Olympics

AdmiralAK

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
The first olympics I remember were the 1992 olympics in spain. I remember watching them on TV when I was living in Greece. Back then, as a 12 year old boy I did not care much. After I moved back to the states in 94, and essentially became an adolescent, taking charge of my own future and forming my own opinions of the world I have watched these games.

Each time I see them I get moved. I don't know how other Greeks feel, and I don't how others on the board feel about them, but for one thing I am damn proud to be of greek heritage. When I see the greek flag coming out with teh greek delegation, when I hear the anthem, when I see the olympic flame I get chills down my spine.

I also feel the same way about being an american, I am damn proud that Salt Lake City is this year's host city. I was moved then the American flag was brought out, even though torn, burned and defaced by the events of 9/11, it is still as majestic as ever and it still symbolizes what it is to be an american, furthermore it symbolized the endurance that we have as a people and as a nation.


I really like the Olympics, not just for the sport aspect of it, and the fact that it provides great entertainment, but also for the greater fact that it symbolizes the unity of all peoples on this earth, we are all flesh and blood and in a eutopian version of reality we would live in peace and co-existance, something which isn't true today, and something which became horribly obvious to all americans alike on the wake of 9/11.


Having said all this I have been pissed off at the I.O.C., at some people's arrogance, and a few things that happen during the olympics in general and I wanted to lay it on the table (yes it is ranting time)


1) First of all, exactly WHY THE F(udge) is French used for introducing what is happening and then Enligsh?! Of ALL the languages in the world WHY FRENCH ????? If ANY language is to be used side by side to the defacto "international" language (english) it should be GREEK! Am I missing something here ???


2) While we are on the subject of french, I cannot understand the sheer arrogance of the French, and the I.O.C. in general. I have been made aware of the fact that some IOC official wanted no "pro american" chants (i.e. rooting for the home team) because we would be perceived as arrogant... huh ?! (I dont have the actual articles to this but I will try to find them). THey also were opposed to some sort of tribute to the fallen of 9/11. What kind of their business is this ??? (I am aware that not all french are arrogant, so no flames please).

3) TV coverage of teh olympics. This is a multi issue topic which I will do all in one paragraph... (a) -- Why not have better TV coverage ? More neutral, sponsors are footing the bill so why don't you show more of teh competitions ? (b) -- "presenters" like Katie Currick which evidently have no intelectual spark in them making dumbass comments while this great ceremony was taking place (it was a trully marvelous ceremony--kudos to SLC). These people dont belong there! They are jsut pretty faces on TV to read the news to you!


4) Finally MY BIGGEST pet peeve of them all! The comments made by everyone about Greece's readyness for the 2004 olympics. I have heard enough of this BS. Seriously! I too have my criticisms about the speed at which progress is made in greece for the summer games, but come on already! What the heck gives others the right to criticize like that! I have heard the phrase "If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all" and this applies here! Better yet, you have criticisms ? You've got problems ?? Why don't you frikkin come and give a hand and do something about it if you want to open up your big fat mounth and say something! :mad:




Well... those are my thoughts for now, just wanted to share my excitement, as well as my rants on the issue.




Admiral
 
I know this is problably not as deep as a response as you would like, and it really doesn't answer any of your questions, but I wan to add something else....

What was up with the "show"? I liked the parade, the orchestra was cool, but all of the choreographed dancing and the wagons and the square dancing just didn't seem to be interesting at all. I just wanted to see the flame go up.

As far as shows go, I liked lilihamer the best, with sydney coming in second. This is problably because I like the winter olympics more.
 
I almost need to thank you for saying that Lillehammer OL was good Matrix. It's cool to see that even norvegians can make something good that people remember.
 
It's a conspiracy!

Just kidding, I enjoy the Olympics. I really don't get all involved but it is fun to watch and root for your country (go USA). However, I am a bit miffed that Scrubs won't be on again for like two weeks. Two weeks!!
 
posted by testuser
Certain countries either boycott (USA, USSR) or are banned (Afghanistan is the latest)
Click to expand...

Funny, when you think about it, both of those examples had to do with Afghanistan. The US boycotted the Moscow games because of the invasion of Afghanistan, and then the Soviets boycotted the Los Angeles games because of the US boycott four years earlier.

posted by Admiral
The comments made by everyone about Greece's readyness for the 2004 olympics.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't take it to seriously, Montreal wasn't ready in 1976, how many people remember that (I mean besides me that is)?
 
