Today's discussion questions

[sabotabby]

It's another one of those long days at school and I won't be around, so here are two discussion questions for you. Fight talk amongst yourselves.

1. What do we think of this news story? There's a lot in there, so let's pick it to pieces.

2. Speaking of genocide, the Toronto District School Board has a new history course dealing with the subject. It officially recognizes three genocides: Armenia, the Holocaust, and Rwanda. What's missing, and why do you think they chose to exclude the genocide that happened in the country where the course will be taught.

Have a happy Friday!

Comments

[springheel-jack.livejournal.com]

I've been to Yad Vashem. I toured the sculpture garden at sunset, and it's very pretty. Some of the pieces are hair-raising. It has a wonderful view, too, overlooking a valley and a huge settlement in East Jerusalem that glows a lovely pink as the sun falls below the hills.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

This is tough subject.
The Holocaust, like every Genocide, is unique in it's own right. What makes the Holocaust "extra special" is the sheer magnitude of it and the ideology behind it. At least that's what I glean from reading about from various sources.
The Holocaust also has the best advertisement as the "most evil thing to ever happen to man kind".
I think it's mainly because Israel came into being because of it and there is still this fear that we'll be destroyed if we don't remember that we were nearly eradicated.

The Holocaust has been co-opted into Zionist discourse and that annoys me. There was Judaism before Zionism, though many would like to ignore that.

Bush saying what he's saying is just him being an Israeli ally, I don't think there's anything too meaningful in the fact that he was at Ya V'Shem. Every international hot-shot goes there for a little catharsis and the knowledge that the bad guys were beaten and that Good will Triumph.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

Does he have any idea of what "bombing" meant in the forties? Does he really want to have killed everyone in the camp, inmates and all, except for a few random survivors? Maybe this is what liberation means to him.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

It would have been technically possible to have taken out the railway lines leading to Auschwitz, at least by late 1944, but they would have been fairly easy to repair. While the kind of area bombing you link to was the normal type of operation, especially for the British and Canadian night bombers, much more precise operations were possible. Examples would include the "Dambuster" raid, the bombing of the Tirpitz and, perhaps most spectacularly, taking out one wall of Amiens jail so that Resistance members held by the Germans could be busted out.

Probably the biggest problem involved in any kind of air operation against the extermination camps would have been that, being in Poland, they would have been at the extreme of the western allies bomber force's operational range. Out of range before the autumn of 1944 I'd imagine. It was the same problem that made it almost impossible to send supplies to the Warsaw Rising.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

*nods* all good points, thank you. (I had somehow managed never to read about Operation Jericho before, so that will be an interesting thing to research today.)

I was wondering about the operational range of bombers, too (particularly since earlier I noted his stress on how the US, rather than the Allies, should have done this, and wondered how on earth the planes were going to get across the Atlantic twice. Was it really a common thing for the USAF to carry out bombing raids against the European mainland, and did they do so from London or somewhere like the RCAF did, or does he maybe just think the Allies were called "the US"?)

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

There were significant USAAF bombing operations carried out from bases in the UK and Italy. (In fact my local hospital where I grew up was built by the USAAF). The problem would have been that any kind of precision operation would have had to be carried out in daylight, which means, in effect, by the Americans. To avoid very high loss rates they would have needed fighter escorts. The range (round trip) of a P51D with external tanks was 2600km so SE Britain to Poland would have been theoretically possible. I don't think it would have been practical though as, in practice, the Luftwaffe would probably have engaged the escorts over Western Europe on the outbound leg forcing the pilots to ditch the external tanks (aircombat with external tanks on isn't really feasible) and turn back early leaving the bombers exposed.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

That (and what's before that) is illuminating, thanks. In a somewhat loosely related historical note, the U.S. (I'm quoting Norman Finkelstein here (as in "I don't really know anything on the subject myself")) did not support Israel much prior to 1967, when it began using it as a strategic ally.

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

Another possibility could have been sending the bombers to Russian held territory to refuel after the mission. Churchill suggested doing as much when to Stalin during the Warsaw uprising (except sending supply planes instead). But Stalin, true to his character, denied that there was even an uprising happening at the time to Churchill's emissary (who was the head of the London based Polish goverment).

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I was aware of the history of trying to use Russian bases for air operations so considered that to be a non starter from the off. The Russians wouldn't even allow British planes to be based on their territory to cover the Arctic convoys.

[troubleinchina.livejournal.com]

Well, see, if we talked about the genocide in Canada, we'd make the students feel bad or something.

[cucumberseed.livejournal.com]

My eyes!

Sorry, I didn't get far. My president's thoughts are the same ones I had when I was 12.

Gah!

[faithhopetricks.livejournal.com]

1. Bush was visibly moved as he toured the site, said Yad Vashem's chairman, Avner Shalev.
"Twice, I saw tears well up in his eyes," Shalev said.

DUDE, THAT STRAW? THAT STRAW RIGHT THERE? YOU ARE GRASPING FOR IT. STOP THAT.

called Rice over to discuss why the American government had decided against bombing the site, Shalev said.

Dear God, imagine THAT conversation.

"Well, why didn't we bomb it and save the people?"
"Mr President sir...."
"If we bombed it, we could've saved the people!"
"Sir, Mr President...."
"Think of all those people that would have been saved! If we'd just bombed it!"

Yeah, the Nazis would've just had to, you know, shoot everyone QUICKLY rather than torture them slowly and horribly! Which, you know, plus for not being tortured slowly and horribly. OTOH, I really fucking doubt the fucking Großdeutsches Reich would have thrown up its collective hands, exclaimed "Dearie me!" and let all the people it was dedicated to, you know, LIQUIDATING, just go home or something.

