Kamakazi!

[outrager 6]

Quote

Suicide bombing seems far braver to me than say bombing people from 45,000ft or firing missiles at them from miles away.

Well said!

bsbd!

Yuri.

[billvon 3,113]

"If a US pilot chooses to steers his mortally wounded fighter into an enemy carrier and destroys it, he's gonna get an award. If a japanese pilot is ordered to do it as part of the battle plan does the same, people here call him insane."

(your restating of my post)

That's an interesting change you made - presumably to suggest that if someone is _ordered_ to commit suicide, and they obey, then they are insane. It's interesting because one of the distinctions some people make between soldiers and terrorists is that soldiers are ordered to do things, and thus are not subject to the same sorts of ethical judgements as terrorists who do such things on their own.

Yet here you seem to be implying that the people who _do_ take the initiative (i.e. do things they are not ordered to do) are the heroes and the people who obey orders are the crazy ones. Interesting.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Suicide bombing seems far braver to me than say bombing people from 45,000ft or firing missiles at them from miles away.

Well said!

It's not really on topic. And what does bravery have to do with conducting warfare, anyway? Why are we glorifying a something that should be treated as an demanding, professional, difficult and stressful job?

The bravest soldier isn't always the best one. The best ones are the best trained and best prepared.

this is not the x-games, kids

Think back on ancient times fighting with a sword. The best warriors weren't out making it personal and taking chances with each opponent - they died quickly. The best analogy would likely be harvest - they went out and killed (harvested) every enemy they could, because that was what ended the war the quickest and most decisively. It's hard work, dirty and distasteful. The good soldier has a hard enough time without making it all about 'bravery' or other nonsense. He has a real job to do, not suck up to your fantasy of some story book character that you tie the word 'soldier' to.

Calling to task the bravery or lack of bravery of a soldier in a missile silo etc is akin to demanding cops disarm sufficiently to give the criminals a 'fair' fight. It's nuts.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Interesting.

This is fun to see you purposing playing here, but I have to get back to work. I'll try again later. The only thing is this was listed as 'bravery'. Bravery in sacrificing life is a personal thing, not a strategic goal. If you won't acknowledge the difference in someone making the conscious choice to cover a live grenade vs following an unnecessary order to crash their plane or even strap on a bomb and self destruct in a civilian market.....

I think you do and, sorry, but you're just being very Kallend like here. It's only fun for a couple of posts, then it just gets tedious.

later

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,113]

>Bravery in sacrificing life is a personal thing, not a strategic goal.

Of course. Yet we honor (and therefore institutionalize) bravery by giving awards for it. Which is understandable; the right kind of bravery benefits us.

> If you won't acknowledge the difference in someone making the
> conscious choice to cover a live grenade vs following an unnecessary
>order to crash their plane or even strap on a bomb and self destruct in
>a civilian market.....

You've picked two extremes; I will pick the other two mentioned above.

Is there really a moral difference between a US soldier who defies orders to stay on to certain death to kill japanese, and an insurgent who faces certain death to kill US marines at a checkpoint? There is surely an emotional difference, as people who kill marines get me very angry and people who kill insurgents get me less angry. But that also means that there might be someone in Iraq who feels exactly the opposite - and for the same reasons.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>Is there really a moral difference between a US soldier who defies orders to stay on to certain death to kill japanese, and an insurgent who faces certain death to kill US marines at a checkpoint? There is surely an emotional difference, as people who kill marines get me very angry and people who kill insurgents get me less angry. But that also means that there might be someone in Iraq who feels exactly the opposite - and for the same reasons.

It's hard to stay away, it's very boring at work today... But that was a much more sincere post and harder to work with except for the caviats you added.

I can't speak to the examples frames of mind other than defying orders to kill someone takes them out of the position of serving anyone but themselves - dispicable. And the 'insurgent' staying to kills civilians is also dispicable. Perhaps in the same way, or not, I wouldn't know as I said. But both wrong.

Then you move to something personal - You feel more angry because you realize the marine (in general, not the one defying orders to kill) is more likely on the higher moral ground (as you were raised) because of his mission and that he's not tasked himself to kill civilians as the portrayal of insurgents has been presented to us. And trying to empathize with someone else who has an unreasonable position is wasted energy. Sometimes you are allowed to be right and they can be wrong. Sometimes you can both be right but come to different conclusions due to different upbringings and culture - then it's simply survival of the strongest. It's a statement that we have the ability to empathize even with odd or different moral positions is tribute to our ability to think. But when it takes away our ability to make a sound judgment call, then it is handcuffs, not intellect.