OK, first off let me say that I know some of you are going to probably be very pissed with what I am going to say here. I want anyone reading this post to know that I am not out to degrade or offend anyone; this is just my opinion.

With that said, I have to say that it is not the French that are arrogant. It is the Americans that are arrogant. I am an American, too, but I think all of this nationalism and patriotism stuff that we have gotten into is simply plain pathetic. We Americans think we're all high and mighty and above everyone else, and as such we think that nothing can befall our country.. until something like 9/11 happens. Rest assured, I am very sorry that 3000 people died in the attacks, and am very angry about the hijackers who did this, but that doesn't mean that we should remind everybody at every chance we get what "tragedy" has befallen our nation. It is damned arrogant to bring the "torn and tattered" flag from the WTC towers to every little event, like the SuperBowl, or the Olympic Games. What's next, the World Cup? I will seriously be sick to my stomach if I see that ragged flag "flying" when the U.S. plays soccer.

It's not the fact that we have a flag flying that pisses me off; some nationalism is justified. But does Japan fly any irradiated flag from the time that we bombed Hiroshima? Do the English fly any torn or tattered flag from the time that they fought Germany? Hell no. And if an attack that killed only 3000 people warrants one flag to be displayed everywhere we go, certainly a bombing that killed hundreds of thousands of people would warrant hundreds of "special" flags flying at every event since that bombing decades ago. We Americans are totally blowing the 9/11 attacks out of proportion, and therein is where I think we are arrogant. Again, let me make clear that I am very sympathetic to the families of the victims, but I think that there are some events that are just a little teensy-weensy more tragic :)rolleyes: ) than 9/11 (Holocaust, anyone?).

And AdmiralAK, about your first complaint: seriously you don't have to get mad about using French at the Olympics. Do you have something against the French? Did the French do some horrible tragedy like 9/11 against you? Or are you just blowing all of the stereotypes of the French out of proportion like we Americans do for 9/11? Seriously, maybe you could simply ask WHY we do it in French rather than Greek, instead of mouthing off saying (and I quote), "First of all, exactly WHY THE F(udge) is French used for introducing what is happening and then Enligsh?! Of ALL the languages in the world WHY FRENCH ????"
It's a little arrogant and rude to think that Greek should be used instead of any other language. I believe the reason that we use French relates to the fact that French is the traditional language for diplomatic usage (but is rapidly being replaced by English); I don't know. But, would you mind giving a little more respect to the French?

Oh, and next time we give a tribute to 9/11, lets give a tribute to all people who have died in such tragedies, not just Americans. Frankly, I could care less about a 9/11 tribute, unless we honor all people who have died for reasons not worth dying for.

When will I be proud to be an American? When we Americans give one final tribute to 9/11, and let the victims rest in peace, leaving the recounting of the events to the history books. I will be proud when we realize that we have a President who is relying on the nationalism to keep his approval rating up. I will be proud to be an American when we allow other nations to be proud of their nationalities, instead of smothering them with our rampant patriotism.
 
That is quite interesting simX, but a few questions if I may?

(1) You seem to have some very strong issues about the September 11th events. It is not uncommon for people who are trying to heal to want to share their feelings with others. I can understand that for the unfeeling, this may seem at nauseum, but bite the bullet and deal with it.

(2) Who has forgotten any of these other tragedies? I would point out that Japan does not even use the same flag that they did during the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But lets say that there was a major event hosted by England following the end of the war in Europe, would you begrudge them the chance to show national pride by flying such a flag? Here is the problem with your comments, because we have a louder collective voice than other nations you feel we should individually show less pride in ourselves. Why? Why should any nation, big or small, be ask to think less of themselves? Now I don't think we should show our pride at the expense of others, but what you seem to be asking is extreme at best.

(3) And why can't you see why Admiral would want Greek to be used? Since when is the Olympic flame started in France? And yes the I.O.C. of late has been very poor guardians of the Olympic ideals which the games where originally designed to bring back. Who do you think has been selling broadcast rights to the US networks for coverage? If the coverage is TOO commercial, don't blame the US networks, blame the I.O.C. for selling the rights in the first place. Admiral is right, host nations language or Greek first and second, then any others (like French) after.

Frankly, I don't think you could be proud of being an American. My pride does not rise and fall based on small events (such as the term of a President or a national tragedy like Sept. 11th), it is based on our long term effect on the world (which in the absents of the US would either be over run by fascism or communism, in which case no one would be able to speak their opinion anyway) and the general nature of my fellow citizens. Do we have our short comings, yes. Can we be self absorbed, yes. Are we good people that the rest of the seem to come to when they are having problems, yes. No other world power has ever reached our current position without using imperial forces to do it. Can the French say what ever they want about us, yes (and they often do). Can any nation say what ever they want about us, yes. Are we still there for them when they need us, yes. For that I am very proud to be an American (though I would be even prouder if we had a different President, but hey we get to try again in a couple years).
 
