Revisionist History-OT

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

darbycmcd
Posts: 400
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:47 am

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by darbycmcd »

CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Canoerebel »

ORIGINAL: Zorch
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've talked and typed way too much today. Waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy too much. I've irritated myself.
Cortisone cream is good for that. [:)]

Please, no more dangly-bit allusions.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Grfin Zeppelin
Posts: 1514
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Grfin Zeppelin »

ORIGINAL: darbymcd

CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
Dont forget to burn the books.

Image
User avatar
Orm
Posts: 27755
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 7:53 pm
Location: Sweden

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Orm »

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Dont forget to burn the books.
Oh, that has already begun. But that they do as silently as they can since here they fear public opinion.
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: darbymcd

CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
warspite1

So I ask again, where does it end and who, on this faux moral crusade to re-write our past, actually decides? What do you do about slave owners like George Washington? Why are Lee, Nelson, Columbus proposed as fair game if Washington isn't? Have you read some of Washington's comments on his slaves? Just try and follow this nonsense down its logical path (as logical as this gets - which isn't very) and see where we end up.

Still it will create lots of employment - think of all those street names, buildings, warships that need re-naming. That'll keep the map makers busy - and boy will Wikipedia need a lot of new contributors.

Problems that remain in society don't get fixed by re-writing history. They get fixed by confronting the past, recognising the journey and striving to get where we want to be.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Apollo11
Posts: 24811
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Apollo11 »

Hi all,
ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

Looks like you can add Christopher Columbus (mean to indigenous people) and Ulysses S. Grant (anti-Semite) to the list of "symbols of hate".

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/christopher-columbus-statue-new-york-city-could-be-considered-removal-n795316?cid=par-xfinity_20170823

Dear Lord... [:(]


Leo "Apollo11"
Image

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE
Amoral
Posts: 377
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:17 am

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Amoral »

It's a false dilemma to say the US had to either invade Japan or nuke Japan. Japan would have surrendered if offered even semi-reasonable terms.
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19692
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Amoral

It's a false dilemma to say the US had to either invade Japan or nuke Japan. Japan would have surrendered if offered even semi-reasonable terms.
What evidence is there for that? I just watched a documentary on the development and use of the atomic bomb which said that even after the second (Nagasaki) bomb the hardliners in the Japanese Cabinet wanted to fight to the death. They even wanted to defy the emperor's speech. There were just enough that wanted to obey the emperor to decide to surrender if the Allies would allow the emperor to remain head of state. Surrender was supposed to be unconditional but Truman accepted the emperor remaining condition and ended the war - the implication being that if he stuck to "unconditional surrender" the Japanese would have fought on. Even without the A-bomb air raids were devastating Japanese cities and killing tens of thousands. I don't see "ready to capitulate" as a sure thing without the bomb.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by warspite1 »

I hope there are no statues or monuments or public buildings dedicated to the memory of Oppenheimer, Truman etc.... [8|]

Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Panther Bait
Posts: 654
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:59 pm

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Panther Bait »

ORIGINAL: warspite1
ORIGINAL: darbymcd

CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.
warspite1

So I ask again, where does it end and who, on this moral crusade to re-write our past, actually decides? What do you do about slave owners like George Washington? Why are Lee, Nelson, Columbus proposed as fair game if Washington isn't? Have you read some of Washington's comments on his slaves? Just try and follow this nonsense down its logical path (as logical as this gets - which isn't very) and see where we end up.

Still it will create lots of employment - think of all those street names, buildings, warships that need re-naming. That'll keep the map makers busy - and boy will Wikipedia need a lot of new contributors.

Problems that remain in society don't get fixed by re-writing history. They get fixed by confronting the past, recognising the journey and striving to get where we want to be.


Considering the capital of the country they "govern" is named after Washington, imagine the consequences. Maybe they can rename it Freedom Fries, D.C. That seemed to work well before.

