Get your a-bomb souvenirs here

For topics not directly related to eikaiwa.

Moderator: Shawn

Postby senseiman » Sat May 08, 2004 7:01 pm

Diogenes_in_Tokyo wrote: SM, I respect your views, but I think you started out with your mind made up, and I don't think anyone here could persuade you to change it.


Of course I had an opinion on the subject when I started this thread, but I always keep an open mind and people very often do persuade me to change my mind. But the best argument anyone seems able to come up with defending Tibbet's actions is to say "Oh, its just a little picture of a plane. Whats the big deal?" This is not compelling enough to convince me that my views on the subject are mistaken.

Diogenes in Tokyo wrote:
Some people may find Tibbets' behavior a bit distasteful - I myself thought desktop A bomb models I saw on one site were a bit much. But I wonder which of us feels competent to judge him. And especially on moral grounds.

Were we in the same situation in history, we would have done the same thing? Maybe, maybe not. Regardless, I have serious qualms about directing moral pronouncements at anyone, and especially someone not here to defend himself...


I want to make myself clear on this point; I am not judging him here for his actions in the past (ie: dropping the bomb). There was a war on and while I think the bombings were horrible events, General Tibbets wasn't the one who made the decision to use the bombs. I can accept the arguement that he was just doing his job and that he probably had little choice in the matter. What I do feel qualified to judge though is his behaviour today. By making the callous and grossly insensitive decision to engage in this shameless for-profit self promotion he is choosing to act in the most appaling and crass manner imaginable.

And as for the general not being here to defend himself I again have absolutely no sympathy. He is the one who has chosen to go out and seek the limelight and become a public figure (and his only motivation in doing so is pure greed, I might add) and this kind of scrutiny and criticism is the price of celebrity.
Last edited by senseiman on Sat May 08, 2004 7:02 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Buckle up. We've got a blind date with destiny....and it looks like she's ordering the lobster.
User avatar
senseiman
Eikaiwa Hero
Eikaiwa Hero
 
Posts: 501
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 12:51 pm
Location: the senseiman secret lair

Postby JP_Jones » Sat May 08, 2004 7:45 pm

dogdays wrote:...I remain in awe of the man in black.


What the hell does Johnny Cash have to do with this??
User avatar
JP_Jones
Photoshop King
Photoshop King
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 7:33 pm
Location: 東京

Postby Guest » Mon May 10, 2004 6:44 pm

Like dogdays and senseiman, I think Tibbets shelpping pics of himself is repulsive. It's also sad that that solider has to resort to this to earn some coin. On another note, WTF is up with the Japanese fascination for war? Cammo-pattern clothes, all sorts of gun mags in the bookstores.....

Anybody here with military experience take exception to wearing your uniform as a fashion accessory?

-JB
Guest
 

Postby JP_Jones » Mon May 10, 2004 9:58 pm

which song?
User avatar
JP_Jones
Photoshop King
Photoshop King
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 7:33 pm
Location: 東京

Postby senseiman » Mon May 10, 2004 11:35 pm

John_Barleycorn wrote:On another note, WTF is up with the Japanese fascination for war? Cammo-pattern clothes, all sorts of gun mags in the bookstores.....

Anybody here with military experience take exception to wearing your uniform as a fashion accessory?

-JB


I used to be in the reserves, sometimes I still wear my combat pants around. They are damned comfortable. Sometimes army type clothes look cool, like chicks wearing camoflauge pattern mini skirts. Sometimes it just looks stupid though. Like guys who wear jackets with pictures of fighter jets on them and some macho slogans or something written under them. Fucking retards.

Continuing on this point, there is a shop that caters to the needs of non-fighter pilot dorks who wear fighter pilot jackets near my place. They sell tons of very real looking replica automatic rifles, pistols and even a light machine gun. They also sell all the gear, combat clothes, US army patches, matrix sunglasses, etc. etc. They have tons of this macho crap and the one thing that struck me is that nobody who was actually in the army would ever buy any of that shit. And as another bizarre twist, mixed in the display cases with all the guns and gas masks they have lots of those 'kawaii' character goods (toys and figurines) that Otaku like to collect. So its like customers are looking in the case and saying "Uhhh...yeah I'll take the AK-47, that browning handgun and....oh yeah can I also have the Doraemon action play set?"