Other topic - I don't define bravery by how someone else 'feels' about it - nor would I define it by getting awarded medals. So someone outside the situation gets 'very angry' or someone in Iraq 'feels the opposite' - who cares. It has no bearing on the bravery of the person in the situation. Only bearing on some self righteous observers who don't know all the facts as well. (So it's not so much an "emotional difference" as an emotional response. That's just an indicator of the character of the observers, not participants)

My favorite quote from the series I'm reading goes something like "man should have no sovereign other than reason"

We move too much on feelings - we also make rash judgments on entire groups due to highly publicised indicidents of certain out of the norm individuals. It's a shame really.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[JackC 0]

Quote

Quote

>If a US pilot chooses to steers his mortally wounded fighter into an enemy carrier and destroys it, he's gonna get an award. If a japanese pilot is ordered to do it as part of the battle plan does the same, people here call him insane.

Just for clarity here in the distinction - although I know you are fully aware of the difference.

Kamikaze pilots were volunteers.

"The Way of the Samurai is found in death. When it comes to either/or, there is only the quick choice of death. It is not particularly difficult. Be determined and advance. To say that dying without reaching one's aim is to die a dog's death is the frivolous way of sophisticates. When pressed with the choice of life or death, it is not necessary to gain one's aim." - Yamamoto Tsunetomo, Hagakure

[eaglenrider 0]

Quote

Quote

In other words, don't kill yourself for a freaking 'cause'.

__________________________________________________

Interesting!
Let me ask you this.
Do you consider standing up to a superior force on a battlefield where your death is a probable certainty "suicide".

You are purposely misreading me just to be contentious.
__________________________________________________
I'm not reading or misreading anything,rehmwa, I'm simply asking your opinion. " Do you consider standing up to a superior force on a battlefield where your death is a probable certainty "suicide" ?"

Blues,
Cliff

[mr2mk1g 10]

Man, you guys sure know how to muck up a relatively simple thread about Japanese Kamikaze.

The likelihood is we are pretty much incapable of fully understanding the mindset of the young men who flew their planes out to meet American fleets more than 60 years ago. Remember those men came from a society which had only 70 years previously been completely isolated from the rest of the world, embracing feudalism under the rule of the Tokugawa.

Their society still believed that true warriors faced one another across a pair of katana or nodachi. Their society still had fresh in their minds a warrior code which dated back nearly a millennia. I don't mean some airy fairy old fashioned idea that is remembered back through the mists of time as we westerners see a swordsman – I mean the pilot's actual parents would have seen Bushi and Samurai walking round with swords, living their life as a warrior.

Part of the warrior code embraced by that society was an incredibly strict code of honor.
One which we simply don't grasp. One which drives them to commit ritualized suicide through seppuku should they be defeated or dishonored. Have none of you heard of the 47 Ronin? Read the story; maybe it will enlighten you as to some of the basic tenets of Bushido.

Out of the jaws of defeat it is hardly surprising that this code turned to the concept of the kamikaze; the divine wind; the storm that destroyed the Mongol invasion fleet nearly 700 years earlier. This concept is so far removed from our western values that we don't understand it. We call it insane, stupid or worse. Sanity and stupidity is defined by the society in which we live - we don't live in that society.

What is beyond comprehension to our society is simply the ultimate expression of a core belief of another. Sure we don’t understand, we're not a Japanese airman who lived through the Meiji reformation. This understanding goes on today; we just don't understand why hundreds of Japs dress up as CHIPs every weekend or why the biggest Hells Angles chapter is in Tokyo, why manga comics are so common or even tolerated, or why Karaoke is so damned popular.

If you want to look for parallels between the Kamikaze and the present situation in the Middle East go ahead... although it is far from the original question which sparked this thread. Whilst the parallels are certainly there, the kamikaze and the suicide bomber probably share far less than many who've contributed to this thread obviously believe.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'm simply asking your opinion. " Do you consider standing up to a superior force on a battlefield where your death is a probable certainty "suicide" ?"