Mike
When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard
User avatar
AcePylut
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:01 am

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by AcePylut »

I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.

I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.
User avatar
AcePylut
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:01 am

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by AcePylut »

ORIGINAL: darbymcd

CR, I agree. It is disgusting that we are subject to a majority opinion that wants to maintain monuments to a treasonous secession movement which had as its genesis the perpetuation of slavery. Minority people, such as african americans, must live under the unblinking eyes of statues which were for the most part put up in the Jim Crow era as expression of the intolerance and hate you mention. The battle is lost... for the Lost Cause dead-enders.

[&o]
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.

I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.

This is the crux, that all the "Washington, Jefferson . . ." apologists miss. The Confederacy was a traitorous enterprise. It was never a nation (see USSC decision.) The officers of the CSA, especially Lee, were traitors by the plain wording of the US Constitution. Put the statues in museums, with plaques explaining they were traitors. Get them off public streets and out of public parks.
The Moose
User avatar
Grfin Zeppelin
Posts: 1514
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Grfin Zeppelin »

For the sake of forum peace just drop this topic. Nothing good will come out of it.

Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by witpqs »

We should not hide reality. Some (not all - some) who want to remove or change various icons are very bigoted in various ways but seem to pushing for some sort of false purity, almost as though it justifies their own bigotry. What will come of doing so is worse bigotry and extremism as reasoned perspectives are replaced by emotional lynch-mobbing. I will shut up now. [8D]

Condoleezza Rice on Slave Owner Statue Purge: ‘It’s a Bad Thing’
“I’m a firm believer in keep your history before you,” Rice answered. “And so, I don’t actually want to rename things that were named for slave owners. I want us to have to look at these names and recognize that they did.”
http://www.thewrap.com/condoleezza-rice-denounces-tearing-down-slave-owners-monuments-its-a-bad-thing/
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Canoerebel »

If we applied scripture, we would by acclamation take down the monuments, recognizing that they are "stumbling blocks" to a meaningful percentage of our population.

But that wouldn't be a solution. There will be no satisfying the grievance movement until everything is torn down and there is a new form of government rooted in something - mob rule, pure democracy, anarchy, libertarianism, or something. And eventually, like all forms of government (democracy, republic, socialist, communist, fascist), wealth and power will accrue to a small percentage smart enough, strong-willed enough, selfish enough, or lucky enough to thrive. And the process would be repeated.

America, warts and all, has the freedom of movement to go up or down, depending on hard work, smarts, athleticism, luck, good looks, whatever. We are not bound hard by chains in our social class. We have been a mobile nation...and that trend has increased over time, as minorities have become more and more part of the mainstream classes and wealth classes. We have lots of warts, but I prefer imperfect freedom to imperfect totalitarianism or imperfect mob rule.

We would do well to emulate Lincoln's "with malice towards none, with charity for all" sentiment. But that's not where we're heading.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Lecivius
Posts: 4845
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:53 am
Location: Denver

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Lecivius »

This is gonna get locked, folks. Move along.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
User avatar
Trugrit
Posts: 1186
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:31 pm
Location: North Carolina

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by Trugrit »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: AcePylut

I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.

I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.

This is the crux, that all the "Washington, Jefferson . . ." apologists miss. The Confederacy was a traitorous enterprise. It was never a nation (see USSC decision.) The officers of the CSA, especially Lee, were traitors by the plain wording of the US Constitution. Put the statues in museums, with plaques explaining they were traitors. Get them off public streets and out of public parks.

Yes, but the American Revolution was a traitorous enterprise.

Famous people get the monuments.

Almost every single individual that has ever had a monument erected to him or her
Is a Son of a Bitch in one area or another. It is almost an historical requirement because
Famous people are often complex like that.

The problem is where does it end? What is the next step? I’m a southerner and I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t care if the monuments stay or go but what about me?

