Some One Had Blundered---Fear Makes You Panic

Fear Makes You Panic

It does not demand much reading to know that German and Japanese soldier were more well-prepared psychologically than their British and American opponents.
The whole social system of Nazi Germany were based on the need of war and they do not need much persuasion to go to war or die for their fatherland and their Fuehrer.
Japanese soldiers, were educated under the belief that nothing is better than the death on battlefield for the Emperor, and also, nothing is more humiliating than surrender.
During WWII, Chinese soldiers experienced a great shift from coward to fearless, especially after the Rape of Nanjing happened, in which Japanese Army, after conquered the then capital of China, killed literally everyone in the city including POWs and civilians, including women and children as well. (The Rape of Nanjing http://www.tribo.org/nanking/background.html or http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/njmassac/index.html)
On the contrary, American and British soldiers were more like be "drafted" or "cheated" in the War without much psychological preparation for it. Mainstream fictions and movies covering WWII always portrait Allied soldiers as fearless, full of confidence and very experienced with their work. But in reality, that is not the truth.
In "Someone Had Blundered", we can easily find out that nobody, can actually be fearless. And due to the fear of death, people will not have enough courage to make sure that their action follows the rules of war. And in addition to that, Allied soldiers did not have enough training to let them react properly during the war.
Fussell described several categories of blunders allied soldiers made. And "friendly fire" were actually the one that intrigue me the most. If soldiers were so horrified during the war, how can you expect them to first judge the identity of incoming fire, objects, and person, then aim well, and fire at the target? I can not remember the exact statistics, but during the whole war, by every several ten-thousand bullets, there were only one soldier got shot. And during Vietnam War, the rate were even worse--on every some twenty-thousand bullets, there was one soldier shot.
If fear decides how well soldiers can perform during the war, it is not hard to tell something from those statistics mentioned above.

Wartime, TypeCasting

In the reading Typecasting in the book Wartime the author writes how the sides and soldiers in World War Two were stereotyped. The Japanese were looked at as animals, a dwarfish species. And the U.S. loved killing them, they got great pleasure from killing the Japanese. The Japanese were able to see in the dark as the Americans mythed. The Japanese were able to survive on grubs and roots. A distinct advantage over the Americans. The Japanese would do heinous things to American prisoners of war. In one incident the Japanese castrated an American. In another incident an American soldier got his hands and head chopped off by the Japanese. In return the Americans used Japanese as rifle targets when they held them prisoners of war. The Americans also used to steal the gold teeth of the Japanese, dead or alive. The Germans were looked upon as more human than the Japanese. But not without fault. The Germans as the Allies viewed were cold, pendatic, unimaginative and sinister, they were purely sick human beings. They hung poles and gassed Jews. They were percieved the whole lot of them as enemies of human decency. The Germans were heartless, evil to the core. The Germans were a disease spreading out all around Europe, like a cancer taking over a body. The Italians were looked as as weak and without the nature for war. They were the chefs sort of speak. As one British soldier said after a fine gourmet meal, in Taranto "We should never have fought these men." ,meaning the Italians. The Germans held the Italians in contempt for most of the war, mainly because they were so much like the Americans according to the Germans. The Germans saw the Americans as lazy and ignorant, that's how the Italians were. The Italians were motivated by vainglory and cowardice. They were neat and took care of things like their uniforms and this surprised alot of British prisoners of war. The Italians were viewed as incompetent, fraudulence and cowards. The Americans saw that it was fit for the Japanese to crawl on their stomachs in the malarial jungles of the South Pacific. The Germans were fit to defend the Apenninies from behind mountain barricades. And almost impossible to see them swap fighting styles. So Americans saw the Japanese as beast like yellow skinned animals, the Germans as sick and the Italians as preposterous. The Americans in the end felt the forces of decency and rightousness had been victorious.

Was WWII Propaganda Responsible for Inequalities in Domestic Responsibilities?

The Magazine War Guide for June-July 1943, outlines the ways in which women should respond to the call to patriotic duty to "fill the shoes of any men who have left those occupations which are necessary to the life and well being of the civilian population." One concern addressed is finding time for housework when full time jobs are taken. "What's the first objection to a housewife's taking a war job? A very real one. She says: 'How can I get my housework done, and still have eight hours left in which to work at a war job?' It is an objection that must be met."

