[Enchante]

Someone please explain how Clint Eastwood bleating about Japanese dead on Iwo Jima supports some global anti-war position??? Interesting, Mr. Chirac, that "showing the dead ends that simplistic schemas or the recourse to force lead to" doesn't explain why we liberated YOUR country with an enormous "recourse to force"......

[Red6]

In the French mind, they liberated themselves.

[LibFreeOrDie]

Chirac is probably still upset that the we "invaded" the beaches of Normandy 60+ years ago...

[sgtbono2002]

The Japanese were so humane during WW2 its just great to see it from their side.

I am sure they can explain away the Repe of Nan King and the Bataan death march, How about the Bordellos where they sent white and Philipino women to work in. I am sure the beheadings and the Japanese working men to death in mines and building railroads were necessities.

Sorry Mr. Eastwood your movie doesnt interest me.

[hsalaw]

And the French, led by Chirac, continue their free-fall into irrelevance. He should read "America Alone," by Mark Steyn, and pay a little attention to the future rather than trying to revise the past.

[definitelynotaliberal]

ping

[Wuli]

Humans are not perfect. In that imperfection, and some will even believe their motive behind that seeking is benevolent, and for some of them it may be. But, power corrupts and many, not all, who achieve power become corrupted by it, if they were not corrupt before seeking it. Corrupt rulers seldom fail to resort to force to achieve, maintain or spread their rule. They do not cause wars. Wars are caused by the weak, by those who do not believe that those corrupted by power will extend the force with which they hold power, to you, if you do not make it clear that you have the will and will obtain the means to oppose them.

Chirac is an idiot. The only result of his efforts had they been successful, would have been that we would have had to contend with Saddam, militarily, at a much later date.

[mmanager]

Excerpts from "Flags of our Fathers"

"Bushido, the "Way of the Warrior" had for centuries been the honored code of Japan's proud samurai caste. In the first half of the twentieth century the military romanticized the "Way," calling upon all young men to be willing to die for their Emperor (Muhammad). It was this interpretation of Bushido that motivated the Japanese soldiers to fight to the death in a manner the Marines judge fanatical (Sound familiar?) But this ideal was not the real thing. Rather, it was a corruption of Bushido.
"In the past the Bushido code had been as specialized and silted as the Hippocratic oath. The samurai had always been a small elite within the larger society. For them, Bushido defined a life of honor and duty. But in the early 1900's the Japanese military set forth an updated version of Bushido. Its aim was to make warriors of the entire male populace. Death in battle was portrayed as an honor to the family and a transcendent act on the part of the individual. Surrender was a disgrace to the soldier and his family."

I this question, what is different from this doctrine from the Muslim's?

It is a blueprint of evil that has been replicated through time.

God Bless America

[MarkBsnr]

Eastwood recently was quoted as saying that these films show the irrelevance of war. That's probably what got the cheese eating surrender monkeys interested.

If anything else, remember that this is the same bunch that worships Jerry Lewis.