The store is in a shopping centre and every time I walk past it I just can't imagine what kind of loser would shop there. Never seen a customer in the place but they must come because they've been in business for a couple years now.
Buckle up. We've got a blind date with destiny....and it looks like she's ordering the lobster.
User avatar
senseiman
Eikaiwa Hero
Eikaiwa Hero
 
Posts: 501
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 12:51 pm
Location: the senseiman secret lair

Postby Ojii » Mon May 10, 2004 11:46 pm

John_Barleycorn wrote:...WTF is up with the Japanese fascination for war? Cammo-pattern clothes, all sorts of gun mags in the bookstores.....


I think it's a spin-off from the manga/video game crowd. It's that simple.

I also like to wear camo-pants because, as Senseiman said, 'they're damned comfortable'. The problem is whenever I do wear these pants in public, I get a lot of nasty looks.
Ojii
 
Posts: 913
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:24 pm
Location: 沖縄

Postby Diogenes_in_Tokyo » Tue May 11, 2004 12:33 am

Well, if you've ever been in active service for a rather long period, the idea of wearing cammies for anything other than hunting, bird watching, or the like just rubs you the wrong way.

There are lots of official regs that ban wearing a mix of civilian clothes and military gear to begin with, so you get accustomed to that mindset (kind of like taking your hat off when entering a building - anyone remember the Sopranos episode?).

A practical reason is that when you come back from a long exercise, mission, or deployment, your cammies usually reek of sweat, body odor, and muck - military wives often force their husbands to strip and maybe even hose down before even coming in the house. And you can NEVER wash cammies with regular clothes or the odor gets into them, too.
Lastly, after playing around in the mud with only dudes as company for months at a time, the last thing you want to do is put on a set of cammies. When we'd get back, guys would be racing to shower and get into clean civilian clothes, preferably a t-shirt and shorts.

I guess when you're actually in the military, the last thing you want to do is look like you are...
All those people killed in shootings in America?
Oh, shootings, yes. But that doesn't mean Americans are more violent than other people. We're just better shots.
User avatar
Diogenes_in_Tokyo
Eikaiwa Lifer
Eikaiwa Lifer
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:51 am
Location: Gov. Ishihara's sh!tlist

Postby amerikajin274 » Tue May 11, 2004 12:38 am

First off, I do not agree with Gen. Tibbets' decision to sell the photographs. I do agree that it represents a blatent callousness on his part, and from what I've read about him in interviews he seems to be a little too nuke happy even now.

As for his conduct during the war, I don't expect him to feel guilt or remorse for that, though it would be perfectly natural if he did. I think that Tibbets isn't so much proud of the fact that his piloting skills ultimately massacred 200,000 people as he is proud of the fact that he helped his country defeat an enemy of the state. I think he's also proud of the fact that he enjoyed a successful military career, one that involved the oversight of the logistical phase that would carry the Manhattan Project into effect.

Let's be careful in judging his character based on an act of war. Did Paul Tibbets order the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki or was that President Harry S. Truman? Hell, Truman has his own library.
Off the air
User avatar
amerikajin274
Frustrated Realist
Frustrated Realist
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 9:55 pm
Location: Off the air

Postby amerikajin274 » Tue May 11, 2004 10:17 am

>>>I imagine that candidates for the Enola Gay were even more intensely screened for a variety of psychological traits. One prominent factor to consider, especially for the pilot and crew, was human conscience. If the General had one, it would have been a risk and he wouldn稚 have been selected. It is reasonable to assume that the General was selected because he was cold heartless and lacks a human conscience. His behavior today, seems to reflect those traits.<<<

