[kabar]

Eyewitness counts just as much as documentation

Nonsense. Over 16 million Americans served in uniform during WWII. They each had a different perspective of the war. Eyewitness accounts can provide a slice of what was happening, but certainly not give you the grand sweep and context of what was happening. Portraying MacArthur as some sort of coward and incompetent because a few GIs disliked him is not good "documentation." I served a year in Vietnam, but I certainly don't believe that my perspective on events is all that meaningful in terms of the total overview of the war.

Burns uses these individual experiences and perceptions [hopefully they have been vetted for their authenticity] to butress his view of the war. So far, I prefer "Victory at Sea" as a documentary on the war without all of this PC multicultural diversity crap Burns is pushing.

[RightWhale]

History is always a story told by the historian. I was lucky my granduncle finally told me about WW I. There was a Look or Life magazine article with some pictures of troops lining up to get on ships to go over there. He said, “Cannon fodder.” Which he might know since he was one of them.

[af_vet_rr]

Portraying MacArthur as some sort of coward and incompetent because a few GIs disliked him is not good "documentation."

I think some of us, and I'm just as guilty, are ignoring the point of view that people had back in 1941 and 1942. The show is trying to say "this is how people felt".

MacArthur made some huge mistakes at the beginning - there is no doubt of that - even he admitted later on that he made mistakes. That doesn't make him incompetent. Incompetence is when you don't learn form your mistakes, and MacArthur clearly learned from his mistakes.

As far as cowardice, the show interviewed somebody who was on the Bataan Death March, who felt abandoned, and it interviewed somebody who wondered why we left 10s of thousands of Americans to be captured while MacArthur escaped. That's how those people felt back in 1942 - they weren't asked "how'd you feel in 1945".

If you make the distinction, the show becomes a bit more meaningful.

[RightWingRadio]

So far, I prefer "Victory at Sea" as a documentary on the war without all of this PC multicultural diversity crap Burns is pushing.

Just jumped in from another thread. Glad to hear I'm not the only one who thinks Burns is shoving "thought" down our throat. This is a 2007 viewpoint and attempt to revise 1940 America. Period. It has nothing to do with history and is camouflaged by unreleased footage is all.