WW2 had two sides. Why do we never talk about the other one...

[Toriver]

Hollywood has a good amount of Jews living there, both past and present.
A good amount of "the opposite perspective" isn't portrayed in movies, historical films, war films, etc.
The Jews villain Germany. They also have this long-lasting belief that the world hates them. Unfortunately though, given the philosophy of their religious nature and a sense of self-catering it's no wonder they are often seen with such antipathy.
If a war film ever came out, being produced in Hollywood in American soil, the Jewish leaders would have a fit with the word "anti-semetic" because they believe their ancestry is more important than the human race as a whole.

They see themselves as the only people who died in the last Great War. Bottom Line.

No...I do not hate Jews, nor am I an anti-semite. But it disturbs me how greatly they care only about their own, refuse to respect the past, and move on and accept warfare as that. Warfare.

And can someone please, stop saying "The Germans were forced to...". They were defending their damn country regardless if they were the aggressor or not.

WAIT a minute, here. I don't think you quite understand the difference between WWII itself and the Holocaust. The Holocaust would have happened whether or not WWII took place or not. Hitler's obsessive hatred of the Jewish race was seperate from his ambitions to take over Europe. The seeds of the Holocaust were sown before Hitler began getting aggressive against his neighbors. If the Jews who were (relatively) lucky enough to end up in work camps instead of straight-up death camps weren't making munitions and other supplies for soldiers, they would have probably ended up making other things.

And the Holocaust is to date the largest genocide operation the world has ever known, and remembrance of it is a stark reminder to us never to let such a thing happen again. What they went through was absolutely horrible. Further, in the case of WWII, they were civilians, absolutely innocent of everything, and if Hitler didn't have such a racist, anti-Semitic agenda, maybe some of them would have also fought for Germany. There was no justifiable reason at all for Hitler to do what he did, and the Jewish people have no historical obligation at all to accept that anyone forget what happened to them, as it was one of the most heinous acts perpetrated against innocents by any ruler throughout history.

That said, I can see how sometimes this can get carried away into Jewish leaders getting upset at any attempts to humanize German soldiers fighting a battle completely unrelated to what was going on with the Jews. The extent of what was going on in the Holocaust wasn't even known to many on the Allied side until they started invading German territory in 1944 and seeing it firsthand. To put it bluntly, the only ones fighting in the war for whom the fate of the Jews was high on the agenda were the Nazi leaders, and that was a bad fate. While ordinary German soldiers were likely vaguely aware of what was going on (it was hard to ignore), killing the Allied soldier then killing Rosenblat the local kosher butcher wasn't first on their mind. They had families and homes like any other soldier on the battlefield, and the actions of their commanders shouldn't put a stain on their own lives and jobs keeping their families safe. But don't suggest that the average Jewish person or rabbi today wouldn't know that and understand that too.

Basically, don't link the two events (WWII and the Holocaust) when one would have likely happened independently of the other. I think the Jewish leaders would know that too and today wouldn't have too much of a problem portraying average German soldiers as human.

 

[Kurokami]

I was wondering today about a history essay question I got about the ethical standards when the decision to drop the nuke was made. I looked through my notes and my teachings and it tended to steer toward dropping the nukes as a good solution. This puzzled me and I actually argued the other way but that isnt what this thread is about. I wondered what they taught japanese students about Hiroshima and Nagaski. What in gods name do you say to those kids.

"Two cities were vaporised but we totally deserved it, you can't really be sad, we were the bad guys"
"Two cities were vaporised but we were actually in the right, they were the bad guys, now you can feel sorry for them"

I cant really see either of these being acceptable... I dont know what I'd say.

Hell I know sins of the father and such is a pretty poor way to look at things but in this case I have no idea how Germans and the other ex axis powers feel about the war or how they can talk about it without being in the wrong in some way, either not being able to feel pity or sadness for their fallen ancestors or take pride in anything they did (armed service or other wise) or seeming like they sympathised with the whole idea of the axis powers. It seems like catch 22 here, they can't really have an opinion that won't be viewed as horrific or will force them to see their family with a blackened past.

TLDR:

What are you taught about that era? How do you feel people should talk about the other side when teaching or in general conversation? Is it fair to dehumanize old enemies? How would you feel if you belonged to a nation once branded "enemy" and in the wrong regardless of peoples personal beliefs? Whats your opinion on the whole thing?

People should be taught "this what happened" not bad guys and good guys. Personally I view the bombings as a good thing, not because I approve of killing people, not because I think it was necessary to end the war, but because it brought about the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction, where I live we call that peace... For now.

