Letters from Iwo Jima

[JudgeDredd]

So...to summarize...

in a court of law, Collective Guilt does not exist

outside a court of law Collective Guilt does exist

There you go. An apparently less intelligent than you lot Scot has summed it up for you. Now ffs grow up.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

So...to summarize...

in a court of law, Collective Guilt does not exist

outside a court of law Collective Guilt does exist

There you go. An apparently less intelligent than you lot Scot has summed it up for you. Now ffs grow up.

Thanks Judge,

We unruly children do need a good slap once in a while! [:D]

I gues I will have to give up taunting him in the interest of civility, but I have to admit that once he demonstrated that no amount of logical argument would ever sway him that taunting him became way more entertaining.

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


I and others provided multiple examples of collective emotional experiences and you persist in pursuing the narrow minded definition of guilt as merely a legal status why continuing to deny the simple fact of reality that it is also an emotion that can be experienced collectively.

Surely you understand the difference between collective guilt, which is where you are found guilty of something because of the actions of others, and an emotion you share with others, because you are observing the same phenomena or listening to the same piece of music.

Surely you understand that difference.

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

So...to summarize...

Dont give up your day job.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


I and others provided multiple examples of collective emotional experiences and you persist in pursuing the narrow minded definition of guilt as merely a legal status why continuing to deny the simple fact of reality that it is also an emotion that can be experienced collectively.

Surely you understand the difference between collective guilt, which is where you are found guilty of something because of the actions of others, and an emotion you share with others, because you are observing the same phenomena or listening to the same piece of music.

Surely you understand that difference.

What I surely understand is that you persist in wanting to define collective guilt as a legal status. You just presented a fine example.

Surely you undertand that an "emotion you are sharing with others" constitutes a "collective" experience, ergo the emotion was experinced collectively and if that emotion happens to be guilt, then you have participated in the experience of collective guilt. How can you possibly continue to deny it's existence with a straight face?

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

So...to summarize...

Dont give up your day job.

Perhaps you should.

[Ike99]

Panzerjaeger Hortlund-When I ignored your ad homs, you though that was revealing, when I ignored your funny pictures, you thought that was revealing, and now when I ignored your ramblings about me and why I post here, you thought that was revealing. Sometimes a spade is just a spade you know, it could be that Im ignoring you because I think you are just posting irrelevant and pointless "theories".

You said that you apologize, that I push your buttons, and you think Im using forum to excercise my argumentative skills. I dont know what to respond to such utter nonsense. So I ignored it. In the future, I will continue to ignore you when you post random BS.

Hans does this because he has a very weak position. If you take out the...

I realize that may be difficllt for you to grasp given your educational handicap.

You might want to get a clue that the rest of your species looks down on attorneys as the truly misguided village idiots of the species.

Ike became a laughing stock of these forums some time ago with his anti-American diatribes, why are you working so industriously to beat him out for the champion laughing stock position?

His post would be half as long and quite possibly some could be taken out altogether.

When someone makes a valid point he counters with an ¨ad hom¨ so in his own mind he is effectively countering the point. Then he tries to get others to share in his ad hom attack to solidify his own dillusional perception.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Panzerjaeger Hortlund-When I ignored your ad homs, you though that was revealing, when I ignored your funny pictures, you thought that was revealing, and now when I ignored your ramblings about me and why I post here, you thought that was revealing. Sometimes a spade is just a spade you know, it could be that Im ignoring you because I think you are just posting irrelevant and pointless "theories".

You said that you apologize, that I push your buttons, and you think Im using forum to excercise my argumentative skills. I dont know what to respond to such utter nonsense. So I ignored it. In the future, I will continue to ignore you when you post random BS.

Hans does this because he has a very weak position. If you take out the...

I realize that may be difficllt for you to grasp given your educational handicap.

You might want to get a clue that the rest of your species looks down on attorneys as the truly misguided village idiots of the species.

Ike became a laughing stock of these forums some time ago with his anti-American diatribes, why are you working so industriously to beat him out for the champion laughing stock position?

His post would be half as long and quite possibly some could be taken out altogether.

