MovieChat Forums > Flags of Our Fathers (2006) Discussion > I´m sick of the glorifying of the americ...

I´m sick of the glorifying of the american soldiers!

posted 18 years ago by tnordseth
520 replies | jump to latest

99% of the movies about ww2 is about american and british soldiers. Young people today are taught that ww2 was only won because of the invasion of normandy (which btw only 50% of the troops were american. the rest was English, French, Polish, Dutch, Norwegian, Danish and other soldiers)

Her is a fact for you history lacking americans:

The German army had 300 divisions on the eastern front (that´s Russia btw)
-3 million soldiers fought the red army since july 22nd 1941.

On the western front, the German army had only 50-60 divisions.

FACT.

American and British loss; under 1 million soldiers combined.
German losses; 7 million soldiers.
Russian losses; 17 million soldiers!!!!!

The war was won almost solely due to the red army, with soldiers under a brutal regime, who faced being shot by their own officers if they didn´t advance.

When USA joined the war in late 41, the German invasion of Russia had already stopped outside of Moscow and Leningrad. American soldiers didn´t join the war in europe until 3 years later.

So stop thinking you saved europe! I mean, I really respect the effort you made, as well as the great sacrifices. But stop glorifying it!!!

But I will definately watch red sun, black sand:)

-Norwegian

[–] cwklay 18 years ago

1. Without American intervention Britian would have been invaded and fallen making an amphibious invasion of europe nearly impossible.

2. Russia was on the verge of complete collapse, stalin's purges left the Red Army with virtually no officer corps, their weapons were in many cases held togeather with glue and tape, and their main tactical achievment was the human wave attack (which is probably why the Germans had an 8/1 kill ratio.) It was the winter that stopped the German army outside of moscow, the Red Army was completely swept away and the city was stripped of anything valuble and evacuated. Combine this with the fact that had the pacific war gone the other way, the Japanese were planning to invade Russia from the south east.

3. Remember this is a "world war" which means that isolating any single theater such as Europe is misleading. The fate of Europe was tied to the outcome of the global war. Even if European countries had managed to repel the nazis, an Axis dominated Asia and Middle East would have led to eventual domination.

4. As for your list of losses I hardly think we should glorify the red army and a regime that was wasteful, corrupt, incompetant, and threw away the lives of so many millions. Right after the invasion Stalin was so surprised that he had a nervous breakdown and the USSR was left virtually leaderless for a matter of weeks. The Red Army only began to make headway after the Nazis were decimated by the winter and the high command was distracted dealing with losses in Africa and threat of invasion from a secure Britain.

5. You can compare the respective sacrifices all you want, the fact is that without US economic and military support the Allies would have lost the war.

[–] jackster1687 18 years ago

You are an idiot. The movie is about United States Marines and the United States Navy. The United States got absolutely no help in fighting the Japanese in the war. You don't know anything about the war and should not even bother watching a movie if you cannot honor the sacrifice of thousands of men who died. The movie is about Iwo Jima, which is a bit distant from Moscow or Leningrad.

-American

[–] teacher_tom516 18 years ago

Okay, gotta chime in here.

"The movie is about United States Marines and the United States Navy."

That's verifiably true...

" The United States got absolutely no help in fighting the Japanese in the war."

And this is verifiably false.

The United States was part of a multinational ALLIED force that included (naturally) Australians and New Zealanders - whose nations were directly threatened and in Australia's case even attacked by the Japanese, the British who had A LOT at stake in the Pacific, even if they needed to keep the bulk of their forces in Europe. There were the Dutch who fought until their territories were overrun. And the Filipinos - an SEMI-INDEPENDENT Commonwealth (recently an American colony) - who had a stake in keeping the Japanese off their shores I would think! And let's not leave out the MASSIVE (literally) Chinese contribution to the Allied victory. The major reason that the Imperial GHQ would not countenance sustained operations in the Pacific vs the Allies such as conquering Australia or even perhaps Hawaii (though that latter is extremely far fetched) was they were already overcommitted in China - which in their eyes was almost the main theater of war! Even the Free French got in on the act with the massive battleship Richelieu.

Try reading a bit about Bataan and Corregidor, the fall of Malaya, Singapore, Hong Kong and the Dutch East Indies, the Sittang River Bridge, the Java Sea and Karel Doorman's sacrifice, the Kokoda Trail, the sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse, the sinking of the cruiser Haguro, Imphal and Kohima, the Philippine guerrilla movement, the battle of Leyte Gulf...

OR Read the surrender document signed aboard USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay - the war for the Pacific was an ALLIED effort not merely an American one.