Hollywood has a good amount of Jews living there, both past and present.
A good amount of "the opposite perspective" isn't portrayed in movies, historical films, war films, etc.
The Jews villain Germany. They also have this long-lasting belief that the world hates them. Unfortunately though, given the philosophy of their religious nature and a sense of self-catering it's no wonder they are often seen with such antipathy.
If a war film ever came out, being produced in Hollywood in American soil, the Jewish leaders would have a fit with the word "anti-semetic" because they believe their ancestry is more important than the human race as a whole.

They see themselves as the only people who died in the last Great War. Bottom Line.

No...I do not hate Jews, nor am I an anti-semite. But it disturbs me how greatly they care only about their own, refuse to respect the past, and move on and accept warfare as that. Warfare.

And can someone please, stop saying "The Germans were forced to...". They were defending their damn country regardless if they were the aggressor or not.

Considering you keep lumping all jews into an extremely negative stereotype you've got built up in your head is it so outrageous to think that you hate jews?

I got tackled walking on the street because I wore a Kipa one day and I'm not even religious. Is it so outrageous for me to assume that some people hate Jews? That's what most believe and rightfully so. Very little believe badly of non-Jews, perhaps they tend to trust Jewish people more so than others, but all things considered that's hardly a strange pair of shoes to find yourself in.

Don't assume you know how Jews think, it's really not that different from you...

Actually considering what you wrote, perhaps that's not a good example.

=]

 

[Danzaivar]

I was wondering today about a history essay question I got about the ethical standards when the decision to drop the nuke was made. I looked through my notes and my teachings and it tended to steer toward dropping the nukes as a good solution. This puzzled me and I actually argued the other way but that isnt what this thread is about. I wondered what they taught japanese students about Hiroshima and Nagaski. What in gods name do you say to those kids.

"Two cities were vaporised but we totally deserved it, you can't really be sad, we were the bad guys"
"Two cities were vaporised but we were actually in the right, they were the bad guys, now you can feel sorry for them"

I cant really see either of these being acceptable... I dont know what I'd say.

Hell I know sins of the father and such is a pretty poor way to look at things but in this case I have no idea how Germans and the other ex axis powers feel about the war or how they can talk about it without being in the wrong in some way, either not being able to feel pity or sadness for their fallen ancestors or take pride in anything they did (armed service or other wise) or seeming like they sympathised with the whole idea of the axis powers. It seems like catch 22 here, they can't really have an opinion that won't be viewed as horrific or will force them to see their family with a blackened past.

TLDR:

What are you taught about that era? How do you feel people should talk about the other side when teaching or in general conversation? Is it fair to dehumanize old enemies? How would you feel if you belonged to a nation once branded "enemy" and in the wrong regardless of peoples personal beliefs? Whats your opinion on the whole thing?

I'd wager it's taught the way us Brits learn about the British Empire and some of the atrocities commited: They're just given the cold facts about the situation and are reminded that the country was totally different back then.

So rather than :

"Two cities were vaporised but we totally deserved it, you can't really be sad, we were the bad guys"
"Two cities were vaporised but we were actually in the right, they were the bad guys, now you can feel sorry for them"

It'd be "Two cities were vaporised, these are the reasons why...". And just let the kids decide for themselves how to view it.

 

[Hiraeth]

From what I've heard from Japanese friends, they don't mention WW2 at all, really, in Japan, in schools. It's not taught. They don't bring it up. Japanese tourists have come to Australia and been totally shocked to learn that Japanese submarines were ever in that area. And Japanese war veterans don't discuss what happened with their families, or in public.

It's like a black ink spot on a white dress that nobody acknowledges, because it's more polite to say nothing.

How about, I don't know, the BOMBING OF DARWIN. Seriously the best part about this post is that you've failed to mention direct attacks on Australian shores in favour of talking about the submarines that entered Sydney Harbour, either because you don't know about them or they've slipped your mind. If it is just that you've forgotten, I'm sorry for jumping at you, but there's a huge amount of people who didn't even know. The reason? It was covered up and played down by the Australian government because they didn't want to scare people. It's still not really taught in southern schools today. I know Aussie students that have only heard about the bombings because of the film Australia, and I've met others who didn't see that, and thus still didn't know. The Japanese government isn't the only one that's been manipulating people's memory of history. I mean more than 200 people were killed in Japanese air raids during WWII, and there are people in Australia who just don't know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Darwin

 

[Timmey]

Two sides?

Pretty sure there is a whole many more than that.

Great contribution, there were two main 'sides' really, Allied and Axis powers.