When someone makes a valid point he counters with an ¨ad hom¨ so in his own mind he is effectively countering the point. Then he tries to get others to share in his ad hom attack to solidify his own dillusional perception.

When I was engaging in taunting (read ad homs) I was clearly engaging in taunting and fully and publicly admitted having done so.

If your attempt at psychanalysis had come before the disclosure it might have had a chance at being a considered a credible criticsm.

As it stands it has no credibility whatsoever.

Nice try though.

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

What I surely understand is that you persist in wanting to define collective guilt as a legal status. You just presented a fine example.

I'll take that as a "no" then.

Surely you undertand that an "emotion you are sharing with others" constitutes a "collective" experience, ergo the emotion was experinced collectively and if that emotion happens to be guilt, then you have participated in the experience of collective guilt. How can you possibly continue to deny it's existence with a straight face?

Well, what happens with the individual that does not feel that same emotion as the rest of the group? He is not experiencing that emotion that others are sharing, is he?

So, in order for us to know whether an individual is feeling that emotion or not, we have to check each individual to see whether he is feeling the emotion or not. And thus, we are making an individual test to see whether the emotion is there or not.

A side-effect of this of cource, is that the feeling is only collective among those who experience it, and if we translate this to the discussion we were having, then only those japanese guilty of warcrimes share the guilt of those warcrimes, or in other words, the guilt is not collective for all japanese members of the armed forces, only for those who are found guilty on an individual level.

The fact that you fail to understand this is truly amazing.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

So...to summarize...

Dont give up your day job.

You know, PJH

You truly are beautiful...and I'd find it very difficult to come up with a reason not to hump you....
but drop it

[morvwilson]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Your saying the US invaded and conquered the Phillipines so it could then just turn around and give the Phillipines back it´s complete independence and self determination?

Really now. [:D] How sweet.

Does that make a lot of sence to you?

Or does it make a lot more sence to say "Americanize the Philippines¨ & ¨Prepare the Phillipines for Independance¨ are nice sounding code words saying, set up a government in the Philliines that is sure to along with the wishes of the imperialist masters?

Come on now, I am still trying to keep this reasonable.
The reason the US went to the Philipines was to do damage to the Spanish. It was still a Spanish possession in 1898. The interesting part of that was that the attack was ordered by the then assistant secretary of the Navy Teddy Roosevelt, who did not actually have the authority to give the order.

At the end of your post you imply that you seem to think that "Americanization" is evil in some way.
Is it wrong to teach people that they can do things on their own and not depend on some strong man to lead them?
Is there something wrong with freedom?
If it weren't for the "Americanization" of Japan after WW2, Japan would not be the economic power it is today. Not to mention that Japan has the third largest Navy in the world today.

You see, the reason I have tried to steer you away from publications like The Guardian and New York Times etc., is because this is how they think. They think the very society that gave them freedom of the press (The United States of America) is an evil empire.

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: morvwilson

They think the very society that gave them freedom of the press (The United States of America) is an evil empire.

Oh really? In Sweden we got our law regarding freedom of the press in 1766. When did you get yours?

[ORANGE]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

None of them are saying it didn't happen and none of them are excusing it.

That is your mistaken defensive stance at being taking to task for your prejudiced efforts to hold them up on a balance sacle and proclaim them EQUAL.

One was doctrine...one was not. It is simple fact you continue to bury your head in the sand in denial of.

Wow Hans, your pretty good at sounding intelligent but at the same time being completely wrong.

No one is denying? What´s this?

If I am wrong and you have records to link up confirming wide spread killing of POW's at the hands of Americans please enlighten away. Or is it you have a hunch of a Yank Dog conspiracy and Marts post is conformation

That´s all they have done on here Hans is to deny, try and minimize or simply lie about the atrocities of the Allied troops in the Pacific. Monkey see, hear and do no evil you know?

One was doctrine...one was not. It is simple fact you continue to bury your head in the sand in denial of.

My hands not in the sand, yours? When one looks at the interment of the Japanese Americans in the USA, the dehumanizing propaganda meant to instill racial hatred in the average 19 year old Marine. The widespread overlooking of killings of POWs. Japanese skulls on magazine covers.