My ancestors fought for the south. In your book they were all traitors. When the war was over they returned to their homes and farms and had children. In your book they were they still traitors even after they took the oath of allegiance. I’m a direct descendent of those people. I have their DNA in my body and bloodstream.

You could say without reservation that I’m a living monument to those traitors and slave owners.

There are direct descendents of Jefferson and Lee living in our country.
There are black people living in America that have Thomas Jefferson’s DNA in them.

What are you going to do with us living monuments?

Maybe we will have to wear an armband. Instead of the Star of David maybe a small Confederate flag
On the armband to signify we have at least one drop of slave owner blood in our systems.


"A man's got to know his limitations" -Dirty Harry
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

This is gonna get locked, folks. Move along.

Yes it will. It shouldn't but it will. And it's not Matrix's fault. They've been willing to bend over backwards in an attempt to be fair and open and kind and tolerant. But , in the long run , they are a commercial enterprise and controversy just doesn't pay the bills.

"It ought to be a law!". "We should do SOMETHING about that!". "Why hasn't anyone stopped that?". In my mind, these are the culprits to much of our societies failings.

Let me explain. We are a society of well meaning people. We try to cure every illness, right every wrong , solve every problem. And we are arrogant to think we can. We have full time state legislatures, full time politicians in every capacity no matter how small the community, we complain when congress takes a week off (when our ancestors were worries when they met too much) and a legal system to tries to right every imaginable wrong (and quite a few unimaginable ones too!).

We are busy bodies , micro managers and individuals with a God complex.

Why? Previous generations looked at "problems" and asked are they really problems? Should we interfere? Is it any of societies concerns or that of individuals? Should we just butt out? But today everyone needs to have a grievance , has to be a victim, or some how they feel incomplete. Disputes that in the past we worked out by two individuals behind a barn, now require a bloated judicial system. Why? And how did we get to everyone has a immediate need to be addressed , but people who have a different view to ours cannot have their say , in the name of "Social justice?". Isn't ANY justice by our vary system "Social?" In every legal jurisdiction does not a criminal trial issue a case of "the people against ...."? Or the state of , or the US Government (you know , of "We the people" fame) against...."?




Maybe THAT's the main song of the recent Disney musical Frozen resonated so strongly with people. "Let it go" is good advice. Don't have an opinion on everything , especially things that don't concern you. And of course that old bit of advice on government (often attributed to Jefferson , but could be anybody) "the government that governs least, governs best". My personal favorite adage is "just because you CAN do something , doesn't mean you should". Or maybe all these government incursions into life is just the political equivalent of "hold my beer". [X(][:(][:'(][:D]
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: Revisionist History-OT

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: AcePylut

I, personally, think it's absolutely ridiculous to have statues of men that tried to destroy our nation, on "gov't" property.

I don't care if Robert E. Lee was for or against slavery, I don't care if he was a good man or a bad man by todays or 1860s standard of judgement. In my opinion, the man was a traitor, nothing more nothing less. As as a result, not one single gov't penny or parcel of gov't land should should have his (or any other Confederate leader) image, likeness, bust, statue etc. on it... unless it's in a museum or a history book.

This is the crux, that all the "Washington, Jefferson . . ." apologists miss. The Confederacy was a traitorous enterprise. It was never a nation (see USSC decision.) The officers of the CSA, especially Lee, were traitors by the plain wording of the US Constitution. Put the statues in museums, with plaques explaining they were traitors. Get them off public streets and out of public parks.

Yes, but the American Revolution was a traitorous enterprise.
warspite1

Well said. I can't believe how many "tear down the monuments apologists" simply miss this fundamental point. Depending on whose 'side' you sit, someone is going to be a bad guy to someone. So for example, depending on whose side you sit, one of Charles I or Oliver Cromwell was a traitor. The 1640's were a massively important time in British history. There are monuments, there are memorials to both. That time needs to be remembered. So does the US Civil War.

Condoleezza Rice - you put it perfectly.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”