"Advice as to how a woman can streamline her housekeeping, in order to do it in four hours a day before or after she goes to work, is very much needed...What things can be skimped without damage to health and fitness, what shortcuts there are to the daily or weekly routine under emergency conditions, how to make and manage a schedule that will not overtire the woman who does a full day's work outside her home - all these are subjects to which the women's and home magazines can contribute much."

Does the responsibility women took on during WWII, being both full-time workers and homemakers, have anything to do with the inequality in domestic responsibilities today? Although there was a call for women to leave the workforce and go back to being housewives after the war, is it possible that the messages of WWII created a cycle of these inequalities even when both husband and wife are part of the labor force? If women were called to "fill the shoes of men", why is it that men have not helped fill the shoes of women?

War time- type casting

I found the type casting section of wartime to be very interesting. Stereotypes are necessary to put things into perspective in preparation for war. The enemy is no longer kindred or a fellow human being created by GOD, but an animal, sick mis-guided set of people, or cowards. The psychological effects of these categorization makes it easier to hate, and therefore kill them. The dehumaniztion of the enemy caused haneous acts to be committed that were similar to the atrocious acts commited against blacks in america. Blacks were considered sub-human....hence the same members of a civilized society in which great technology was developed, art etc., could perform the barbarious acts it did against black (lynchings, cutting out black fetuses etc.)

Some of the most barbarious acts were committed in the conflicts between the US and Japan. Fussell speaks of the limbs, and skulls, and teeth etc being saved a souvenirs and sent home. This didnt really happen with the Germans or Italians, america's racism didnt allow for it. The hatred for the Germans was based on their illness, diseased thought infecting all or Europe, and the Italians are "cowards" indeed, but also the makers of fabulous fashion and ice cream and pasta...The only coloreds in the equation had to be the animals. The Japanese were treated as such...much like members of the US elite go hunting and display the heads of the bears and elephant they killed, so they did with the Japanese.

Wartime - Typecasting

In his chapter. "type-casting" Fussel does well to point out how the dehumanizing of the enemy was integral to inspiring troops to fight. While it would be difficult to instruct troops to treat cruelly another human being, to inflict these horrors on a mindless animal bent on destruction was not.

The stereotyping of enemies as different or animalistic was not new to WWII. As far back as Roman times, clear distinctions were made between citizens and barbarians. Nor did these practices vanish after WWII. The same tactics were used to demonize Iraqi troops during the Gulf War (planted stories about bayoneting babies in incubators, ect).

While some would argue that these nationalistic, jingoistic tendencies are just part of man's natural aggressiveness, remnants of our hunter-gatherer roots, others would say that these tactics are skillfully and aggressively used by governments that have realized their potential.

Wartime by paul Fussel "type casting"

This war was filled with so much hate. There was so much more hate towards the enemy compared to the previous war. The propaganda was filled with more hate as well shown toward the japs. I beleve not only because of pearl harbor do we dispise them, which we read on pg 116, but also during WW1 the propaganda was geared to make people be pro war, because enicially nobody was. They refer to them as animals "they must be animals to behave thus, and cruel ones at that". "Bestial apes". "we ae drowning them and burning them all over the pacific", they also make reference to the Germans being human like , when they cted like animals just as much. This became a racial war against eachother. the japanese were also called "monkey men', and "sub humans". So it seemed bcause they were of a diferent race this war was esculated and they were concidered cretures and animals, never humans. but the government wanted them to be precieved this way so what ever we do its justified. there were many rumors even spread of americans getting the hands cut off and tortured. The media spread alot of propoganda about the japanese so america as a whole shared hate toward them.

Precision Bombing Will Win the War

In the second chapter of Fussells book he goes on to talk about prescision bombing and the B17. "The weapon of ultimate victory is specifically the b-17 flying fortress, the mightiest bomber ever built". It could hit a twenty five foot circle from 20,000 feet. The planes were hitting targets with bombs. They dropped a bomb dijon by mistake and it landed on civilians in Freiberg-im- Breisgau and killed fifty- seven people. They even dropped a bomb on the queens palace. The COBRA, which was the named used for immense bombing operations in July 25, 1944. It was to occur on the 25 of July and to dropp bombs but through a communication blunder it happened the day before. Due to this twenty-five American soliders were killed and one hundred and thirty one wounded. The next day this operation was re-mounted and once again it hit American lines and killed one hundred and eleven people including General Lesley McNair and five hundred were wounded. This was the disater at Saint Lo. After this several Canandian troops were killed when RAF Bomber attempted to reinforce the ground attack. This showed that precison bombing was not that accurate. Killing some many Americans and having so many wounded by trying to use the b17. They also by accident targeted a hospital, as well as the queens palace. I feel bad for people at that time because it seemed like they didnt really know how to target what they needed to but instead bomb things like the hospital, the queens palace and even their own men.