OT: I think that the Americans dropping the bombs was an unavoidable action that was brought about to end the war as soon as possible. If they hadn't dropped them and instead decided to invade and fight on without them the death toll would have been huge on both sides. As horrid as it seems to merely make it a numbers game 200,000-250,000 is only minor compared to the millions that would have died from a full scale invasion and consequential land war.

 

[ultrachicken]

In elementary school, I was taught that the bombs were wrong. Later on, in other WW2 classes, instead of a teacher objectively telling us whether it was right or wrong, they had the class discuss the issue, and never gave a definite answer.

The latter option is essentially the perfect one, I think. It allows the kids to formulate their own opinions based on the facts given to them.

 

[fgdfgdgd]

Eh, my history teacher was pretty non-biased when we learned about it all, explaining the reasoning and that more than likely most of the soldiers didn't believe in the cause but fought for their countries reguardless.

 

[badgersprite]

From what I've heard from Japanese friends, they don't mention WW2 at all, really, in Japan, in schools. It's not taught. They don't bring it up. Japanese tourists have come to Australia and been totally shocked to learn that Japanese submarines were ever in that area. And Japanese war veterans don't discuss what happened with their families, or in public.

It's like a black ink spot on a white dress that nobody acknowledges, because it's more polite to say nothing.

How about, I don't know, the BOMBING OF DARWIN. Seriously the best part about this post is that you've failed to mention direct attacks on Australian shores in favour of talking about the submarines that entered Sydney Harbour, either because you don't know about them or they've slipped your mind. If it is just that you've forgotten, I'm sorry for jumping at you, but there's a huge amount of people who didn't even know. The reason? It was covered up and played down by the Australian government because they didn't want to scare people. It's still not really taught in southern schools today. I know Aussie students that have only heard about the bombings because of the film Australia, and I've met others who didn't see that, and thus still didn't know. The Japanese government isn't the only one that's been manipulating people's memory of history. I mean more than 200 people were killed in Japanese air raids during WWII, and there are people in Australia who just don't know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Darwin

Lol wut?

Of course I know about the bombings of Darwin, dude. But I don't live in Darwin. Hence I haven't met any Japanese people in Darwin. And, thereby, I don't meet Japanese people in Darwin learning about the bombings of Darwin for the first time. I can only interact with people where I live. Hence, all the personal stories I know tend to involve shit that went down on the East Coast.

In fact, I'm actually referencing a friend who came from Japan that I went to school with, who basically found out that Japan had ever been in Australian waters by reading about it on a plaque on a sea view.

JFC. I don't mention one thing (which I thought was self-explanatory) in a short post and you jump down my throat about it. Take a chill pill.

 

[tris4992]

I just say that Kitakyushu is the luckiest city in the world.

I don't really understand and a short search on google didn't clarify.
Care to elaborate ?

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

What I know about it was, that Japan would never have surrenedered as it is the ultimate disgrace, if the US had made it to mainland Japan, the Empire would have armed women and children with anything from guns to katanas to sticks and made them fight.
Dropping the bombs saved countless lives on both sides, but at a horrible, horrible cost.

It was completely wrong from a moral standpoint, but Japan would never surrender and the US was too close to main Japan to give up, there would have been no negotiations had the US not scared the abosolute shit out of them.

 

[binvjoh]

In Sweden we recognize the fact that we ended up helping both sides a bit. No teacher I've had has ever tried to paint what we did right or wrong but instead they've given us facts and we've had to make our own judgement.

 

[Hiraeth]

From what I've heard from Japanese friends, they don't mention WW2 at all, really, in Japan, in schools. It's not taught. They don't bring it up. Japanese tourists have come to Australia and been totally shocked to learn that Japanese submarines were ever in that area. And Japanese war veterans don't discuss what happened with their families, or in public.

It's like a black ink spot on a white dress that nobody acknowledges, because it's more polite to say nothing.

How about, I don't know, the BOMBING OF DARWIN. Seriously the best part about this post is that you've failed to mention direct attacks on Australian shores in favour of talking about the submarines that entered Sydney Harbour, either because you don't know about them or they've slipped your mind. If it is just that you've forgotten, I'm sorry for jumping at you, but there's a huge amount of people who didn't even know. The reason? It was covered up and played down by the Australian government because they didn't want to scare people. It's still not really taught in southern schools today. I know Aussie students that have only heard about the bombings because of the film Australia, and I've met others who didn't see that, and thus still didn't know. The Japanese government isn't the only one that's been manipulating people's memory of history. I mean more than 200 people were killed in Japanese air raids during WWII, and there are people in Australia who just don't know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Darwin

Lol wut?

