Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eastwood attacks Japan war myths
The Observer (U.K.) ^ | 05/28/06 | Justin McCurry

Posted on 05/27/2006 7:18:26 PM PDT by Pokey78

Two new movies based on a bloody 1945 battle are stirring up memories and forcing both sides to re-examine their history


More than 60 years after it became one of the bloodiest battlefields of the Second World War, Iwo Jima's tragic history retains the power to overwhelm. As his plane prepared to land on the isolated Japanese island last month, the actor Ken Watanabe found he could not hold back the tears. Accompanying Watanabe, who shot to stardom playing a feudal warlord opposite Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai, was another hard man of Hollywood whose time on Iwo Jima would lead to something of a professional epiphany.

When Clint Eastwood's two films about Iwo Jima, one of the darkest periods of the Pacific War, reach cinemas this year, audiences could be excused for forgetting the man behind them was once the trigger-happy Dirty Harry.

The 75-year-old director has promised Flags Of Our Fathers and Red Sun, Black Sand will attempt to show for the first time the suffering of both sides during 36 days of fighting in early 1945 that turned the island into a flattened wasteland.

(Excerpt) Read more at observer.guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Japan; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fivemarinesonesailor; flagraising; flagsofourfathers; iwojima; marinecorps; marines; mtsuribachi; redsunblacksand; threeflagraisers; usmc; wwii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-336 last
To: Protagoras

Overall he's OK although he has some of the problems you might expect at his age. Ironically, given his eyesight then and the way he could shoot, he's essentially blind now. Has been to several D-Day events with his daughter though.


321 posted on 06/02/2006 7:43:59 AM PDT by Gone GF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: Gone GF

Thanks for the update.


322 posted on 06/02/2006 7:48:15 AM PDT by Protagoras ("A real decision is measured by the fact that you have taken a new action"... Tony Robbins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter

My Apologies! I never meant to insinuate that we had to be "culturally sensitive" with reagrds to Japan and the Second World War; only that we make the mistake of believing they operated on the same wavelength that we do (or did at the time). What would have made good, political, tactical or strategic sense to a Westerner in the years 41-45 would not be viewed in the same way by most Japanese of the same period.

As an example, I submit that Japan went to war under the impression that they had been forced to. This feeling is advanced by a combination of factors: Japanese racial chauvanism, economics, notions of national pride, the shame principle and a host of other factors (like American sanctions).

No Western leadership (short of Nazi Germany) would have thought it necessary (or practicable) to incite an aggressive war against three other powers (USA, Britain, Holland) as a pre-requisite for finishing a war in CHINA (and which was obviously unwinnable to anyone with unprejudiced eye). In the Japanese mindset, the war in China was not being lost because the Japanese were rotten soldiers or the Chinese good ones; it was not being won because China was receiving Western aid that enabled them to hold out. This "aid" was keeping Japan from fufilling it's national destiny in China.

The Japanese came to the conclusion that once this aid was removed, China would either quickly crumble militarily or bow to the inevitable and join hands politically with Japan. The Japanese never intended to RULE China proper, per se, merely to pull the strings and reap the benefits. So long as western influences (missionary, economic, political, military) existed, this plan could never be successful.

In this reagrd, the attack on Pearl Harbor (and simultaneous assaults elsewhere) was intended to keep the Americans at bay (the Japanese believed that in the name of Anglo-Saxon unity, the US would go to war to save the British Empire) while Japan both closed the doors by which China received this aid (The railway from Hanoi, and the Burma Road), and simultaneously swipe the resources in the South that would allow Japan to complete the war in China free of western interference (and despite the Western sanctions imposed upon Japan). In any event, the Japanese never even thought of their actions as "conquering China" but rather as "liberating" China from western imperialism and guiding it forward under "enlightened" Japanese tutelage.

This is the guiding principle behind the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere"; Japan will liberate the Asians from the West, and guide them into the future in a spirit of Pan-Asian brotherhood (as befits a "master race"). The upside is that while all of Asia would benefit from this scheme, Japan proper would be center of this new universe. The Japanese would be worshiped by grateful Asians and Japanese business would prosper on a constant stream of cheap raw materials and ready-made markets for it's products.