What else is war but legalized massacre? In that situation you don't want people who can play "patty cake"; you want killers. The Japanese and Germans had more than their fare share and I don't doubt for a second that they would have done the same thing to U.S. citizens if they had been given the opportunity, and if you think otherwise well then you need to dig out your history books and re-read them. The Japanese dropped plague bombs on Chinese civilians; they used Chinese civilians and our own captives of war as guinea pigs for their biological weapons program; members of Unit 731 disclosed plans to attack the U.S. with plague in September of 1945....the a-bomb was unconventional warfare for sure, but conventional wisdom dictates that when one side throws out the rulebook (as the Japanese and Germans did) then it's anything goes. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were awful, but the war itself was awful.
Off the air
User avatar
amerikajin274
Frustrated Realist
Frustrated Realist
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 9:55 pm
Location: Off the air

Postby W.Pep » Tue May 11, 2004 11:05 am

I’m having some troubles with this one. The main reason being growing up I was a big fan of Chuck Yaeger. Mostly for his test-pilot exploits, however I did have one of his computer games. It was a WWII flight combat simulator. At the time I had no problem with it. Yet reading about Tibbets, I immediately thought that signed photos were in bad taste. I extended this to other possible marketing techniques and as Ziggy said, where do we draw the line? If Tibbets endorsed an Enola Gay flight simulator I would be disgusted. I think mainly because (as Senseiman explained earlier) we would be dealing with the deaths of mostly innocent unaware civilians, whereas I can now rationalize that Yeagers’ game was involved with a more clear cut situation. People were trying to kill him and he was trying to survive. But I still feel like a little scumbag for having heartily played it because it wasn’t fantasy. Those things happened day in and out for years and I think this is often lost in the translation.
DiT would you have a problem with an Enola Gay flight simulator game? Do you see that as different from signed photos or could that indeed be a logical next step for a savvy merchandiser?

Edit: honest question, no sarcasm intended.
Last edited by W.Pep on Tue May 11, 2004 11:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
'I am Joe's Clenching Bowels.'
W.Pep
Eikaiwa Hero
Eikaiwa Hero
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 2:56 pm

Postby senseiman » Tue May 11, 2004 11:37 am

Diogenes_in_Tokyo wrote:Well, if you've ever been in active service for a rather long period, the idea of wearing cammies for anything other than hunting, bird watching, or the like just rubs you the wrong way.

There are lots of official regs that ban wearing a mix of civilian clothes and military gear to begin with, so you get accustomed to that mindset (kind of like taking your hat off when entering a building - anyone remember the Sopranos episode?).

A practical reason is that when you come back from a long exercise, mission, or deployment, your cammies usually reek of sweat, body odor, and muck - military wives often force their husbands to strip and maybe even hose down before even coming in the house. And you can NEVER wash cammies with regular clothes or the odor gets into them, too.
Lastly, after playing around in the mud with only dudes as company for months at a time, the last thing you want to do is put on a set of cammies. When we'd get back, guys would be racing to shower and get into clean civilian clothes, preferably a t-shirt and shorts.

I guess when you're actually in the military, the last thing you want to do is look like you are...


I can relate to this. When I was actually in the reserves, I wouldn't have been caught dead wearing any of my uniform outside of work. Definite taboo. Plus the ever present urge to wear clothes that didn't remind me of the army.

But I kept a couple of useful items when I got out: one pair of combat pants and one combat rain coat. The Canadian army combats are a solid olive drab color unlike the American or British camoflauge pattern ones, so they don't look so conspicuous when worn with civies. They aren't so stylish though, so I usually limit myself to wearing them around the house or when I go hiking in the mountains.
Buckle up. We've got a blind date with destiny....and it looks like she's ordering the lobster.
User avatar
senseiman
Eikaiwa Hero
Eikaiwa Hero
 
Posts: 501
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 12:51 pm
Location: the senseiman secret lair

Postby Diogenes_in_Tokyo » Tue May 11, 2004 1:11 pm

W.Pep wrote:
DiT would you have a problem with an Enola Gay flight simulator game? Do you see that as different from signed photos or could that indeed be a logical next step for a savvy merchandiser?