Hmmm...seems pretty much doctrine to me.

I would like to see the proof of these alleged widespread atrocities of Allied Troops in the Pacific theatre.

Where were these widespread killings of POWS? And what do you mean by widespread? Do you mean that one POW was killed in the Aleutians and one killed in Borneo so that they were widespread spatially? Or did one occur in 1941 and another in 1945 so they were widespread chronologically?

As for the internment camp I know a gentleman who was interred in one and he is a PROUD American, I mean a walking tall, strong, independent AMERICAN. His son joined the Marines. The Japanese in the United States also had unique ties to Japan which may or may not have been mentioned. Over 20,000 Japanese Americans joined the Japanese war effort.

Japanese in Canada were also interred, as well as other countries in the America’s I believe but that of course will never come up because it is easy to ignore facts that do not fit with the popular mythology.

Certainly none of the camps in the America or Canada reached the level of dehumanization and brutality of those in Europe, Asia or Eurasia and to say that is to justify the acts in those brutal camps.

As for the offensive skulls on magazine covers what exactly is your problem with that? The first amendment in the United States covers freedom of speech. Is this a freedom of speech issue?

[ORANGE]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: morvwilson

They think the very society that gave them freedom of the press (The United States of America) is an evil empire.

Oh really? In Sweden we got our law regarding freedom of the press in 1766. When did you get yours?

In 1791 which is during a time that Sweden did not have freedom of speech.

[Erik Rutins]

Just a reminder to everyone, please keep this discussion out of the personal sphere. It's definitely crossed the line a few times but is not irretrievable. Keep it civil, keep it reasoned.

[ORANGE]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

What I surely understand is that you persist in wanting to define collective guilt as a legal status. You just presented a fine example.

I'll take that as a "no" then.

Surely you undertand that an "emotion you are sharing with others" constitutes a "collective" experience, ergo the emotion was experinced collectively and if that emotion happens to be guilt, then you have participated in the experience of collective guilt. How can you possibly continue to deny it's existence with a straight face?

Well, what happens with the individual that does not feel that same emotion as the rest of the group? He is not experiencing that emotion that others are sharing, is he?

So, in order for us to know whether an individual is feeling that emotion or not, we have to check each individual to see whether he is feeling the emotion or not. And thus, we are making an individual test to see whether the emotion is there or not.

A side-effect of this of cource, is that the feeling is only collective among those who experience it, and if we translate this to the discussion we were having, then only those japanese guilty of warcrimes share the guilt of those warcrimes, or in other words, the guilt is not collective for all japanese members of the armed forces, only for those who are found guilty on an individual level.

The fact that you fail to understand this is truly amazing.

You use the word racism and its variants frequently. Is this not a direct play toward collective guilt?

[morvwilson]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: morvwilson

They think the very society that gave them freedom of the press (The United States of America) is an evil empire.

Oh really? In Sweden we got our law regarding freedom of the press in 1766. When did you get yours?

Pzh!
I had given up on you ever responding, glad to see I was wrong about that.
IMO our founding fathers were not above taking the best ideas on how to do things from anywhere they were found. Maybe Sweeden was where they got the idea. It may rate some checking. As you know, in 1766 the US was still under British rule, but that I think we would need a new thread to go that way. (enough going here as it is)

So, what did you think of my previous posts? The Sir Thomas Moore example?

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: morvwilson

So, what did you think of my previous posts? The Sir Thomas Moore example?

Im afraid I didnt see the relevance of it to the discussion we had about collective guilt.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

What I surely understand is that you persist in wanting to define collective guilt as a legal status. You just presented a fine example.

I'll take that as a "no" then.

Surely you undertand that an "emotion you are sharing with others" constitutes a "collective" experience, ergo the emotion was experinced collectively and if that emotion happens to be guilt, then you have participated in the experience of collective guilt. How can you possibly continue to deny it's existence with a straight face?

Well, what happens with the individual that does not feel that same emotion as the rest of the group? He is not experiencing that emotion that others are sharing, is he?

