Iwo Jima changes name........

[Nikademus]

maybe. personally, i don't see what all the fuss is. The history books arn't changing since 'at the time' it was called Iwo Jima. It's not the name thats important, but the battle itself.

[putting Mulder back in cryo]

[anarchyintheuk]

Placenames change all the time for a variety of reasons. In this case it's military. It's ironic that the only reason there are former residents and descendents of residents around to request the reversion (assuming the majority of them, in fact, do want it changed) is that they were evacuated by the same organization that supposedly started the problem in the first place. The fact of the matter is that no one except soldiers live there anymore and, considering what is probably buried there is enough to waken Godzilla, no one ever will. I would consider it historical revision to change the name of an island known by millions to a name known by thousands who, if they ever lived there, don't anymore. More people went to a place they knew only as Iwo Jima and died there than however many descendants of the original islanders are alive today.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Placenames change all the time for a variety of reasons. In this case it's military. It's ironic that the only reason there are former residents and descendents of residents around to request the reversion (assuming the majority of them, in fact, do want it changed) is that they were evacuated by the same organization that supposedly started the problem in the first place. The fact of the matter is that no one except soldiers live there anymore and, considering what is probably buried there is enough to waken Godzilla, no one ever will. I would consider it historical revision to change the name of an island known by millions to a name known by thousands who, if they ever lived there, don't anymore. More people went to a place they knew only as Iwo Jima and died there than however many descendants of the original islanders are alive today.

Thank you

[Feinder]

Yes, but 20 years from now when a whole generation is schooled as it being Iwo To, when they hear about a battle being fought on an island named "Iwo Jima" it won't be associated with "Iwo To" - the places will be distict in their minds (in fact Iwo Jima will no longer exist).  The significanace is lost.
 
Names are important.  They are not only lines and letters on a map, they define our history and help us to remember it.
 
If you want to change history, to remake a perception, you change names.
 
The Turks didn't want the capital of Christian empire in their "model" Islamic state.  So they changed Constantinople to Istambul.
 
The Soviets eradicate the Czars and Orthodoxy, so they change St. Petersburg to Leningrad (you can't very well officially be an athiest state with a major city named for a Saint after all!).
 
Kruschev comes along and changes Stalingrad back to Volgograd, to further expunge the harsh memories of Stalin. 
 
Frankly, the people of Iwo Whatever can call their island anything they want, it's THEIR island.  But changing the name -IS- significant.  It -DOES- have a purpose, and that purpose is to distance itself (and thereby diminish) the significance that is Iwo Jima.  And given time, it does work.
 
-F-

[Nikademus]

ok....i see where this is going [8|], so i'll leave it with this....."would Japanese citizens care if an American battlesite was renamed?"

Would german citizens care if the French renamed Verdun?

Would german citizens care if Russia changed the name of Stalingrad? (oops....they already did)

Do the British care if Argentinians call the Falklands war by the name they gave the island chain?

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Yes, but 20 years from now when a whole generation is schooled as it being Iwo To, when they hear about a battle being fought on an island named "Iwo Jima" it won't be associated with "Iwo To" - the places will be distict in their minds (in fact Iwo Jima will no longer exist). The significanace is lost.

Names are important. They are not only lines and letters on a map, they define our history and help us to remember it.

If you want to change history, to remake a perception, you change names.

The Turks didn't want the capital of Christian empire in their "model" Islamic state. So they changed Constantinople to Istambul.

The Soviets eradicate the Czars and Orthodoxy, so they change St. Petersburg to Leningrad (you can't very well officially be an athiest state with a major city named for a Saint after all!).

Kruschev comes along and changes Stalingrad back to Volgograd, to further expunge the harsh memories of Stalin.

Frankly, the people of Iwo Whatever can call their island anything they want, it's THEIR island. But changing the name -IS- significant. It -DOES- have a purpose, and that purpose is to distance itself (and thereby diminish) the significance that is Iwo Jima. And given time, it does work.