Of course I know about the bombings of Darwin, dude. But I don't live in Darwin. Hence I haven't met any Japanese people in Darwin. And, thereby, I don't meet Japanese people in Darwin learning about the bombings of Darwin for the first time. I can only interact with people where I live. Hence, all the personal stories I know tend to involve shit that went down on the East Coast.

In fact, I'm actually referencing a friend who came from Japan that I went to school with, who basically found out that Japan had ever been in Australian waters by reading about it on a plaque on a sea view.

JFC. I don't mention one thing (which I thought was self-explanatory) in a short post and you jump down my throat about it. Take a chill pill.

I did say 'If it is just that you've forgotten, I'm sorry for jumping at you, but there's a huge amount of people who didn't even know', which I assume would carry over to 'sorry that you didn't deem it worthy of mention'. I don't think it's too much to ask that people know about things that don't occur where they live. Sorry if I came on too strong, but I am genuinely astounded by the fact that some people (not you), have managed not to hear about the bombing of Darwin. Sorry it came across as attacking you specifically, but you made no mention of having actually heard that Darwin had been bombed, and yet you mentioned that Japanese submarines had entered Australian waters like that was a big thing. I made assumptions based on what you'd said, and you didn't exactly spell out the whole story, you just said that before coming to Australia, Japanese students didn't realize that submarines had entered Sydney harbour. They also don't hear about the bombing of Darwin, which, considering that people actually died, is (in my opinion) slightly more significant than a submarine presence in Australian waters. Then again, I'm from Darwin originally, so clearly I'm biased towards things that happened in my own region. Sorry if I came off as argumentative, however I'm still genuinely astonished that people don't know what happened (again, only directed towards you because what you said wasn't entirely clear to me).

In relation to that, two stories of my own:

1) A Japanese exchange student stayed with my family in Darwin and when they were going to take him to a museum he found out about the bombing of Darwin for the first time.
2) In a tutorial at my uni, I brought up the bombing of Darwin in relation to the subject of memory, and the way in which it is manipulated for purposes of nationalism. One of the students in the class had never heard about it before then, another had only heard about it that year, others only knew about it because of 'Australia'.

Both the Australian and Japanese governments had filtered their country's memory of an event, although it happened at different times, it was done for what I consider to be similar reasons - the Australians were attempting to maintain morale in wartime, the Japanese are attempting to rewrite their unfavourable history. In both cases, the actual events are obscured because of a government agenda. I do think the Japanese case is more troubling considering that it's not just the one event that they're writing out of history, but the entire war, but I doubt any government is entirely innocent of similar acts.

Again, sorry for coming across as overly argumentative, but I just get generally annoyed at this, and that ended up coming across as being mostly directed at you. Even so, you can keep your chill pill.

 

[Unknower]

In Finland, it's taught that Winter War was a defensive war against Soviet aggression and that the Continuation War was a war to regain the lost territories and that during the Continuation War, Finland was just co-belligerent with Germany, not a member of the Axis countries, as Finland never signed the Tripartite Pact.

 

[Lord Monocle Von Banworthy]

The problem lies with the fact that they chose civilian cities, not high priority military targets.

Dude, our Peace Museum in Hiroshima doesn't even try to claim that. It clearly outlines Hiroshima's military importance as a military headquarters, transshipping point, depot and training ground. Nagasaki was home to one of the biggest shipyards and naval headquarters in Japan. Both were as close as you can get to purely military targets when you talk about using something as destructive as a nuclear weapon on something with the population density of Japan. We're not all spread out like the US or Canada where you could blow up say, Area 51 in the middle of the empty desert and there's not a city for hundreds of kilometers.

 

[BlueberryMUNCH]

We've been taught to be good historians and got taught both sides of the coin, basically.

I had to write about the positives, and the negatives, of the Nazi regime, and had to give a balanced argument.

Throughout my Grammar School life I've kinda learned to, when appropriate, desensitise myself and just become a good, unbiased historian.

Doesn't mean I recognise the terrible things that happened, but I just had to distance myself from them to get good grades haha.

 

[cybran]

History is written by the winners, if we learned from both sides instead of one(ex: ACW) The world could have been better. Instead of learning why they fought in the first place we just put they were bad.(ex: ACW)

If I learned one thing from CoD MW2 it is that history is written by the victors =P

 

[Kenko]

The germans can take pride in their fallen ancestors. The vast majority of the german army were fighting to for their home and fatherland like everyone else did. Only assholes were the real nazi's. The SS, Gestapo and so on. They pretty much coerced germany into war. Everyday germans didnt really have much choice but either shut up and do as they say or get shot like the rest.