Light and Heavy Duty

In the book Wartime by Paul Fussel, in chapter one he talks about the issues of light and heavy duty. One for instance for light duty was using a jeep truck as to fight with. "Over half its 11,600 men were mounted, the rest driving armored cars, jeeps, and motocycles". Also they used football helmets for standard equipment for men in the army this showed light duty. Also as light duty men wearing nice uniforms and proud to go off to war. "He wears a clean field jacket, properly buttoned, We half expect a necktie, The caption reads, Pvt. Joe Louis says, we're going to do our part.. and we'll win because we're on gods side" This states that they are proud to go off to war and that they are doing their part. On the other hand Heavy duty is shown on a poster in 1943 of a drowned sailor who was cast up on the beach. Posters were now showing the war to be bloody, brutal, and horrible. The Battle of Bull Run was at first a light duty war. People even wanted to have a picnic and watch them fight. Some women even brought along their evening glowns expecting a victory ball right after. The heavy duty was when this light duty war turned in to a heavy duty war. When journalist Marguerite Higgins when she went to Europe she was shocked. "Cities were runied and stinking". She said there were dead bodies everywhere and some were torn apart, as well as people who were badly wounded. I think that when we go to war we think and hope that it will be a light duty war but most times it turns up to be a heavy duty war. Especially right now we can all say that the war in Iraq is a pretty heavy duty war.

Light Duty vs. Heavy Duty in Wartime

As we've learned from the beginning of Wartime, images from the media come in both light and heavy forms. In the beginning of a war, the media shows us images of pride, light, easy, inspirational, clean, and sanitary. But as the war progresses so do the images. Pictures begin to shift form a once soft picture to a very heavy, gruesome picture. Images of corpses, death and duty in the forms of paintings, posters, images, etc. Even Hollywood movies follow this trend during a wartime.

Fussel points out that the population is not capable of understanding war at first. He says that people think it will be quick, painless, and easy. So it is the medias job to show them that. But as time progresses and stories get out, people come to a realization that war is not short, war is not sanitary; war is gruesome, tough and hard. And the media goes on to show us that.

The Art of Precision Bombing

Precision bombing in World War II was anything but precise. Paul Fussell brings to the forefront stories of incredible inaccuracies in bombing. Through propaganda, the governments on both sides of the struggle used their ability to bomb accurately as selling points for the people. Not only did stories of precision bombing perform the act of selling the war to the people, but they also keep the public confident in the progress of the armed forces. One must pose the question- Is this a good thing? When reading stories about falsehoods conjured by the government and its agencies, one tends to get angry. The common man usually feels that being lied to is a crime when it comes from the top. However, it can be argued that stories of the governments' confidence in its precision bombing, whether false or not, provides an important service to the people in wartime. Rather than inundate citizens with more fear than they already have, it might be necessary to tell them what they want to hear. From personal experience, I remember the first Gulf War very well. I remember seeing a precision bombing exhibition on CNN. A bomb was dropped with the aid of night vision down the chimney of a building. Reflecting upon it almost fifteen years later it occurs to me that I have no idea what that buildings' significance was. Was it a military target? Was it an armory? Was it a hospital? Was it a school? At the time, these question did not matter. I was put at ease by this exhibition. That is precisely the service to the citizens that I mentioned earlier. It just seems to me that people do not need a front row seat to watch a war. Those fortunate enough to not have to engage in armed struggle ought to remain ignorant of its perils. It is essential in wartime to remain confident in the soldiers that we support.
That being said, the fact that these precise bombs are being dropped at all is the crime. The danger of the propaganda regarding precision bombing is the fact that often times the government believes its own hype. They are in fact victims of their own propaganda. The truth is that these precision bombs hit almost everything but the targets. For the same reason i believe citizens should be ignorant of the perils of war, i believe that citizens should not be casualties of bombs that are supposed to be precise. The difference between today and World War II, is that ordinary citizens like you and I can see the destruction that follows these bombings that we get a far aweay glimpse of on CNN. Back then, it was in the nations best interests to believe we were more powerful than we were. Now, we know the bombs aren't as precise as advertised but we are still told so regardless.