-F-

Frankly - I don't know why we gave it back to them in the first place...

[carnifex]

OK THANKS A FUCKING LOT
NEXT TIME PLEASE PUT "SPOILER" IN THE SUBJECT LINE - NOT ALL OF US HAVE PLAYED WITP ALL THE WAY THROUGH

The 1945 battle for Iwo Jima pitted some 100,000 U.S. troops against 22,000 Japanese deeply dug into a labyrinth of tunnels and trenches. Nearly 7,000 Americans were killed capturing the island, and fewer than 1,000 of the Japanese would survive.

[Jam_USMC]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Maybe a bit inflamatory to say as much, but it's probably a flavor of the erasing of WW2 from Japanese history.  Considering their portrayal of WW2 over the last 50 years, to me at least; by reverting back to a name that few have ever even heard of - it's just one more way of making it as it it (WW2) never happened.

-F-

Agreed. Japanese spent a generation or two forgetting that war, and I guess maybe they are still trying. The average American (or Allied nation of that time) knows much more about the war, and that battle, than the average Japanese--and always will. And For two reasons: We won the battle. We won the war.

That said, probably the only people in the world who are even aware of this story--and care about it--are the people who live(d) there, Military historians, and those of us on this forum.

Edit: Immediately after reading this story I grabbed my Sharpie and made the appropriate correction to my DVD collection to relect recent trends and avoid being offensive to any segment of this planet's inhabitants. I now own a copy of "Letters From Iwo To." You should too.[:)]

[Ian R]

"They were evacuated in 1944 as U.S. forces advanced across the Pacific. Some Japanese navy officers who moved in to fortify the island mistakenly called it Iwo Jima, and the name stuck."

Its name at the time of the battle is Iwo Jima, so its the battle of Iwo Jima regardless of any name change. The mistake came IIUC, because the characters for "to" and "jima" are not quite, but pretty much interchangeable.

In the English language we know it as Iwo Jima; Cologne or Koln? Munich or Munchen? Vien or Vienna? Rome or Roma? Iwo To or Iwo Jima? WitP is in English, so go with the English language.

A non issue.

Similarly:

Hollandia is now called Jayapura, but it was still Hollandia until 1 October 1962, became Kota Baru, at one point was called Sukarnopura (until '68 when Sukarno was deposed) and then changed to its current name, which means "military victory city". Ethnic Papuans however prefer the name Port Numbai.

Sticking with the historical Hollandia seems like a good idea, regardless of what the locals may have called it at the time.


Here is another example:

The Vogelkop pennisula (Dutch) means the "birds head" or "chicken head" penninsula (in English). The Indonesian name is Kepala Burung.
 
Would anyone like to guess what kepala burung translates to?

However, in English usage, the Dutch form was most often used (or it seems so from reading the various histories) so simply go with that.

Then of course there are the names for places in what was German New Guinea pre 1914, Kaiser-Wilhemsland . Not all the places ending in "schhafen" were changed prior to 1941/2, although Friedrich Wilhelmschhafen was named Madang by the Australian troops who occupied it.

Finschhafen on the other hand is still Finschhafen, albeit sometimes spelt Finschaffen, Finschafen, or even Finschaven.

[TOMLABEL]

d

[TOMLABEL]

ORIGINAL: carnifex

OK THANKS A FUCKING LOT
NEXT TIME PLEASE PUT "SPOILER" IN THE SUBJECT LINE - NOT ALL OF US HAVE PLAYED WITP ALL THE WAY THROUGH

The 1945 battle for Iwo Jima pitted some 100,000 U.S. troops against 22,000 Japanese deeply dug into a labyrinth of tunnels and trenches. Nearly 7,000 Americans were killed capturing the island, and fewer than 1,000 of the Japanese would survive.

[:D][:D][:D]

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: TOMLABEL

d

Probably the most intelligent post in the whole thread.

[ilovestrategy]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

What it really sounds like is more "PC" non-sense....

[&o][&o][&o]