I am not arrogant to think that greek should be the language used as the primary "introduction" language (instead of french). What have the french contributed to the olympics as an ideal? Absolutelly nothing, they just brought them back to life after the christian movement had killed them. You never see the olympic flame being generated ANYWHERE except greece, yet still one day you MIGHT think that france generates it because there is virtually no coverage of the flame lighting ceremony!

The only place I saw it was on a greek news channel. No foreign media covered this event, the
"ignition" if you will of these games.


I am against French being used for the simple fact that the language has been eclipsed in terms of international usage by english. French should not be the primary language used for the olympics, but because the IOC is dominated by snooty french-speaking "people" that is why they have French.


Another reason I think the French are arrogant is their whole stance on how WE as a nation conduct ourselves during the aftermath of 9/11, that the F(udge) gives them the right to dictate to us what to do? -- this is just a general issue

the IOC is arrogant for wanting us not to root for the home times, no chanting USA, no this no that! Arrogance!



As far as us, as americans being arrogant, hey I dont disagree with you, there are some people like that, but I have seen both sides, I have seen the arrogant euros up close and personal (and was one of them for quite some time) and I have seen the arrogant american, but never was one, because by that time I grew up, formed my own opinions, and became more "sophisticated" hopefully.

Nationalism to the extreme is bad, national pride to the extreme can also be bad. As an ancient greek philosopher said "pan metron ariston" (a.k.a. the golden mean). I see absolutely nothing wrong with us having a good dose of self esteem and feel proud to be who we are!


As for the flag, the flag is going to be put away somewhere, for the moment it makes us feel good, it brings us closer, and gives us a sense of unity, which is something we need cause our country spans a continent. Often californias dont assiociate with texans, or texans with Idahonians, or new yorkers, we are quite frankly worlds apart in our daily lives. We have ventured far from one another, and this 9/11 wake up call gave us the boost we needed to feel together as a people!



I dont know where you are coming from, but I smell PeeCee (political correctness) coming from your direction, either you, or what made you think this way.





Admiral
PS: another great debate topic :)
 
testuser: You make it seem like those lives at Hiroshima are valued less than the lives of the ones that died in 9/11. And it doesn't make a big fat piece of difference whether it was during peacetime or wartime. LIVES WERE ENDED. And there were MANY TIMES MORE lives ended at Hiroshima than at 9/11. Your post is the one that is insensitive because you think that the innocent people that died at 9/11 are worth more than those thousands that died at Hiroshima; innocent civilians were killed there, too, REGARDLESS of war or peacetime. You do not know what would have happened if we did not drop the bomb.

RacerX: I understand that people want to share their feelings with others. But why can't I share my wanting to get on with it? All I hear is 9/11 this, 9/11 that, 9/11 here, 9/11 there. There's new 9/11 classes at Stanford for examining what led up to 9/11. I can't get away from it. And that's all I want to do. Just the other day I heard on the radio a psychologist who was saying that Lord of the Rings came out after 9/11 because we were up for a dose of mythology due to the attacks. Can't I have my half-hour of Simpsons without hearing or talking about 9/11? That's part of MY healing; moving on with it.

I am not trying to say that we should individually have less pride in our country. But there's a point where it needs to stop. Do we have to make all of these people martyrs? If I was in the WTC tower, I wouldn't want people to be mourning my death for 5 months. Can't we have one national moment of silence for the WTC tragedy, and then let it rest in peace?

AdmiralAK: I understand that the Greeks invented the Olympics. But I still don't think that it's anything to get all angry over that French is used as the main language. You can't have the announcements in all languages, you know. So everyone can argue about which languages the announcements should be made in until their blue in the face and it's still not going to appease everyone: that's my point.
 
Wow. You guys got a lot to say. Thats past me, im a simple folk. All I have to say about the olympics is weeeeee. I dont really watch them all that much. I dont really get into the historical backround. I watch the opening ceremony, and see all the little "no-name" countries, bringing one representative. And pay extra special attention to who lights the big flame. (it was such a BIG secret) I think most of these guys use drugs any way, so its really not about the athletic abilities. It all comes down to who is the more popular country. Thats usually why the US comes out with the most medals. (and we use more drugs than all the other countries).