The jeep became the new weapon to help soldiers with the ability to go anywhere through mud, sand, and snow with out having to get stock or get dirty. The jeep also had the ability to carrying a lot of soldiers to any distinction that they wanted. Jeeps had the ability to move weapons from camp to camp. They also performed as ambulances for soldiers that got hurt. The jeep was one of the biggest idea that the government incorporated in to the life of a soldiers because of all of the thing it could do to help soldiers had a big advantaged over the enemy.

Precision bombing

It is interesting to see how bombers were thought to have been the ultimate weapon to win the war, when they were often highly inaccurate. Propaganda at this time had aimed at getting the public to believe that bombing was an highly effective weapon in targeting and destroying enemies when they often missed their targets. Bombers even sometimes made the mistake of attacking their own troops killing many. The bombers job was dangerous in itself before the end of the war 22,000 of them would be dead yet the war writers board was producing materials to say that it was not necessarily a dangerous job. It is interesting to see how propaganda hid the inaccurate truth of bombing during WWII.

All for War

American people financed the whole war and "it was only wealth that tipped the scales in favor of the Allies."(Wartime, P123)Pondering over the sharp contrast between the severe deprivation American people had during those years and the cost of the whole war(just think about the fact that each war how many imprecise or dead bombs were thrown), it's easy to imagine the tension existing in daily life at that time, because you would never know which was going to be rationalized next.
Isolationism never works as the capitalist problems as well as its callous and exploitative nature become increasingly stark as the development of industrilization. Having just suffered from the big depression, Americans could never afford to close its doors to the outside. Inevitably, they went back to the road of war for the sake of exploring larger market. With this goal in mind, home front's opinion was manipulated in order to support the war no matter what huge price they would pay for it. No wonder, Edmund Wilson drew the conclusion that " our whole world is poisoned now."
As the Great War saw the burgeoning of PR industry, Advertising and film(especially cartoons and comedies)played important roles for the promotion of the war both within home front and the army abroad. By the 1940s, America was in the midst of a communications revolution, thanks to movies, radio and perhaps most importantly, the invention of offset printing, which exponentially boosted capacity in the U.S. to produce newspapers, pamphlets and color posters, as we can see in those posters that portrayed the Axis powers. However, the fact that the media needed government support for development made it easy for the government to assure that they speak with one optimistic and morale-sustaining voice and typecast the enemies as the images the government wanted them to be. They decided under government censorship what was reality for the public and the army to embrace and non-exceptionally the enemy was characterized as dehumanized and demeaned under typecasting which is a common rule for any country at wartime. In other words, racism propaganda prevails in every foreign war regarding the portrait of the enemy. This reminds me of the "double victory campaign" during that time initiated by black journalists which called for the revolution both within and outside the nation.
Compare to the Great War, the loss and gain of this war are both much more tremendous. It not only strengthens the status of dollars in the world economic system, but further influences international relations on a much broader scale.

Type-casting and "The Bomb"

In WWII, the U.S. military dropped two atomic bombs on Japan: one on Nagasaki, and one on Hiroshima. How was this justified to Americans? First, Japan had attacked the United States and, as far as the average American citizen was concerned, it had attacked the United States without being provoked. Even though this created anger at the Japanese, I don't think that it would justify to the average American the tremendous loss of life that the bomb brought. Second, the Japanese would not surrender no matter how badly they were being beaten. I don't think that this was enough to warrant the atomic bomb either. Although the bombs brought victory to the United States and an end to WWII, the inhumane and incredible loss of Japanese life as a result of the bombs were unnecessary and I like to believe that many Americans would have felt the same way.
Over 240,000 Japanese were killed between the two bombs. How was there no backlash among Americans as to this incredible loss of life?
Reading the "Type-casting" chapter in Paul Fussell's book, I realized that the U.S, military campaigned to make the Japanese seem "sub-human," and more animal than human. Japanese were illustrated as dangerous beasts and there were slogans such as "rap the Jap," and "let's blast the Jap clean off the map" imagined by the military that helped create hatred toward the Japanese. With this propaganda strongly serving the notion that Japanese were not human but horrible beasts, the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki must have been easier for the American public to swallow.

Public Opinion

This packet mainly deal with the way the opinion of the public can be changed easily. For example, George Creel says that there are ways to influence the public. "The protagonist of good government, then, selects such appeals as will best serve to reach the groups he desires to influence... if it is better streets and highways, the fear of an accident to the pedestrian or autoist." It still works to this day. If you tell high school basketball player trying to get better that the newest Jordans would help him or her jump higher, he or she would probably try to buy them.