Ok, simple answer then - no

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[JackC 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm simply asking your opinion. " Do you consider standing up to a superior force on a battlefield where your death is a probable certainty "suicide" ?"

Ok, simple answer then - no

What about going up against 10 cops armed with a swag bag, stripey shirt and a Saturday Night Special shouting "You'll never take me alive, Copeur!!"

[jdfreefly 1]

Interesting that this code of conduct did not cause the Emperor and General Hideki Tojo to take their own lives under the shame of defeat.

As is often the case, the leaders of a people rarely hold themselves to the same standards of honor and morality that they hold their citizens to, or that the citizens hold each other....

Often, the reason for this is that these codes of honor and morality are designed for one purpose, to allow the ruling class to control the masses. What I think we have to ask ourselves when we frantically wave that flag, and support those troops, and pay those taxes, and hate those terrorists, is this:

"Do I support this because I believe in what we are doing, or am I just following the crowd? Am I just doing what is expected of me for fear of appearing to have no honor, no morality or no patriotism?" When you fail to ask these questions, you allow yourself to become a tool for evil men.

For the record:
I do support our troops, I have been behind the war in Iraq from day one, although I have always been suspicious of our governements motives.

I do not hate the terrorists, but I do pitty them and condemn their actions. I do not think they are cowards, I think they are missguided people, with little hope, who have allowed themselves to become the tools of evil men.

Methane Freefly - got stink?

[mr2mk1g 10]

'Course for the pratchet fan it would be standing on top of a hill during a thunderstorm wearning wet copper armour shouting "the God's are all bastards".

[FallRate 0]

Quote

I think Zep put the counter argument more clearly, this one needed a couple reads to get.

What can I say? I value brevity.

FallRate

[Zep 0]

Oh boy, I wish I was that eloquent but I'm not an never will be.

Your post apitomises exactly what I would of liked have said, when I said earlier that the western world
did not understand their culture.




Thank you for explaining it.




>The likelihood is we are pretty much incapable of fully understanding the mindset of the young men who flew their planes out to meet American fleets more than 60 years ago. Remember those men came from a society which had only 70 years previously been completely isolated from the rest of the world, embracing feudalism under the rule of the Tokugawa.

Their society still believed that true warriors faced one another across a pair of katana or nodachi. Their society still had fresh in their minds a warrior code which dated back nearly a millennia. I don't mean some airy fairy old fashioned idea that is remembered back through the mists of time as we westerners see a swordsman – I mean the pilot's actual parents would have seen Bushi and Samurai walking round with swords, living their life as a warrior.

Part of the warrior code embraced by that society was an incredibly strict code of honor.
One which we simply don't grasp. One which drives them to commit ritualized suicide through seppuku should they be defeated or dishonored. Have none of you heard of the 47 Ronin? Read the story; maybe it will enlighten you as to some of the basic tenets of Bushido.

Out of the jaws of defeat it is hardly surprising that this code turned to the concept of the kamikaze; the divine wind; the storm that destroyed the Mongol invasion fleet nearly 700 years earlier. This concept is so far removed from our western values that we don't understand it. We call it insane, stupid or worse. Sanity and stupidity is defined by the society in which we live - we don't live in that society.

What is beyond comprehension to our society is simply the ultimate expression of a core belief of another. Sure we don’t understand, we're not a Japanese airman who lived through the Meiji reformation. This understanding goes on today; we just don't understand why hundreds of Japs dress up as CHIPs every weekend or why the biggest Hells Angles chapter is in Tokyo, why manga comics are so common or even tolerated, or why Karaoke is so damned popular.

If you want to look for parallels between the Kamikaze and the present situation in the Middle East go ahead... although it is far from the original question which sparked this thread. Whilst the parallels are certainly there, the kamikaze and the suicide bomber probably share far less than many who've contributed to this thread obviously believe.<


Post note: My Father was a raider under General Wingate in Burma, He hated the japenese with a blind hatred,
When he finally explained to me why he hated them, He said, I admired only two soldiers (enemy) they where
the Africa Corps and the Japenese.

Gone fishing

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

I don't support the suicide bombers but I do think it takes courage to do what they do.

funny you should say that, I read where a bomber was upset because he was told he was "dropping off a car". Turned out the mindless in charge remotely set off the bomb with him in it. He was just a bit angry.

brave hardly, stupid is the term I would use.