SVTStingRay
Sr Member
woo woo! i wont be able to see it cause im on da road woohoo! damn i need to stop posting
The Pacific on HoBO on Sunday!
- Thread starter SVTStingRay
- Start date
I'll give it a chance to see how they portray it. After Tom Hanks went off the deep end then struck his head on the bottom I'm not sure. He's made idiotic comments recently about how WWII was a "war of racism and terror" from the U.S. Um no. We got attacked.
tgreco
Sr Member
so you're saying there weren't any internment camps?
and what were those folks crime besides being of Japanese descent?
if you want to limit the discussion to Pearl Harbor, you might have a point, but there was 5 years of war that followed it
so, while you might not agree, I can see the point he was trying to make
propologist
Sr Member
Don't have HBO , but i can't wait. I still watch band of brothers all the time.
That's a small part. What Tom Hanks is saying is the entire premise of the war was that the U.S. was a racist country who just wanted to terrorize Japan. There's also a lot of stuff that was unclassified that says the U.S. had reason to be worried about the Japanese civilians in Hawaii and the West Coast. They just shouldn't have done a blanket internment.
You can make an argument that the camps and the propaganda was racist, but not the entire war because we were attacked. You can't change that.
DemonFire
Sr Member
tgreco
Sr Member
It's not about changing the fact that we were attacked. It's about the actions that took place after, and the general difference in attitude in the European war, vs. the Pacific... which is kind of the whole point of the series
so, no, sorry, nice try... but that's not what he said at all
what he did actually say is:
"The Pacific war was mainly fought by isolated groups of men and was overlaid by a sense that our foes were fundamentally different from us. In that sense, the war in the Pacific bears a closer relation to the complex war on terrorism the U.S. is waging now, making the new series a trickier prospect but one with potential for more depth and resonance. "Certainly, we wanted to honor U.S. bravery in The Pacific," Hanks says. "But we also wanted to have people say, 'We didn't know our troops did that to Japanese people.' " He wants Americans to understand the glories — and the iniquities — of American history
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1969606-1,00.html#ixzz0i1rpqXSx
Did you actually read the interview in Time? Cuz it's sounds an awful lot like you're parroting some talking head.
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1969606-1,00.html
Hanks mentioned about 3 sentences concerning that, in a 4 page article. And it's a portion of the greater point he is making, about how the Pacific theater is more relevant in the course of WWII though the European theater is by far the better known of the two.
But then, that only is apparent if you actually READ THE ARTICLE, and not some schmucks take on one paragraph
so, no, sorry, nice try... but that's not what he said at all
what he did actually say is:
"The Pacific war was mainly fought by isolated groups of men and was overlaid by a sense that our foes were fundamentally different from us. In that sense, the war in the Pacific bears a closer relation to the complex war on terrorism the U.S. is waging now, making the new series a trickier prospect but one with potential for more depth and resonance. "Certainly, we wanted to honor U.S. bravery in The Pacific," Hanks says. "But we also wanted to have people say, 'We didn't know our troops did that to Japanese people.' " He wants Americans to understand the glories — and the iniquities — of American history
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1969606-1,00.html#ixzz0i1rpqXSx
Did you actually read the interview in Time? Cuz it's sounds an awful lot like you're parroting some talking head.
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1969606-1,00.html
Hanks mentioned about 3 sentences concerning that, in a 4 page article. And it's a portion of the greater point he is making, about how the Pacific theater is more relevant in the course of WWII though the European theater is by far the better known of the two.
But then, that only is apparent if you actually READ THE ARTICLE, and not some schmucks take on one paragraph
Yes I read the article, that's why I responded that way... I also read the CBS news interview where he clarified his statements to people just being "ignorant". He's made a habit over the last year of increasingly nutty comments on the U.S. military.
There's also no need to insult people by insinuating that they are too dumb to just read the whole thing... You should be able to discuss something politely.
There's also no need to insult people by insinuating that they are too dumb to just read the whole thing... You should be able to discuss something politely.
Similar threads
