tend to forget how Japan recoiled from western civilization. With their sense of immutability based on their divine origin, they were offended that Perry's ships demonstrated technology far beyond theirs. They feared for their country and their national identity.
From that point on, they began a drive toward modernization unheard of anywhere in the world until that time. Their navy was trained and equipped with the latest and best warships the British could design and sell them well into the twentieth century. Their army bought the best and most efficient weapons worldwide until their own war industries were completed and capable of meeting their military's needs.
Forty years later, they annexed Formosa after crushing the Chinese forces.
Fifty years later, in the Russo-Japanese War, the Japanese navy summarily destroyed the Russian Baltic Fleet in a battle fought in the Straits of Tsushima.
Russia lost their Manchurian provinces in an American brokered peace.
Less than sixty years later, the Japanese annexed Korea after apparently murdering the king and members of the royal family that opposed the Japanese as protectors.
Eighty some years later, they invaded China claiming that the Chinese attacked their troops at the international border, the Marco Polo Bridge Incident.
The brutality of their occupation and treatment of captives horrified even the German ambassador in Nanking who reported the excesses to his superiors in Berlin.
Three years later, the Japanese attempted incursions into Siberia and were soundly thrashed twice by the Russians and formed an uneasy peace there in 1940.
A year later, they attacked Pearl Harbor and the European colonies in southeast Asia.
In the United States, there was horror and disbelief. The American Secretary of State excoriated the Japanese delegation purportedly seeking a peaceful solution to the controversy between the two countries.
I don't know if you really understand the dismay and the fear that Pearl Harbor generated in this country. At the time I lived on a farm in Wyoming. The news came to us over the dry-cell powered party line, neighbor-to-neighbor. Someone held their phone earpiece to a radio and the individuals holding their earpieces along that line would pass along what they heard to those waiting to hear this dreadful news.
The hysteria was rampant. In rural Wyoming, air raid wardens patrolled the small towns and countrysides making certain blackout regulations were enforced.
The war brought us to Los Angeles in the summer of 1942. Here the blackout meant cars ran at night with only their parking lamps lit. Theater marquees were dark and curtains were draped from it so that you had to wind your way through a maze of these curtains to prevent any light escaping to guide enemy bombers.
Units of the USAAF marched down the street to the local restaurants for their meals. I stood on the balcony and watched as hundreds of men went by singing their hymn of defiance.
The Secretary of War said it well for the entire country, when he thundered, "The Japanese started this war. We are going to finish it."
At first, nobody believed it possible after the debacle in the Philippines, the loss of Wake and Guam as well as the garrisons in China.
The stories of Japanese brutality in the Bataan Death March only surfaced in the newspapers two years later after survivors were found, or rescued.
As America won more of its battles in the Pacific, confidence soared.
It was after the battles on Iwo Jima, and finally Okinawa, that the U.S. strategy was carefully analyzed. The planners knew now that Japan had to be defeated by killing nearly every Japanese on the home islands. They would never surrender.
That acknowledgement, the fury that drove the country to revenge Pearl Harbor rose to white hot when American prisoners were found, and the truth of the POW camps was revealed.
It was true that high altitude precision bombing over Japan was impossible. Though stubbornly held too for far too long. You did not mention the jet stream that frustrated any such attempt. The Japanese anti-aircraft defenses included suicide pilots crashing their fighters into the B29s. The losses were horrendous. That was why LeMay relieved the commander and instituted the fire bomb raids. He stripped the bombers of all the armament save the tail gun and its operator. A crew, the minimum necessary to fly the plane, was boarded and the the weight saved was replaced by more incendiaries.
The attitude of this country was that they wanted the war over. The Allied victory in Europe made everyone anxious to end the conflict, once and for all, and bring all of our troops home.
The probable casualties from an invasion was horrific to consider. That led to the decision to begin the atomic bombing campaign as I am certain you know.
However, your essay does not emphasize the tenor of our country's absolute hatred of anything Japanese at that time.
However, we should not presume to condemn the U.S. government. This was war and the Japanese, correct by their lights, caused a violent revulsion in the largely Christian west for their brutal contempt for their prisoners' humanity and their inhumane treatment.
One fallacy that keeps arising is the plaintive cry asking why the U.S. did not bomb an uninhabited island as a demonstration?
I can only ask why is there an assumption that the Japanese would acknowledge that weapon's power and immediately surrender?
If Hiroshima was not example enough, what would be? If Hirohito had not declared that Japan must surrender after the destruction of Nagasaki, there would never have been an
end without more bloodshed. As it is, we know that there were elements in the military that even then tried to prevent the emperor's rescript from being broadcast to the empire ordering that they stop fighting.
Fantasist
Comment Written 24-Jan-2012
reply by the author on 25-Jan-2012
-
Thank you for reading and for your wonderful, insightful reply. You, like me, seem to enjoy history. I certainly did not mean to point fingers or blame the U.S. My point really was to point out that no matter how we might view things, other cultures might view things totally different. Warm regards, Bill
-
My son came from high school raising the question of the morality of using the atomic bomb. I read his textbook and the apologetic tone with mounting fury. I have some artifacts from the time as well as contemporary accounts. I also challenged the instructor for his bias and raised a question with the LAUSD for their acceptance of the test and permitting their instructors to teach their one-sided account of history rather than documented truth.
Perhaps you recall the flap over the fiftieth anniversary of the bomb drop at the Air and Space Museum where an inappropriate exhibit card questioned the morality of the drop. Needless to say, that card was quickly removed and the individual responsible disciplined for his unprofessional action.
My daughter worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory for two summers while in college. Every year on the anniversary of Trinity, demonstrators would bring their signs and try to obstruct traffic into the laboratory.
My thesis is that decrying past events and applying modern morality to condemn those individual is inappropriate. History is to learn and not repeat such errors. It was only after the horrifying pictures of the Muslim prisoners held in the Serbian prison camps. Then it took action by an American president to kick the EU and NATO into action to stop the "ethnic cleansing". Yes the "Trail of Tears" was tragic, however, so was the expulsion of religious dissidents from England into Ireland where they became the hated overseers for the English, and ultimately, the Scotch-Irish who emigrated to the North American colonies and became the U.S. founding fathers. Consider the medieval Albegensian Crusade, and the slaughter of the Huegenots in Florida by the Spanish.
We would not tolerate such actions today, as witness the initiative (though tardily) taken during the ferocious conflict in Rwanda.