Like I said, one of the sites with info about Tibbets offered military paraphenalia. I see nothing wrong with selling replicas of military insignia or patches - unit pride is a symbol of a common bond and a mark of pride. that heightens the more the unit achieves/survives.

I also see nothing wrong with 'tasteful' photos (i.e., just of him and the plane, not him giving the middle finger over the bomb bay doors). But why, you ask. Well, to a pilot, that plane was much more than a mere object - it was his bread and butter, friend, and protector -pilots named them, you see, so they had far greater value than you or I would attach to them.
As I see it, photos of the man and his plane are no more offensive than pictures of martial artists in full regalia (after all, they are practicing skills to kill/maim an opponent, hence 'martial') or 'action' photos of a workman and his tools.

Not that everything Tibbets' name is plastered on is tasteful. The little atomic bomb models (and I used to love models/miniatures) are in bad taste, and I'm sure there might be other stuff I'd consider tacky.

I can see how people might consider Tibbets' autographed stuff to be in bad taste, but that's where it ends - crass - not morally reprehensible.
All those people killed in shootings in America?
Oh, shootings, yes. But that doesn't mean Americans are more violent than other people. We're just better shots.
User avatar
Diogenes_in_Tokyo
Eikaiwa Lifer
Eikaiwa Lifer
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 1:51 am
Location: Gov. Ishihara's sh!tlist

Postby W.Pep » Tue May 11, 2004 1:41 pm

Diogenes_in_Tokyo wrote:
W.Pep wrote:
DiT would you have a problem with an Enola Gay flight simulator game? Do you see that as different from signed photos or could that indeed be a logical next step for a savvy merchandiser?

Like I said, one of the sites with info about Tibbets offered military paraphenalia. I see nothing wrong with selling replicas of military insignia or patches - unit pride is a symbol of a common bond and a mark of pride. that heightens the more the unit achieves/survives.

I also see nothing wrong with 'tasteful' photos (i.e., just of him and the plane, not him giving the middle finger over the bomb bay doors). But why, you ask. Well, to a pilot, that plane was much more than a mere object - it was his bread and butter, friend, and protector -pilots named them, you see, so they had far greater value than you or I would attach to them.
As I see it, photos of the man and his plane are no more offensive than pictures of martial artists in full regalia (after all, they are practicing skills to kill/maim an opponent, hence 'martial') or 'action' photos of a workman and his tools.

Not that everything Tibbets' name is plastered on is tasteful. The little atomic bomb models (and I used to love models/miniatures) are in bad taste, and I'm sure there might be other stuff I'd consider tacky.

I can see how people might consider Tibbets' autographed stuff to be in bad taste, but that's where it ends - crass - not morally reprehensible.

Well first of all thanks for answering most of the question.
I think however what we are trying to determine is whether or not signed photos of the man and the plane are indeed a metaphorical finger giving exercise. I can certainly appreciate the bond if you will, a man could make with the device that helped him survive a terrible experience such as war. But I take issue with him marketing such device to the public. I fail to see the difference of an infantyman signing photos of his rifle and Tibbets singing photos of his plane. Arguments of bombadier and pilot aside a bomber is a tool of war and the Enola Gay is an especially charged tool. Furthermore I take issue with the word crass. If crass is to mean stupid or without sensibility as I have found it defined I think the idea of morals for such a person may very well be moot.
'I am Joe's Clenching Bowels.'
W.Pep
Eikaiwa Hero
Eikaiwa Hero
 
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 2:56 pm

Postby Guest » Fri May 14, 2004 6:50 am

Thanks for your opinions, guys. I've always thought that civilians wearing military uniforms looked stupid. It cries out: WANNABE! If you want to wear the uniform, enlist, for heaven's sake! The again, this is a country of uniforms where Union 76 is a fashion. :huh:

-JB
Last edited by Guest on Fri May 14, 2004 6:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Guest
 

Previous

Return to Japan Topics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron