Many people have stated that the IJNAF attack on Pearl Harbor is WAY too strong, with many more USN BB's and other vessels getting sunk on average than historical. Many others state that it causes just the right amount of damage.
My question is, should the IJNAF airgroups be fiddled around so that less planes attack the USN Fleet in Pearl on turn 1, or is it satisfactory?
Please cite instances and reasons for your decision (ie. I have played the historical first turn multiple times and get X many BB's sunk X many CL, etc... and I think it is too much/too little/just right)
Thanks
Jeremy,
Pearl Harbor Poll
Thank you for your quick response in the qbc thread.
I think the pearl attack is about right but needs to be accomplished with less torpedoes and more bombs if that's possible.
Jap AI needs to spend a little more effort in the Solomons and New Guinea as opposed to going to Hawaii, Palmyra, and Johnston. While it gets the action going earlier in the game, I've found that USA land airpower drastically weakens IJN carrier force. Building up Rabaul and taking all the easiest victory points like in old Pacwar did allow for the occasional IJN victory.
Cheers!
I think the pearl attack is about right but needs to be accomplished with less torpedoes and more bombs if that's possible.
Jap AI needs to spend a little more effort in the Solomons and New Guinea as opposed to going to Hawaii, Palmyra, and Johnston. While it gets the action going earlier in the game, I've found that USA land airpower drastically weakens IJN carrier force. Building up Rabaul and taking all the easiest victory points like in old Pacwar did allow for the occasional IJN victory.
Cheers!
-
sapperland
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Albuquerque,NM,USA
I have started 3 games with just that question in mind. Each time the AI strike Pearl it sinks all the BB's plus a number of other ships. The crits are what really sink the ships. The AI would average some level of crit every 3 hits.
Have the Critical hit calculations been changed to make them more common? I have not tried starting the game as the Japs so I am not sure if this is an AI cheat.
Have the Critical hit calculations been changed to make them more common? I have not tried starting the game as the Japs so I am not sure if this is an AI cheat.
The actual attack on Pearl harbour lasted about two hours. In that space of time, the Japanese attacked with 353 planes and caused the following:
* 18 battleships and auxillaries suffered loss or damage
* 349 aircraft were destroyed or damaged
* 3,581 military personnel were killed or wounded
All authorities agree that the Japanese at that time failed to make the attack on Pearl Harbour the crushing victory it was meant to be. A more aggressive Japanese commander would have re-armed his planes and made another attack on Pearl. The second attack would have damaged or destroyed:
* more battleships, as well as the 38 cruisers and destroyers still afloat
* the vast oil reserves thus immobilizing the U.S. fleet for months
* the mechanical shops and drydocks which were indispensable to a fleet at war
So one could imagine that the current results of the AI attacking Pearl could very well be realistic, especially if the commander of the Japanese fleet was more confident and aggressive.
------------------
A King Tiger can give you a definite edge...
* 18 battleships and auxillaries suffered loss or damage
* 349 aircraft were destroyed or damaged
* 3,581 military personnel were killed or wounded
All authorities agree that the Japanese at that time failed to make the attack on Pearl Harbour the crushing victory it was meant to be. A more aggressive Japanese commander would have re-armed his planes and made another attack on Pearl. The second attack would have damaged or destroyed:
* more battleships, as well as the 38 cruisers and destroyers still afloat
* the vast oil reserves thus immobilizing the U.S. fleet for months
* the mechanical shops and drydocks which were indispensable to a fleet at war
So one could imagine that the current results of the AI attacking Pearl could very well be realistic, especially if the commander of the Japanese fleet was more confident and aggressive.
------------------
A King Tiger can give you a definite edge...
Regarding Pearl Harbor attack:
The number of ships sunk, as it has been pointed out in another thread - was vitiated significantly in historical terms because they were sunk in harbor - and therefore, could be salvaged. When sunk in the game, they disappear - for keeps (unless you use the editor to give them 99% damage or some such.)
It's probably too late now, but the game needs some mechanism for salvage of ships sunk in port hexes. The problem would seem to be that each hex is approximately 100 nm across, which would mean that some of the ships could be at sea and some in port and be in the same hex. That, in turn, would mean we would have to have states of activity for the ships - anchored, moored, underway, maybe even underway watch conditions. (getting hit by a torpedo in transit from Seattle to San Francisco would probably be a lot more devastating to a ship than getting hit in the "combat zone" because of the material condition [battle readiness, for want of another term]of the ship involved - clear as mud, right!)
And all of this does nothing to ameliorate the immediate problem of ships being lost permanently in the Pearl Harbor attack which were raised and returned to service in real life. The only suggestion I have is to realize that three of the "sunk" BB's at Pearl were salvaged, and the other three basically rebuilt or modernized - and make the necessary adjustments with an editor. And see what happens with WitP.
God Bless;
Rev. Rick.
------------------
tincanman
The number of ships sunk, as it has been pointed out in another thread - was vitiated significantly in historical terms because they were sunk in harbor - and therefore, could be salvaged. When sunk in the game, they disappear - for keeps (unless you use the editor to give them 99% damage or some such.)
It's probably too late now, but the game needs some mechanism for salvage of ships sunk in port hexes. The problem would seem to be that each hex is approximately 100 nm across, which would mean that some of the ships could be at sea and some in port and be in the same hex. That, in turn, would mean we would have to have states of activity for the ships - anchored, moored, underway, maybe even underway watch conditions. (getting hit by a torpedo in transit from Seattle to San Francisco would probably be a lot more devastating to a ship than getting hit in the "combat zone" because of the material condition [battle readiness, for want of another term]of the ship involved - clear as mud, right!)
And all of this does nothing to ameliorate the immediate problem of ships being lost permanently in the Pearl Harbor attack which were raised and returned to service in real life. The only suggestion I have is to realize that three of the "sunk" BB's at Pearl were salvaged, and the other three basically rebuilt or modernized - and make the necessary adjustments with an editor. And see what happens with WitP.
God Bless;
Rev. Rick.
------------------
tincanman
"Action springs not from thought, but from a readiness for responsibility.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer
After having played the "historical first turn" 10 times, where only once did a battleship survive, I decided to compare it to the original PacWar.
Here are those results by each test..
ver 2.0--- Original/w old patch
all sunk-- 3 survive dmg 68/54/30
all sunk--- 2 survive dmg 7/58
all sunk--- 5 survive dmg 9/30/64/76/88
1 survive dmg 81--- 3 survive dmg 12/28/96
all sunk--- 2 survive dmg 4/71
3 surv dmg 30/83/11-3 survive dmg 88/51/7
all sunk--- 2 survive dmg 83/13/54
I played "campaign`41/Japenese computer/even" the display and delay were set to "none". The number of crusiers and auxilary ships sunk varied widely every time in both games, depending on how many BBs' were sunk. I did not count the planes nor compare armor values of the BBs' between the two games. 3 seems to be the lucky number in the original game. Hope these numbers help some.
------------------
understanding requires patience
Grok
[This message has been edited by Grok (edited September 28, 2000).]
Here are those results by each test..
ver 2.0--- Original/w old patch
all sunk-- 3 survive dmg 68/54/30
all sunk--- 2 survive dmg 7/58
all sunk--- 5 survive dmg 9/30/64/76/88
1 survive dmg 81--- 3 survive dmg 12/28/96
all sunk--- 2 survive dmg 4/71
3 surv dmg 30/83/11-3 survive dmg 88/51/7
all sunk--- 2 survive dmg 83/13/54
I played "campaign`41/Japenese computer/even" the display and delay were set to "none". The number of crusiers and auxilary ships sunk varied widely every time in both games, depending on how many BBs' were sunk. I did not count the planes nor compare armor values of the BBs' between the two games. 3 seems to be the lucky number in the original game. Hope these numbers help some.
------------------
understanding requires patience
Grok
[This message has been edited by Grok (edited September 28, 2000).]
"My teeth have more bite, than your mouth has bark!"
-
Blackhorse
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Eastern US
Five Pearl Harbors, each with historic first move, both sides set to human:
Results to BBs
1. 3 sunk, 5 damaged 63-87
2. 6 sunk, 2 damaged 71,71
3. 5 sunk, 3 damaged 67-89
4. 4 sunk, 4 damaged 40-96
5. 4 sunk, 3 damaged 52-74, 1 damaged 4
Observations:
The IJN hits a little too hard. The possibility should exist for the IJN to do better than they did historically, but these results indicate that in the game they will *always* do better than they did historically.
Results to BBs
1. 3 sunk, 5 damaged 63-87
2. 6 sunk, 2 damaged 71,71
3. 5 sunk, 3 damaged 67-89
4. 4 sunk, 4 damaged 40-96
5. 4 sunk, 3 damaged 52-74, 1 damaged 4
Observations:
The IJN hits a little too hard. The possibility should exist for the IJN to do better than they did historically, but these results indicate that in the game they will *always* do better than they did historically.
WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff
Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
I notice your results are different, I wonder if having the setting at both human has anyhting to do with it? Also, when the Sunk Ships Page comes up...I notice that I do have some unsunk BB ships, yet when it comes to the US player turn and I check Pearl Harbor all are sunk. A bug?Originally posted by Blackhorse:
Five Pearl Harbors, each with historic first move, both sides set to human:
Results to BBs
1. 3 sunk, 5 damaged 63-87
2. 6 sunk, 2 damaged 71,71
3. 5 sunk, 3 damaged 67-89
4. 4 sunk, 4 damaged 40-96
5. 4 sunk, 3 damaged 52-74, 1 damaged 4
Observations:
The IJN hits a little too hard. The possibility should exist for the IJN to do better than they did historically, but these results indicate that in the game they will *always* do better than they did historically.
------------------
understanding requires patience
Grok
[This message has been edited by Grok (edited September 28, 2000).]
"My teeth have more bite, than your mouth has bark!"
I think it is well as it is.IMO, no changes are needed.
I agree on the salvage of the ships, I wish that in the new "War in the pacific" this is feasible.
But those ships were salvaged because there was no third wave from japanese fleet...if dry docks ,repair shops and installations had been destroyed, all the ships would've been unrecoverable.
Not to talk about unscathed fuel tanks...whithout those, Pearl Harbor wouldn't have been able to be used as Naval Base...
I agree on the salvage of the ships, I wish that in the new "War in the pacific" this is feasible.
But those ships were salvaged because there was no third wave from japanese fleet...if dry docks ,repair shops and installations had been destroyed, all the ships would've been unrecoverable.
Not to talk about unscathed fuel tanks...whithout those, Pearl Harbor wouldn't have been able to be used as Naval Base...
RAM
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
"Look at me! look at me!!!
Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"
the reason for the (sometimes) ahistorical results are because of the unique nature of the PH attack compared to a game engine that has to, by neccessity, take a more general approach to air to surface attacks. (Since Pearl Harbor is only one of many ports that can be attacked)
Due to the shallow nature of the harbor the Japanese had to experiment with modifying their torps with wooden fins to make them run shallow. Even then they could'nt be 100% sure that it would work, which might explain why out of the 300+ planes that attacked the harbor, only 40 B5N's (if memory serves me) were actually equiped with torps. This was why the first attack wave was so devastating. The 2nd wave had **no** torpedo equiped bombers in it which combined with the smoke and increased AA of the defenders led to pretty much negligable damages compared to the previous one (Nevada's sortie also aborbed alot of damage too)
In the PacWar attack on PH, the Japanese get far more torpedo bombers than historical for that situation, both waves too i might add.
Still, the problem with the torp routines that i mentioned in another thread tend to balance this a little as the BB's are able to take ridiculous amounts of torp hits without foundering. Out of many PacWar games i've played, on average the US player tends to only lose 2 out of 8 in most games. Worst results were 0-1 sunk. Best result i ever got was 4 battleships permenantly sunk.
Due to the shallow nature of the harbor the Japanese had to experiment with modifying their torps with wooden fins to make them run shallow. Even then they could'nt be 100% sure that it would work, which might explain why out of the 300+ planes that attacked the harbor, only 40 B5N's (if memory serves me) were actually equiped with torps. This was why the first attack wave was so devastating. The 2nd wave had **no** torpedo equiped bombers in it which combined with the smoke and increased AA of the defenders led to pretty much negligable damages compared to the previous one (Nevada's sortie also aborbed alot of damage too)
In the PacWar attack on PH, the Japanese get far more torpedo bombers than historical for that situation, both waves too i might add.
Still, the problem with the torp routines that i mentioned in another thread tend to balance this a little as the BB's are able to take ridiculous amounts of torp hits without foundering. Out of many PacWar games i've played, on average the US player tends to only lose 2 out of 8 in most games. Worst results were 0-1 sunk. Best result i ever got was 4 battleships permenantly sunk.
Grok: I don't know what y'all are talking about. Perhaps you are seeing the results you are, might be because you aren't playing the Japanese. On this new edition I played the historical first turn as the Japanese, and the BB 'not' lost amount was between 3-5 (approx. 5-6 sunk).
Last friday at work, they were setting up an Australian picnic (whatever that is) for saturday, which I didn't attend. I looked out the window in that atrium and saw a row of like 15 flags stuck in the ground, flapping in the Texas breeze. There was the Aussie flag of course, the Brit one, ours, Mexico, and a few others. I saw no nation represented more than once....accept.... Japan had their Nippon flag, but I saw one flag that left me aghast. Do you remember the Naval Ensign that flew over the Japanese ships as Pearl Harbor was attacked? THAT WAS THERE! It was placed in the ground like all the rest, given a place of honor. I couldn't believe it! I did a little research a found that particualr Naval Ensign is still used by the Japanese Navy, so it's not quite as bad, but still, I wonder who the lamebrain was that thought to give Japan TWO flags, and one of them the Naval Ensign (Rising Sun). As many flags as I've seen on disply, or given a more formal place of honor, I've never seen one of those. I haven't heard anything more about what happened or why it was there, but we have so many pansies at work I'm sure it didn't phase them in the least.
My company has been getting chummy with Disney, so maybe they were going to give away tickets to that new Disney Pearl Harbor movie, but still, what an awful thing to do, to give that flag honor. I could understand it being in a display case, but in the ground?
[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited September 28, 2000).]
Last friday at work, they were setting up an Australian picnic (whatever that is) for saturday, which I didn't attend. I looked out the window in that atrium and saw a row of like 15 flags stuck in the ground, flapping in the Texas breeze. There was the Aussie flag of course, the Brit one, ours, Mexico, and a few others. I saw no nation represented more than once....accept.... Japan had their Nippon flag, but I saw one flag that left me aghast. Do you remember the Naval Ensign that flew over the Japanese ships as Pearl Harbor was attacked? THAT WAS THERE! It was placed in the ground like all the rest, given a place of honor. I couldn't believe it! I did a little research a found that particualr Naval Ensign is still used by the Japanese Navy, so it's not quite as bad, but still, I wonder who the lamebrain was that thought to give Japan TWO flags, and one of them the Naval Ensign (Rising Sun). As many flags as I've seen on disply, or given a more formal place of honor, I've never seen one of those. I haven't heard anything more about what happened or why it was there, but we have so many pansies at work I'm sure it didn't phase them in the least.
My company has been getting chummy with Disney, so maybe they were going to give away tickets to that new Disney Pearl Harbor movie, but still, what an awful thing to do, to give that flag honor. I could understand it being in a display case, but in the ground?
[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited September 28, 2000).]
Is the flag you're talking about used by Japanese navy, the one where the red stripes kinda shine off the red disc?? Just wondering??Originally posted by Charles22:
Grok: I don't know what y'all are talking about. Perhaps you are seeing the results you are, might be because you aren't playing the Japanese. On this new edition I played the historical first turn as the Japanese, and the BB 'not' lost amount was between 3-5 (approx. 5-6 sunk).
Last friday at work, they were setting up an Australian picnic (whatever that is) for saturday, which I didn't attend. I looked out the window in that atrium and saw a row of like 15 flags stuck in the ground, flapping in the Texas breeze. There was the Aussie flag of course, the Brit one, ours, Mexico, and a few others. I saw no nation represented more than once....accept.... Japan had their Nippon flag, but I saw one flag that left me aghast. Do you remember the Naval Ensign that flew over the Japanese ships as Pearl Harbor was attacked? THAT WAS THERE! It was placed in the ground like all the rest, given a place of honor. I couldn't believe it! I did a little research a found that particualr Naval Ensign is still used by the Japanese Navy, so it's not quite as bad, but still, I wonder who the lamebrain was that thought to give Japan TWO flags, and one of them the Naval Ensign (Rising Sun). As many flags as I've seen on disply, or given a more formal place of honor, I've never seen one of those. I haven't heard anything more about what happened or why it was there, but we have so many pansies at work I'm sure it didn't phase them in the least.
My company has been getting chummy with Disney, so maybe they were going to give away tickets to that new Disney Pearl Harbor movie, but still, what an awful thing to do, to give that flag honor. I could understand it being in a display case, but in the ground?
[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited September 28, 2000).]
Pretty ludicrous having THAT flag there, might as well have the swastika beside it as well...
Hi I don't think the results are that bad I mean historicly they sank all the BB's but 6 did return (which is not the case in PW) in my present game I lost 4 sunk 4 damaged 2 back by may other 2 still around 40% (down from 93%) The central Pacific stratagy is sound if done correctly AI can grab Solomons with 1 or 2 units for points but the 3 divisions given to Combined Fleet need to take a few places to gain experiance before trying for Midway or Johnson I killed all three with US divisions with 60 exp. Now it looks like AI is trying for both central and south pacific I will see what happens there.
My feelings on Pearl Harbour strike is they can sink everything as long as I keep CV's and base I can recover, only a matter of how long. I am sending British fleet from Indian Ocean to South Pacific since nothing is happening there.
------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
My feelings on Pearl Harbour strike is they can sink everything as long as I keep CV's and base I can recover, only a matter of how long. I am sending British fleet from Indian Ocean to South Pacific since nothing is happening there.
------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
sulup: It sure was THAT FLAG!
I thought the same thing as well (why not a swastika while they were at it), or at least the German Naval Ensign. I can't recall if in it's upper left corner, if that ensign has an iron cross or a swastika (the Gerry WWII one). If they were flying only naval ensigns that might have made sense, since it is a current flag, but to mix it with national flags and then to give Japan two flags, one of them a glaring reminder of the cowardly attack. I just don't understand. Must be some lamebrain who wasn't taught about WWII in school, but you think a Fortune 500 corporation, like mine, would have enough sense to appoint someone to the task who had a clue about flags, and more particularly what that flag means to Americans. Since Australia wasn't sneak-attacked like us, I doubt they would feel the same way about that flag on their soil, though their nation was an objective of the Japanese strategy.
I thought the same thing as well (why not a swastika while they were at it), or at least the German Naval Ensign. I can't recall if in it's upper left corner, if that ensign has an iron cross or a swastika (the Gerry WWII one). If they were flying only naval ensigns that might have made sense, since it is a current flag, but to mix it with national flags and then to give Japan two flags, one of them a glaring reminder of the cowardly attack. I just don't understand. Must be some lamebrain who wasn't taught about WWII in school, but you think a Fortune 500 corporation, like mine, would have enough sense to appoint someone to the task who had a clue about flags, and more particularly what that flag means to Americans. Since Australia wasn't sneak-attacked like us, I doubt they would feel the same way about that flag on their soil, though their nation was an objective of the Japanese strategy.
-
Yogi Yohan
- Posts: 409
- Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Uppsala, Sweden
- Contact:
Well, if the flag display was one of national flags, then sure, the rising sun has no place there. But you cannot really compare it with a swastika, can you? The swastika stands for an ideology that is as close to pure evil as you can get. Japan had an authoritarian and brutal regime, and it commited many atrocities, but it was nothing like the Nazis.Originally posted by Charles22:
sulup: It sure was THAT FLAG!
I thought the same thing as well (why not a swastika while they were at it), or at least the German Naval Ensign. I can't recall if in it's upper left corner, if that ensign has an iron cross or a swastika (the Gerry WWII one). If they were flying only naval ensigns that might have made sense, since it is a current flag, but to mix it with national flags and then to give Japan two flags, one of them a glaring reminder of the cowardly attack. I just don't understand. Must be some lamebrain who wasn't taught about WWII in school, but you think a Fortune 500 corporation, like mine, would have enough sense to appoint someone to the task who had a clue about flags, and more particularly what that flag means to Americans. Since Australia wasn't sneak-attacked like us, I doubt they would feel the same way about that flag on their soil, though their nation was an objective of the Japanese strategy.
Also, bear in mind that the Pearl Harbour attack might have been dishounourable from a western point of wiev, but according to the Japanese bushido code, you do not need to give your enemies any warning. The Japanese did not issue a formal declaration of war in the 1904/1905 war with Russia either, and it begun with a surprise attack on the naval base of Port Arthur.
Moral codes differ, and holding grudges against the defeated for not sharing yours seems a bit pointless. The war is long over, and the Rising Sun now represents the Navy of the most respectable and democratic country in Asia. For that, it does deserve to be honoured.
Since many people think it is BARELY adequate (ie. gets just that many ships sunk, but, usually as the worst results) that I will slightly modify the IJNAF settings. I think that for each CV I will have 5 B5N Kates damaged which will result in 35 less torpedo bombers (since these are the guys causing the most damage).
Sometimes the IJNAF loses more bomber aircraft when attacking the USAAF bases in Pearl, which also lessens the striking power of the attack on ships in port.
Jeremy,
PS. Could you try this on your own versions while using the editor? I don't want to have to release a pre-patch just to see if it adequately solves just one problem! We are going to release new versions of all of the OBC files that will hopefully solve any gameplay and historical accuracy problems.
Sometimes the IJNAF loses more bomber aircraft when attacking the USAAF bases in Pearl, which also lessens the striking power of the attack on ships in port.
Jeremy,
PS. Could you try this on your own versions while using the editor? I don't want to have to release a pre-patch just to see if it adequately solves just one problem! We are going to release new versions of all of the OBC files that will hopefully solve any gameplay and historical accuracy problems.
Yogi: The Japanese had sent diplomats to declare war as the bombing started or just before it, but failed to get it to them in time. They understood very well accepted international code for declaration of war. It wasn't bushido that dictated the attitude or else they would've never sent diplomats. The plain fact of the matter was that it was pretty common practice for the Axiz to behave in such a manner when going to war (attacking without warning). As I said, the flag makes sense only in the context of featuring naval ensigns, and not placing a "battle flag" in association with the peaceful flag that a national one should represent. Actually, if you want to know the truth, the WWII German national flag (swastika) might get less Americans upset than the Rising Sun one. The swastika one was a legitimate national flag, it wasn't a battle flag, and what's more, the Germans didn't sneak-attack us with that flag.
It may be fine and well to say let bygones be bygones, but what if the flag was put there specifically out of disrespect for America, or disrespect for those Americans who fought there? Just as the fascists did during Japan's wartime propaganda, there's still people today, many of them America-haters, who go out of there way to blame America for "making" the Japanese attack us at Pearl. America was diligent enough to cut off flow of oil to Japan, because they were using that oil to attack in the Axis fashion (attack without declaring war beforehand) against China. It seems this country had a little more moral base back then, as they realised that allowing our oil to go to a murderous regime to attack an innocent country, was making the US an accomplice.
It may be fine and well to say let bygones be bygones, but what if the flag was put there specifically out of disrespect for America, or disrespect for those Americans who fought there? Just as the fascists did during Japan's wartime propaganda, there's still people today, many of them America-haters, who go out of there way to blame America for "making" the Japanese attack us at Pearl. America was diligent enough to cut off flow of oil to Japan, because they were using that oil to attack in the Axis fashion (attack without declaring war beforehand) against China. It seems this country had a little more moral base back then, as they realised that allowing our oil to go to a murderous regime to attack an innocent country, was making the US an accomplice.
I spoke to a lady at work when I first saw THAT FLAG and she now tells me that she contacted an important man in HR(if he's the boss of HR I'm not sure) and that he laughed his head off with no comments at all. Typical reaction from an organization that's stupid enough to put it out there in the first place. I suppose since the question wasn't coming with a liberal angle to it, he found it to be none of his concern.
Getting off topic here but I can't resist to post.
One could then say to any Amerindian, Central American, Cuban etc. that planting an American flag at some sort of historical/diplomatic meeting would be just as blasphemous to them. Does this mean that the US flag is evil?
Possibly getting the Rising Sun flag back into use is mere nationalism rather than antagonisn? It is a symbol of their empire that existed WELL before Pearl Harbor and Nanking, and should not be related solely to just that. It is not comparable to the Nazi flag, as, it existed before any specific governmental/military policies and did not represent the fascist party.
It is just as evil a symbol as the British Union Jack, the US Stars and Stripes, and the USSR Communist Flag in an international, and domestic conception.
Jeremy
PS if you read up in your history of the Far East you will realize that a lot of America's 'moral' stand was based on the fear that they will lose their economic monopoly with a vast amout of China if it was taken over by Japan.
History is a matter of perception on whose lies you believe.
One could then say to any Amerindian, Central American, Cuban etc. that planting an American flag at some sort of historical/diplomatic meeting would be just as blasphemous to them. Does this mean that the US flag is evil?
Possibly getting the Rising Sun flag back into use is mere nationalism rather than antagonisn? It is a symbol of their empire that existed WELL before Pearl Harbor and Nanking, and should not be related solely to just that. It is not comparable to the Nazi flag, as, it existed before any specific governmental/military policies and did not represent the fascist party.
It is just as evil a symbol as the British Union Jack, the US Stars and Stripes, and the USSR Communist Flag in an international, and domestic conception.
Jeremy
PS if you read up in your history of the Far East you will realize that a lot of America's 'moral' stand was based on the fear that they will lose their economic monopoly with a vast amout of China if it was taken over by Japan.
History is a matter of perception on whose lies you believe.
The Rising Sun flag isn't a national flag, it's a flag of their navy. Obviously some of us have been rationalised to death in the dirge of the school system.
The Nippon is their national flag, I have no problem with their national flag here.
For a little context here... I have a Japanese aunt and 1/2 Japanese cousins. I also have a Japanese ENT doctor, who was and/or is a consolate to the US. He has in his office, a US flag and the Japanese national Nippon, but NO Rising Sun. Perhaps if he has some respect for not draping that flag in his own office, perhaps we should reconsider our views if we think it's just sheer nonsense or that we should hang any ol' flag any ol' place.
The Nippon is their national flag, I have no problem with their national flag here.
For a little context here... I have a Japanese aunt and 1/2 Japanese cousins. I also have a Japanese ENT doctor, who was and/or is a consolate to the US. He has in his office, a US flag and the Japanese national Nippon, but NO Rising Sun. Perhaps if he has some respect for not draping that flag in his own office, perhaps we should reconsider our views if we think it's just sheer nonsense or that we should hang any ol' flag any ol' place.