Thats my two cents. :)
 
testuser: You do not need to insult my intelligence. I have studied WWII and the dropping of the atom bomb. Maybe it did save lives. Maybe it didn't. You don't know that, because you don't have all-seeing-past-and-future glasses. And what I am saying is that that's [that you value the lives of 9/11 more] what I get from your comment; you try to devalue the lives lost because it was during wartime, and that it might have saved lives. The fact is that it killed many civilians. That's the point. In sheer numbers, there were more killed at Hiroshima than at 9/11.

Oh, and can you not count the Holocaust as "pure evil"? So if we were given Afghanistan, would that make up for the tragedy of 9/11, and would everything be fine? Is that what you're saying? That's what you're implying, at least what you put across.

And also, I have experienced deaths in my family. One was my father's father, and one was my great aunt. I cherished them both, and was very saddened when they died. But I did not go around, even 5 months after their deaths, reminding everybody that they died 5 months ago. I simply remembered them, and I still do; I am no longer mourning them.

testuser, like I said before, I wish that we could discuss this in a civil manner. I am still willing to do this, but you are making it hard for me. I am trying to voice my opinion, that I need to move on with the tragedy. It's my way of healing, and I am disappointed that you don't respect that.
 
posted by simX
testuser: You make it seem like those lives at Hiroshima are valued less than the lives of the ones that died in 9/11... Your post is the one that is insensitive because you think that the innocent people that died at 9/11 are worth more than those thousands that died at Hiroshima; innocent civilians were killed there, too, REGARDLESS of war or peacetime. You do not know what would have happened if we did not drop the bomb.
Click to expand...

You know, I read his post also, and I didn't get that their lives were any more or less important. And he is completely right in saying that lives where saved by the bombing. Japan was training every man, woman and child to fight the invasion. The Japanese people were told that we were going to rape their women and murder their children if we landed on their shores. Why do you think so many were willing to give their lives as Komakasi? My background isn't history, but I know the facts about the war in the Pacific and the facts that lead to the first, second (which you didn't mention, where the lives of Nagasaki less import to you?) and hopefully last time atomic weapons were used in war. Trying to shroud your insensitivity with a cloak of liberalism isn't going to mask it from any one who really cares.

RacerX: I understand that people want to share their feelings with others. But why can't I share my wanting to get on with it?...
Click to expand...

You can, but you yourself pointed out that what you were planing on saying was going to be unpopular. If you knew this before posting, why do you care what anyone post after that? I'm getting sick of it also, but then I also understand what people are going through. My mild inconvenience is a small price to pay for the healing of others.

I am not trying to say that we should individually have less pride in our country.
Click to expand...

But you sure sounded like it in your attack on national pride.

But there's a point where it needs to stop... If I was in the WTC tower, I wouldn't want people to be mourning my death for 5 months. Can't we have one national moment of silence for the WTC tragedy, and then let it rest in peace?
Click to expand...

Okay, why don't we do this: one day one mourning for each of the people who died in the events of Sept. 11, that would be almost 8 years, or maybe, because we didn't know any of them, we could do just one hour, that would be something over 115 days (which if we had started sometime after Sept. 11, we would still be mourning today).

Maybe you should re-read your posts. You argue about the importance of other great tragedies and the people lost in them as if they mean something to you, but you don't want this resent tragedy to cause you any inconvenience. So what is it? Are you so sensitive that we just can't comprehend it, or so self involved that you can handle missing you programing?

NOTE: As a side point, an event not too long ago did strike me as a misplacement of our collective priorities. It just so happened that a member of the Grateful Dead (sorry, I don't remember his name) died on the 50th anniversary of the dropping of the bomb on Nagasaki. PBS in San Diego ran a Grateful Dead concert over and over again for the entire day, replacing programing that included a documentary about what had happened that lead to the dropping of both bombs. Yes, I was a little unhappy (I stopped supporting PBS in San Diego after that) that the death of one man eclipsed that deaths of thousands.
 
Originally posted by RacerX
Okay, why don't we do this: one day one mourning for each of the people who died in the events of Sept. 11, that would be almost 8 years, or maybe, because we didn't know any of them, we could do just one hour, that would be something over 115 days (which if we had started sometime after Sept. 11, we would still be mourning today).
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Let's say 100000 people died as a direct result of the bombing of Hiroshima (that's even an underestimate, because there were many more who died as a result of radiation in the following years). One day for the mourning of each of these people would be 273 years. So yes, I'll mourn the 9/11 attacks until 2009 if you mourn the bombing of Hiroshima until 2218 (and I'm giving you a leeway of about 50 years, because this is the date from when the bomb was dropped).