So, in order for us to know whether an individual is feeling that emotion or not, we have to check each individual to see whether he is feeling the emotion or not. And thus, we are making an individual test to see whether the emotion is there or not.

A side-effect of this of cource, is that the feeling is only collective among those who experience it, and if we translate this to the discussion we were having, then only those japanese guilty of warcrimes share the guilt of those warcrimes, or in other words, the guilt is not collective for all japanese members of the armed forces, only for those who are found guilty on an individual level.

The fact that you fail to understand this is truly amazing.

Disecting the group into individuals is indeed necessary to ascertain what each individual experienced. You then fail to take the necessary next step in assembling the data gleaned into a group representative set, auspiciously because doing so would undermine your circular argument. Examine 100 individuals to ascertain what each experienced and come away with 72, or 37 or 2 (the number, as long as it is greater than one, is irrelevant) who experienced the same emotional response to the stimulus and you have undenaible documentation that the emotional response was experienced collectively. We both know you are intelligent enough to understand this and your dogmatic denial of it appears to represent nothing more than irrational obstinance.

Your misperception that only those comitting an act can feel guilt for it is completely baseless and a decided delusionary misconception of reality. It is perfectly well possible for individuals to feel guilt by association. As a member of the human race, I feel no end of guilt for the manner in which my self proclaimed superior animal species tramples every other life form on the planet in it's hasty pursuit of it's petty self interests. I don't have to personnally trample every other life form in my path to feel guilt over the fact that my species as a whole does so.

While I don't personnally participate in this particular manifestation of collective guilt there is a large segment of my society that constantly preaches to me that I should feel guilt by association simply for being of caucasion European descent (only partially as I am 50% blood Lebonese and only a quarter German and a quarter Irish in terms of heritage)....guilt for the European imperialistic exploitation of much of much of the rest of the world, "white" guilt for the slave trade......ad infintum.

It is a simpe fact of reality that guilt by association is a common human emotion, which can come in collective form. It isn't a fact of reality because "I feel it is" and I don't merely "think" it is becasue of the way I "feel". I know it is because I possess sufficient powers of perception and intelligence to be capable of comprehending that it is. This is the ONLY reason why anyone can know anything regarding the reality of their existence. It doesn't come from the historical study of laws and norms and standards, it doesn't come from a flood of "corroborating" second opinions.

Frankly, I find the need some evidence for supplying third party support for their opinion a decided sign of insecurity. I don't want to know, nor will I be impressed by, what you think because of what others have told you, I want to know , and will, or will not be impressed by what you think FOR YOURSELF. That is why I don't insult others buy trying to prop up my observations and opinions with the opinions of others. I find the practice rather comical.

[06 Maestro]

I don’t like responding to a “sock puppet”. I picture myself arguing with a 10 year old idiot savant with a special ability to type 150 words per minute with his nose while carrying on a conversation with the two sock puppets on his hands. There is not much point in presenting facts repeatedly to a creature with the common sense of a rock, and the civility of the Wicked Witch of the West.

This thread does need a moderator, not to sensor, but to acquire evidence of the need for Matrix to purchase the software required to spot sock puppets, and their master. There are a growing number of sites (like Paradox) that simply boot the trolls permanently-I think it is a good idea.

It is slightly ironic the PZJ Hortlund could not perform his puppet tricks on Sweden’s primary military game site of Paradox Interactive, and must come to an American based site to ply his trade of demonizing America.
I, like many others on this site did not study military history by watching Victory at Sea. I learned 40 years ago to check both sides of the story if you want to get close to the truth. I love history, and always went far beyond what was required for my courses-you are not fooling me. The attempts at historical revisionism and the open insults/name calling (begun by PZJ Hotlund) are really pathetic and tiresome.

So, PZJ Hortlund…, you can pat yourself on the back for chasing another Pig Dog American out of the discussion if you like. The reality is, I am going to have a very nice day at home; I'm off from work and will be reading some military history and news, maybe play a game of CotA, already working on some fresh ground coffee and a fine cigar. Life is good, and I will enjoy it even more after hitting the “ignore” button to eliminate you and yours. I had never felt the desire to permanently block someone before, so, in that regard, you truly are special. Congratulations.