 |
| Rylance - left. |
His own grandfather had stated to him how the atomic bombs over Hiroshima and Nagasaki had saved his life as a POW in Hongkong. This he chose to gloss over when the opportunity for dodgy, political point-scoring arose.
My own father had made the very same claim. After liberating Europe in 1944/45, he was earmarked to be shipped out to the Far East to fight the Japanese. He explained his joy to me when he heard of the nuclear blasts.
Rational estimates suggested that - the Japanese who invariably fought to the death - would cause casualties of around three million dead. Dad was more than a little relieved.
'Peace campaigner' Rylance had convinced himself that:
a) The Japanese were already in the process of surrender. Absolute tosh! Rewriting of History!
b) That the nuclear bombs were part of a calculated plot to have them tested. More tosh! (They had already BEEN tested!.)
c) He seemed to be mumbling about everything being the fault of 'empires'. Fine. The Japanese had decided to build an empire from nothing - just for the sake of it, as had Hitler.
The actor's aside really seemed to be about Britain, though, as far as I could tell.
We have no perfect history as a nation - (which does?) but have never facilitated a World War, nor have we ever remotely matched, by as much as 1%, the predations of the Japanese during the 30s with matters such as 'the rape of Nanjing'; the enslaving of soldiers; the brutalisation and murder of so many prisoners of war.
c) He seemed to be mumbling about everything being the fault of 'empires'. Fine. The Japanese had decided to build an empire from nothing - just for the sake of it, as had Hitler.
The actor's aside really seemed to be about Britain, though, as far as I could tell.
We have no perfect history as a nation - (which does?) but have never facilitated a World War, nor have we ever remotely matched, by as much as 1%, the predations of the Japanese during the 30s with matters such as 'the rape of Nanjing'; the enslaving of soldiers; the brutalisation and murder of so many prisoners of war.
This arrant, pacifist bunkum was readily accepted because it suited his purposes to do so.
What this programme (series?) is doing is indoctrinating a gullible population into believing that wars simply go away if you talk long enough.
Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Genghis Khan, Attila The Hun were all willing to chat instead of decimating entire nations? Total and utter twaddle!
Churchill said 'Jaw jaw is better than war war.' However, what do you do when one side will not negotiate? Look too at how Hitler 'bought time' for his plans via dishonest negotiating.
Churchill said 'Jaw jaw is better than war war.' However, what do you do when one side will not negotiate? Look too at how Hitler 'bought time' for his plans via dishonest negotiating.
Channel 4 must be named and shamed. This series is deliberately selective about the people at the centre of their programming. Where are the right of centre people to grant authenticity and balance to this 2019 series? - Huh?
.jpeg)