I can almost picture General Bill Slim of the British 14th Army shaking his head and muttering "Exactly what I mean" - the British 14th Army which defended India and retook Burma and Malaya was nicknamed 'the Forgotten Army'.

Sorry 'American' but not acknowledging the mutual contributions of the Allied powers smacks of arrogance - and ignorance.

Learn and be wise.
Tom516

[–] DannyRK 18 years ago

The British campaign in Burma
The Australian campaign in New Guinea
The entire situation in China

All played a part of the pacific theater. But to make a movie about the entire Pacific War would take 10 years to film, and would probably run at over 30 hours long.

That's why this movie is good, it's about Iwo Jima, and shows that the real story is different from sensationalist media stories. Like when Jessica Lynch was in IRaq, the media used her like a pawn, just like the flag-raisers in this film.

[–] teacher_tom516 18 years ago

Indeed and I'm not knocking the movie at all - it's one of my all time favorites! I was just responding to the statement that America carried the war alone.

Technically there's 'a movie' about the entire war - the mini-series Winds of War and War and Remembrance which was very well done IMHO with great set pieces at Pearl Harbor, Midway, Tassafaronga and drama and acting that REALLY puts 'Pearl Harbor' in its place.

We don't need a mega documentary about the Pacific war, I think that any film that honestly seeks to honor the sacrifices of the men who fought the war - be it Flags of Our Fathers, Dark Blue World or even Harp of Burma - is a welcome addition to the canon of Pacific War films.

Best wishes,
Tom516

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Ddey65 16 years ago

And the poor Native American single mother soldier who was killed- her motherless children prob. got "F-all" compared to the fetching, soft spoken Lynch.

This isn't a racial thing, allenkr62. Lori Piestewa died while Jessica Lynch survived. That's why she got all the attention. Both deserve to be honored either way.

[–] 1bad180sx 18 years ago

As soon as Norway starts making good movies, they can glorify the norwegian soldiers all they want.

In the meantime, stop watching american movies if you don't like it.

[–] theh-2 18 years ago

Yes, I'm sure you're sick of glorifying the American soldier but believe me if it wasn't for them, you'd be speaking German by now. Our nation has done more to liberate people than any other nation has on the face of this earth. God bless America and the people who serve in the armed branches.

[–] malikivan 18 years ago

Hey Isnt Mike Strank from Slovakia?I read it somewhere...just wanted to know

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ppruneposts 18 years ago

There are several very well supported and referenced papers on this floating around the internet. Perhaps you might like to read a few of them and try to quash some of the arrogance that gives Americans such a bad reputation globally. The war was won by an Allied force, no one country can claim to have 'saved the World'. The American contribution was certainly a part of the Allied win.

Finally, as to whether the US has "done more to liberate people than any other nation on the face of this earth (sic)", that is a highly contentious statement considering the track record the US has of funding and supporting dictatorships worlwide.

"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." Gilbert K. Chesterton

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] RobertBengtsson 18 years ago

That's just stupid. Most nations in Europe existed long before yours was even a twinkle in the eyes of the pilgrims who went there and killed of the natives who lived there.
Your nation fought the good fight in WWII, but since then it's all gone down hill. The only fight you've won after WWII was Granada.... How impressive is that??

The Koreans, the Vietnamese and now the Iraqis are all kicking your butts.....It's easy for you to kill of the Republican Guard in the open field, but to fight an enemy who wants do die??? Not even the blessed armed forces of the USA can do that, and you will lose that battle to, if you haven't already.

Let's not talk about liberation. Who'm have you liberated since 1945? The Cubans? You left them on the beach to be slaughtered at the Bay of pigs.
Panama? You left a druglord in charge....good work, man.

You should read the notes of Robert E Lee... he knew how to fight from an underdog position. (even though I desagree with his motives, he still was a brilliant general)

On the other hand, USA makes good tv-series, such as American Dad and the Simpsons. It proves that not all americans are as brainwashed as some appear to be.

[–] Ddey65 16 years ago

The Koreans, the Vietnamese and now the Iraqis are all kicking your butts.....

The South Koreans are alive because of us, while the North Koreans remain imprisoned by an illegitimate nation created by the former Soviet Union. If Truman hadn't fired General MacArthur, the Koreans in the occupied north might've stood a chance. The Vietnamese were betrayed by communist sympathizers who sided with the Sino-Soviet-backed North, who BTW we defeated in the majority of battles. The Iraqis are NOT kicking our butts because most of the Iraqis are being killed by the people you THINK are "kicking our butts," and have turned against them.