And Japan would be free to build this world free (it thought) from Western interference. It's why the Japanese ALWAYS held out the hope that once armed resistance had proven futile, that the west would negotiate; they fervently believed the scheme was possible. But they had discounted the history of Western culture, particularly those aspects concerned with economic self-interest and warfare.

Now, does this make sense to you? In the light of the experience of World War II (and Western notions of logic and propriety), heck no. But to the Japanese of the day, it was a sensible compromise to a myriad of complex problems which Japan found itself up against.


323 posted on 06/02/2006 5:20:10 PM PDT by Wombat101 (Islam: Turning everything it touches to Shi'ite since 632 AD...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: indcons; Pharmboy
Ping!
324 posted on 06/03/2006 4:14:47 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe

>>>Some generations are required to kill the totalitarians in order to hand liberty down to the next generation<<<

Short and simple bump!


325 posted on 06/03/2006 4:19:18 PM PDT by investigateworld (Abortion stops a beating heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Americans are not allowed to compete. They cannot 'win' under any circumstances in the coming global society. American exceptionalism must be reduced to the ordinary, in the minds of the internationalists, who appear to have a firm hold on our government and our society. Otherwise the other ordinary countries will complain.

This bears repeating. Over and over.

326 posted on 08/16/2006 11:21:17 AM PDT by Catholic Canadian (Formerly Ashamed Canadian - thank you Stephen Harper!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

As for Clint Eastwood. He's my all time hero. I will reserve judgement until I see the film. That said, I don't agree that in Million Dollar Baby, that Clint 'endorsed' eutanasia. I think he presented it as an issue and did not clearly land on either the for or against side of the issue.


327 posted on 08/16/2006 11:23:23 AM PDT by Catholic Canadian (Formerly Ashamed Canadian - thank you Stephen Harper!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I think the "controversy" is that this particular photo was posed, although there was a photo beforehand that was not.


328 posted on 08/16/2006 11:24:55 AM PDT by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Maybe he has Alzheimer's or something, because this seems very strange coming from him. I was disgusted by his pro-euthanasia position in "Million Dollar Baby" but this is deplorable. We were only fighting Japan because they attacked us.

I think we are born liberals, once we can process information we become conservatives, and as we age and get into our latter years we move back to being more liberal as we feel weaker and more vulnerable.

329 posted on 08/16/2006 11:29:13 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: longfellow
let's not forget the Manhatten Death March.

The what??? ;)


330 posted on 08/16/2006 11:37:45 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("When the government is invasive, the people are wanting." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
I think the "controversy" is that this particular photo was posed, although there was a photo beforehand that was not.

Several people told me that about 3 months ago. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your effort,it's just that I thought this thread had been consigned to the dust bin of history.

It lives!

331 posted on 08/16/2006 11:39:36 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

My Father served in WWII on the U.S.S. Mississippi which was hit twice by Kamikazes, with my Dad’s close friend being killed in one of those attacks. Will Eastwood portray the Japanese soldiers as being so desperate to kill Americans that they would sacrifice their selves? Much like the terrorist today.


332 posted on 08/16/2006 11:40:26 AM PDT by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I hate it when threads are like that. Sorry.


333 posted on 08/16/2006 11:48:15 AM PDT by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
I think the "controversy" is that this particular photo was posed, although there was a photo beforehand that was not.

Not so. The famous Rosenthal photo was of a "second" flag raising (a much larger flag than the first) on the orders of the Fleet Admiral. He wanted a flag large enough for all the men on ships and on shore would be able to see. There was no posing and in fact, Rosenthal didn't even have the opportunity to frame the shot in his view finder. He had his back turned and when he turned around the men began raising the flag and he quickly fired off a frame from his hip and got very lucky. He never even saw the results until months later.

334 posted on 08/16/2006 11:56:55 AM PDT by Ditto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: Catholic Canadian; All
Japanese Trailer online
335 posted on 08/16/2006 11:58:53 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl

Thanks man.

336 posted on 08/16/2006 12:44:45 PM PDT by Catholic Canadian (Formerly Ashamed Canadian - thank you Stephen Harper!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-336 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson