On War and Peace

[SB Shock]

# WW2 generation never regained trust. Baby boomers hold no hatred.

That because of the boomer heavy drug use and untreated STD from free love. Don't worry - the Age of Generation X is now coming to power.

[pinstripers]

Sometimes I think about the American Revolutionary War. The Brits were of the opinion that the colonists were fighting unfairly, that they were were cheating somehow, by shooting from behind rocks a trees, rather than marching up in rows, in plain view, and engaging in combat from there. The colonists just had the opinion that it was a war, and that whatever it took to WIN, was acceptable. Both sides drew the line between acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior in a different place. A couple centuries later, we found that the Japanese drew the line in yet another place. This seems to parallel the current situation with the muslim world. What we consider atrocities, they consider to be war (just win baby). I'm not sure how I feel about it all.

[kcshocker11]

That because of the boomer heavy drug use and untreated STD from free love. Don't worry - the Age of Generation X is now coming to power.

Jealous arent you? Sorry X wont be there they are too busy bustin caps in each other, texting and playing boring video games:kiwi-fruit:

[SB Shock]

Jealous arent you? Sorry X wont be there they are too busy bustin caps in each other, texting and playing boring video games:kiwi-fruit:

Well I know with all the brain cells you killed as a boomer how you would get Generation X mixed up with Generation Y - they both have "Generation" in their name. It all right pops.

[kcshocker11]

X Y both messed up chromosomes and god knows our std's were easily cured.:kiwi-fruit:

[SB Shock]

X Y both messed up chromosomes and god knows our std's were easily cured.:kiwi-fruit:

:satellite:

[Wu du Nord]

Sometimes I think about the American Revolutionary War. The Brits were of the opinion that the colonists were fighting unfairly, that they were were cheating somehow, by shooting from behind rocks a trees, rather than marching up in rows, in plain view, and engaging in combat from there. The colonists just had the opinion that it was a war, and that whatever it took to WIN, was acceptable. Both sides drew the line between acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior in a different place. A couple centuries later, we found that the Japanese drew the line in yet another place. This seems to parallel the current situation with the muslim world. What we consider atrocities, they consider to be war (just win baby). I'm not sure how I feel about it all.

I get what you're saying here, but I think you're seriously over complicating things.

Ask yourself, 'which side is God on?'.

See how easy that was?

[Kung Wu]

Should it be the right of any sovereign nation to nationalize a specific commodity?

[shockmonster]

Sometimes I think about the American Revolutionary War. The Brits were of the opinion that the colonists were fighting unfairly, that they were were cheating somehow, by shooting from behind rocks a trees, rather than marching up in rows, in plain view, and engaging in combat from there. The colonists just had the opinion that it was a war, and that whatever it took to WIN, was acceptable. Both sides drew the line between acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior in a different place. A couple centuries later, we found that the Japanese drew the line in yet another place. This seems to parallel the current situation with the muslim world. What we consider atrocities, they consider to be war (just win baby). I'm not sure how I feel about it all.

While some or most of the British Generals may have thought the colonists fought war methods were not gentlemanly or macho, the main reason the colonists fought a faster moving war with snipers, etc. (especially in the west where there were lots of woods, rivers, etc.) was because our generals had experience fighting these methods during the French Indian War (Washington became quite famous for his work as a British general in the west. The early Americans (or Brits) fought our own wars mainly against the Indians who teamed up with the French in America, while the main British army was probably involved throughout the world. Change didn't come easily to the Brits. but they did have such a numbers advantage and understanding of discipline, where this fast moving war wasn't possible because of the terrain of the country the Brits had their way. Some values, but more experience, good at what they did and stubborness at changing was the reason the Brits didn't change.

[JJClamdip]

My Dad fought in the Pacific during WWII, and for him, his hatred of the Japanese lasted a lifetime.

These people need to read Ghost Soldiers by Hampton Sides and see how much they like the Japanese.

[DUShock]

War is easier than peace...

[DUShock]

These people need to read Ghost Soldiers by Hampton Sides and see how much they like the Japanese.

As one who is not worthy to carry the colors, my unit is a direct dissendant of Alamo Scouts, and I can honestly and sincerely say that they are an inspiration for those at the tip of the spear.

In Orbe Terrum Non Visi

[60Shock]

War is easier than peace...

Absolutely. We excel in winning wars and are sadly unprepared for winning the peace. We have great intentions, but we often, as of late, fail badly at understanding the cultures, the infrastures, and the people.

One small example in Iraq. It took us nearly 18 months to put in a brand new electric grid system in order to bring power back to their homes. Only one problem, when they eventually turned it on, we burned out most of their appliances and wiring in their homes and in many of their office buildings as their 100 year old electrical wiring system was not equiped to handle the powerful new grid.

[60Shock]

Some combat statistics from WWII you may find enlightening which are listed in the US Army Air Foce Statistical Digest:

“In less than four years (December 1941- August 1945), the US Army Air Forces lost 14,903 pilots, aircrew and assorted personnel plus 13,873 airplanes --- inside the continental United States. They were the result of 52,651 aircraft accidents (6,039 involving fatalities) in 45 months.

Think about those numbers. They average 1,170 aircraft accidents per month---- nearly 40 a day. (Less than one accident in four resulted in totaled aircraft,) however, it gets worse.....
Almost 1,000 Army planes disappeared en route from the US to foreign climes. But an eye-watering 43,581 aircraft were lost overseas including 22,948 on combat missions (18,418 against the Western Axis) and 20,633 attributed to non-combat causes overseas.

In a single 376 plane raid in August 1943, 60 B-17s were shot down. That was a 16 percent loss rate and meant 600 empty bunks in England . In 1942-43 it was statistically impossible for bomber crews to complete a 25-mission tour in Europe. (Note 25 missions were required prior to being relieved from combat service). Pacific theatre losses were far less (4,530 in combat) owing to smaller forces committed. The worst B-29 mission, against Tokyo on May 25, 1945, cost 26 Superfortresses, 5.6 percent of the 464 dispatched from the Marianas.

On average, 6,600 American servicemen died per month during WWII, about 220 a day. By the end of the war, over 40,000 airmen were killed in combat theatres and another 18,000 wounded. Some 12,000 missing men were declared dead, including a number "liberated" by the Soviets but never returned. More than 41,000 were captured, half of the 5,400 held by the Japanese died in captivity, compared with one-tenth in German hands.

Some fighter pilots entered combat in 1942 with less than one hour in their assigned aircraft.
The 357th Fighter Group went to England in late 1943 having trained on P-39s. The group never saw a Mustang until shortly before its first combat mission. A high-time P-51 pilot had 30 hours in type. Many had fewer than five hours. Some had one hour. With arrival of new aircraft, many combat units transitioned in combat. The attitude was, "They all have a stick and a throttle. Go fly `em." When the 4th Fighter Group converted from P-47s to P-51st here was no time to stand down. The Group commander said, "You can learn to fly `51s on the way to the target.

A future P-47 ace said, "I was sent to England to die." Some fighter pilots tucked their wheels in the well on their first combat mission with one previous flight in the aircraft.”

[Maggie]

I am pretty sure I know the answer to #2, but I really don't know the answer to #1. I have a couple follow up questions and I want to make sure I have the pulse of the common opinion here. Bare with me on this train of logic.

#1 How long did it take after Pearl Harbor until we liked the Japanese again?

#2 How long until we like Al Qeada?

1. In my personal experience – often much less than one generation. My grandfather hated the Japanese (he served the in the pacific theater); but as time marched on he mellowed – that tends to happen when you win. Notwithstanding, he never ceased saying jap, nip, etc. even so he did it with a twinkle in his eye. For example: “That is a really cute nip serving me pasta,
Maggie”. “Super” responds Maggie, "dig in". He meant no harm – he just wanted to be annoying…..to me. He hated what happened but, in time, he didn't blame the Japanese people. That said he never under stood how the Japanese could do what they did in the 30s and 40s.

2. Never. For reasons I think you can figure out, KungWu – good posts to draw on.