It's easy for you to kill of the Republican Guard in the open field, but to fight an enemy who wants do die??? Not even the blessed armed forces of the USA can do that, and you will lose that battle to, if you haven't already.

Not if we don't fall for enemy propaganda they way we did in Vietnam, Lebanon, and Somalia.

Let's not talk about liberation. Who'm have you liberated since 1945?

South Korea, Eastern Austria, Grenada(who you already mentioned), Central America, Central Europe, Kuwait, Afghanistan, and yes Iraq!

Panama? You left a druglord in charge....

We took that drug lord out. There's your liberation.

[–] mrutter-1 18 years ago

Just a couple of notes:

1. Norwegian down plays the importance of the invasion of Normandy. If it wasn't that important why was Stalin pushing for it for over two years and made claims the Allieds delayed it only so that more Russian soldiers would die in hopes a post-war S.U. would be even more weaker.

2. No one is saying movies like Flags of Our Father and Saving Private Ryan are all encompasing movies and that other countries did not contribute. They are movies about one part of the war, one story. Are these movies suppose to include everyone's side? Watch a documentary.

3. Finally, don't watch it. Why should the U.S. tell the stories of other countries? Let those countries make their movies about their contributions.

[–] RobertBengtsson 18 years ago

I am just a bit confused that USA still downplays the efforts of black soldiers during WWII.

NO BLACK SOLDIER was awarded the medal of honor for WWII actions until 1996!! Talk about a racist government.

It's amazing that men actually fought for a country that denied them the same rights as their white brothers in arms. To risk getting shot although they would never be allowed in the same shops or restaurants as other americans. Sounds just as faschist as the german nazimovement in some ways.
And before you americans bang your own drum....don't forget all the japanese-americans that you kicked out despite their loyalty and service to you during the Great War. (WWI)

And yes......The movie sucked.

//B

[–] Vertigo514 18 years ago

American and British loss; under 1 million soldiers combined.
German losses; 7 million soldiers.
Russian losses; 17 million soldiers!!!!!

“Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. You win it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.”
Gen. George S. Patton

[–] flx-2 18 years ago

Hehehe, you see, Im not north american, neither european... so its quite fun to watch this kind of discussion. I see brainwashed americans that knows nothing about the rest of the world, past, present and future, but their own list of presidents (hilarious), and some times I see very well educated/intelligent americans, that has a global vision. And I see the others, europeans, asians, etc, some anti-americans, but I understand that US was very important on WW2, no doubt, but not the only one. Its obvious that in american movies, they will only glorify themselves. And we know that Hollywood is the most powerfull cinema´s industry... that subject really became boring for the rest of the world. Anyway, if it is a well filmed movie, just watch it this way. Forget the patriotic crap. I will.

WW, never again! Lets focus on our own survival. Global Warming is not fiction!

[–] bones_600 18 years ago

tnordseth, you're an idiot. sorry, but that all just really made me mad, and I'm not American, I'm Canadian, definately not pro-USA.

99% of moveis about WWII are abour US or Brits becuase that's where they're made and who the audience is.

The number of troops does not equal where the war was won. The Germans and Russians faught over single cities and dug in for extreemly long periods of time, i.e. Stalingraad, ect.

The Russians lost 17 million soldiers BECAUSE they were being shot from both sides, the Germans and their own.

And I don't think Mr. Eastwood was glorifying American soldiers, although they might deserve it, he was telling the story of the flag raisers in that picture. I think he went out of his way to press the idea that they didn't want to be seen as soldiers.

I'm sick of non-Americans bashing American-made movies for being pro-America, it just makes sense.

Wait a second, who did Enemy at the Gates glorify?

-Canadian

[–] ppruneposts 18 years ago

It's not just about who make the movies - seldom do we tackle the World Wars lesser known attrocities commited by the Allied troops. We stick to the same formula of German troops smacking women and babies, and Allied troops being the paramount of bravery.

We've written our own moral blank cheque, which is still used to this day as justification for our actions, as we're obviously the good guys, we defeated Hitler and the Nazis.

For instance, how many people knew of the thousands of rapes carried out by American and British soldiers during WW?

"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." Gilbert K. Chesterton

[–] Diabolic21 18 years ago

Yeah. You're absolutly right. You guys were doing just fine before the "glorified" Americans decided to make a "late" entrance. I'm sure you could have beaten Hitler all by your self. Why did we even bother going to "save" Eurpoe? (What a f%cking jacka$$)

[–] ppruneposts 18 years ago

All learnt in your Hollywood History Class. Bless.

"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." Gilbert K. Chesterton