OK, maybe I should stop with the Hiroshima bombing as an example, because probably it did save lives. So lets do this: one day for each person that died in the Holocaust... that's what, 3 million people to be very conservative... what would that be? 8219 years? So I'll mourn the deaths of 9/11 until 2009 if you mourn the deaths of the Holocaust until 10221, in which case we will have already had the Y10K bug. Does the state of Israel really compensate for 8000 years of mourning?

In either case, you would be dead before you finished mourning. I don't think I've overestimated the numbers here. But even if I have, you'd still be mourning these people in these big tragedies if I wanted you to mourn each person for one day.

Is it THAT HARD TO SEE what I'm getting at?

Maybe you should re-read your posts. You argue about the importance of other great tragedies and the people lost in them as if they mean something to you, but you don't want this resent tragedy to cause you any inconvenience. So what is it? Are you so sensitive that we just can't comprehend it, or so self involved that you can handle missing you programing?
Click to expand...

As I said above, I don't think it's that hard to see what I'm getting at. Maybe I'm one of the only people who think that we should move on; fine. But my argument is not insensitive.
 
So, is it me or did your response look like you didn't even read my post. The point of the matter is that this is here and now. When my grandfather died, I had a hard time moving on, it took me almost a year to get past it (almost as long as it took to watch him die). Your hurry to move on is insensitive, there is no way of spinning it other wise. I can tell you for a fact that the bombings of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki have had a larger effect in my life than in yours (unless a documentary about it interrupted the Simpsons one night). You can't expect anyone to take your completely false caring about the Holocaust and both Hiroshima and Nagasaki as being an excuse for not caring about the events of Sept. 11. You can't even seem to fake caring for those other events, so why bring them up? And if you are going to continue to, at least do a better job showing some feeling about them (they are your argument here after all) than you have up to now.
 
1st a small clarrification. i was born on an anniversary of nagasaki. Jerry Garcia died on my birthday. and i wish i had been watching pbs that day. i still miss Jerry. :(

now where to begin. i don't really agree with anyone here or disagree with anyone either. from where i sit, all have said some things that make sense and some that don't.

so i'll just start with the whole idea of healing. first of all, this idea of moving on is a particularly industrial development. Our times of facing grief have grown shorter and shorter. In rural parts of Greece (ironically enough), death rituals and mourning for the dead are carried out for five years after the passing. in the large cities of the world, we are often lucky if we get a week off after someone close dies. We see people on TV who insist they need to work thru it (literally go on working as if nothing had happened).
But who really knows how long it takes any particular person to heal from tragedy? And how can we know what it will take for us to heal? We all carry different things with us over our lives. some things that we have never really healed from. and the biggest reason for this is because we either chose or were forced to 'move on' before we had dealt with them fully. before we had come to understand and resolve them. and the biggest reason for wanting to 'move on'is fear of facing the truths behind the pain. it is easier to remain numb ( a state of supressing conflicting emotions) than to sort out all the things that might reveal pain.
I could start quoting grief theories here that would give empirical basis for this idea, but i'm not publishing a paper here. but i would ask everyone to take a moment to look inside yourselves and determine where your pain lies. perhaps it has nothing to do with the olympics or sept 11. chances are these things have only tapped into emotions you attempted to bury long before that. or perhaps you have been truly traumatized by the events of sept 11. and the fear that goes with it doesn't go away just because Bush is chasing "evildoers". Maybe wanting the world to return to normal is just another way to express a fear that it never will.
i don't think the world has ever been the same since nagasaki. and i think my parents dealt with their fears of that in different ways. but i don't think any of us can say that we have no reason to fear nuclear war. now we have terrorists who seem not to value human life. we are once again faced by a threat that we cannot control. and cannot predict when and how it will strike.

i will pause here. but i will end this with one thought. it seems too bad that this conversation is being held in this medium. we all know how easy it is to project one's own perceptions into the written words of others. normally we get around some of these limitations by using smilies. this converation is hardly suitable for smilies. and so we read what we fear we are going to read. if we were sitting around in a circle, we might be hearing and feeling more of what each person is expressing and trying to understand rather than attacking each other. :)
 
Originally posted by Ed Spruiell
it seems too bad that this conversation is being held in this medium. we all know how easy it is to project one's own perceptions into the written words of others. normally we get around some of these limitations by using smilies. this converation is hardly suitable for smilies. and so we read what we fear we are going to read. if we were sitting around in a circle, we might be hearing and feeling more of what each person is expressing and trying to understand rather than attacking each other. :)
Click to expand...

Okay, this has nothing to do with the topic, but Ed has pointed out something here that I find important in posting in a forum. One of the things that I do when I have time (and almost always when posting a long post) is have Euclid read my post back to me. Also I have Euclid read long post of others to me so that I can't read my own feelings into someone else's posts (I have seen threads where people have continued to fight on a topic that they actually had come to an agreement on simply because they assumed the subject of the other persons post). I don't know about other platforms, but as Mac users we have been given a number of apps that can read text to us (SimpleText, AppleWorks, TextEdit and WorldText) and we should really take full advantage of it.

Okay, this ends my plug for Apple's software. We now return you to our political discussion already in progress. :D
 
posted by my good Ed
1st a small clarrification. i was born on an anniversary of nagasaki. Jerry Garcia died on my birthday. and i wish i had been watching pbs that day. i still miss Jerry. :(
Click to expand...

I'm sorry I couldn't remember his name, I knew he was very important to a large number of people. My only problem with that day was the theory that those who forget the past are doomed to relive it, and the 50th anniversary of the last time an atomic weapon was used against someone seemed like the best time to get people to remember the past. :(

(and it didn't help that it was in the middle of pledge week and they were asking for money at the same time! :mad: )
 
Thanks, Ed. That was much needed. I agree that this would be much different in a group where we could discuss this face to face. I'm kind of emotional at this time, anyway, due to other things, so I think it's probably best that I probably stay out of this argument for a while.
 
and lest someone assume that i think jerry's one life was worth more than all those at nagasaki, i don't. i think nagasaki was one of the most horrendous events in the history of the world. matched only by the holocost and the inquisition. and yes, i think trueman could have been tried for a war crime for dropping that bomb. unfortunately victors rarely have to account for their actions.
But Jerry's death was very upsetting in real time to many people. People who needed to start memorializing right away. I helped design and distribute a memorial t shirt as part of my way of dealing with it. more than a man died that day. for many a way of life died with him. We all have our heroes. and when one of them dies, a part of us dies. and a part of them lives on inside us. Often it is not the physical closeness that determines the level of grief we experience, but the level of emotional closeness.

I find it hard to imagine that anyone who watched the events of 9/11 did not experience it at a deeply emotional level. and most of us don't like feeling that much pain. but the best thing to do is to acknowledge that pain and express it. don't worry about how it looks or what others might think. it is your pain, own it and share it. if others don't want to hear your pain, then listen to theirs until you find the common element. usually it will be fear. fear of the unknown and uncontrolable.
and make no mistake, we never cry for the dead. we cry for what we have lost. for the new emptyness that is within us and needs filling. and we don't usually fill it as quickly as we or the people around us would like. When any individual feels better, that is good. but they shouldn't cease to lack empathy for others who do not fill the voids as quickly as they did.

there are probably few left who cry for the people at nagasaki. there are many of us who still cry about the world we lost that day. because even though it was before i was born, the world has lived in the fear of another bomb like it ever since.
 
Unfortunately, if put in the same position as Truman (the death toll in the Philippines, the projected death toll of a full on invasion, the death toll of extended conventional bombing) I would have made the same choice. The war had to end, and the lives of the many out weighed the lives of the few. I would also point out that we did not completely destroy Japan the way the Germany was, which is why Japan recovered so quickly. A conventional invasion could very nearly have sent Japan back to the stone age (which in turn would have kept us from helping Europe recover by diverting aid). Truman did not do it because of Pearl Harbor, or what we found out the they were doing in China and Korea (which truly does make ones stomach turn), he did what was best given the situation at hand.

Make no mistake though, it was a horrific act that no one wished for (at least I hope no one would wish for). I made a conscience choice early on that my work would forever be so abstract, so theoretical that it could never be applied (for either good or bad uses). It may be harder to make a living, but it is easier to live with.

Just remember that it is always easier to judge someone when you are not the one who has to make the hard choices. Maybe Truman should have been tried, but I don't think it would have cleared his good name in the minds of many of those who could not stand in his shoes. The reality of what happened should not be thrown onto a pile of opinions that fit our personal doctrines. What happen goes so much further than just a simple judgmental statement, and not taking the time to ask the hard questions of why means that anyone of us (including an under educated world leader) could lead us down the same path once again (never underestimate your own role in the world).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top