"I was most impressed that people in the face of horror and evil would not forsake their God. In the face of unspeakable crimes against humanity, brave souls — young and old — stood strong for what they believe,"

OH FUCK YOU YOU FUCKING.... //fumes and sputters incoherently CHRIST hasn't he ever read Primo Lev -- oh. wait. nevermind.

a sobering reminder that evil exists, and a call that when evil exists we must resist it," he said

LIFE: ((beats satire like a redheaded stepchild))
SATIRE: ((gives up, goes home to eat bonbons and watch Oprah))
IRONY-METER: ((blows up))

a meticulously crafted wooden box adorned with a Star of David and a seven-branched menorah, containing a collection of 99 of the artist's illustrations of biblical scenes

....well, I'm glad I read about that at least. I like that.

//is too boggled and furious to write any further, luckily for the rest of the commentators

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

Just like you mention, Bush uses the Holocaust in an utterly manipulative (and historically distorted) way to justify current U.S. foreign politics.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Israel uses to Holocaust to justify anything it does. A few months ago Benjamin "the effing Hawk" Netanyahu was saying that Iran is Nazi Germany and that the year was 1938, trying to be all metaphorical in order to be on the offensive about Iran.

It drives me bananas that the Holocaust is used to advance politics and policies, while the Israeli gov. is waiting for the survivors (in Israel) to die already so that they can really distort the fact without having any actual *witness* say otherwise.

Sorry for the rant, but the use of the Holocaust as a propaganda mechanism really touches a nerve.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

Furthermore, the overuse of the Holocaust card brings about a decline in support for Israel among young American Jews. So it isn't just manipulative, but it is also stupid and bad for the Israeli Jews themselves (umm... ourselves).
What Bush says about Jews "standing strong for what they believed" is ahistorical. This isn't 1492 Spain where Jews were offered the option of converting to Christianity or leaving the country. They were exterminated on grounds having nothing to do with their religion.

[sadie-sabot.livejournal.com]

the_red_shoes kinda covered it.

But, um, yeah, this bombing to stop the killing thing has a little too much traction in our foreign policy at this point.

[shelestel.livejournal.com]

Undoubtedly, most notable in its absence is the total wiping out of the Neanderthals by the Homo sapiens some 30,000 years ago. After that, I would mention some of the notable biological species extinct due to human activity. Beyond that, what Chomsky says.
I'm assuming that most of us have studied about the Holocaust in school. But what is it that we really learned? In my opinion, there are some very important lessons on individual and mass-psychology to be learned that are rarely being explicitly mentioned. Political conclusions are rarely being drawn either. I think that there is a whole lot you can learn from "just" three genocides (which, I'm suspecting, is not going to be learned).

[holy-chao.livejournal.com]

Bush was crying? Obviously he is unfit for the presidency.

[laughingimp.livejournal.com]

Well played.

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

i lol'd

[sabotabby]

Ten points to Gryffindor.

[laughingimp.livejournal.com]

Question: does it offend the Jewish folks here that President Bush showed up wearing a yarmulke?

[sabotabby]

Bush offends me in general. But not the yarmulke in particular. It's traditional for goys to don them when they're at Jewish events.

[laughingimp.livejournal.com]

It's traditional for goys to don them when they're at Jewish events.

Huh. I was not aware.

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

"IBM and the Holocaust is a book written by Edwin Black published in 2001 which chronicles the alliance between International Business Machines Corporation and Nazi Germany.
The book quotes extensively from numerous IBM and government memos and letters that describe how IBM in New York, IBM's Geneva office and Dehomag, its German subsidiary, were intimately involved in supporting Nazi oppression. The book also includes IBM's internal reports that admit that these machines made the Nazis much more efficient in their efforts. Several C-SPAN broadcasts and a 2003 documentary film "The Corporation" showed close-ups of several documents including IBM code sheets for concentration camps taken from the files of the National Archives. Prisoner Code 8 was Jew, Code 11 was Gypsy. Camp Code 001 was Auschwitz, Code 002 was Buchenwald. Status Code 5 was executed by order, code 6 was gas chamber."
What about this? I don't know *anything* about foreign business policy but shouldn't IBM's involvement have been taken seriously? PRETTY EFFED UP IMO.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

It's not quite what it appears. IBM, before the war, was a leader in IT for national censuses. They marketed aggresively to the German and Austrian governments among others. That technology was used in the Holocaust. The technology was supported by IBM Germany during the war but by then Armonk had no contact or control over IBM Germany.

I'm no fan of IBM. I usedf to work for them and hated it. But let's look at a modern parallel. Let's say Microsoft sold SQL Server to the government of Israel which then used that software to track Palestinians it wanted to rub out would you really say that Microsoft was responsible?

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

The technology was supported by IBM Germany during the war but by then Armonk had no contact or control over IBM Germany.
That's everyone's excuse for their involvement in the Holocaust! Okay though.

that is . . .

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

had no contact or control over *insert company here* Germany

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

That's everyone's excuse for their involvement in the Holocaust!

But it's true. I mean you wouldn't blame a German chemical company for the bombing of Dresden because their pre-war US subsidiary made explosives for the US Air Force. Or would you?

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

I think I'm going to need some more analogies.

[auralarua.livejournal.com]

I want to know more about 2.

[bike4fish.livejournal.com]

2. But I'm sure there are towns and streets named after the agents of the local genocide. Whatever would we do is we taught children what they really did? (This is definitely the case in the US - General Phil Sheridan was the architect of the expulsion and decimation of the Indian in the western plains, but he has a major street named after him in Denver, and a town in Wyoming.) Besides, what happens in kids' minds when they figure out that genocide isn't something that happens "over there"?

Of course, I wish everyone had a good idea of how their ancestors participated in genocides and ethnic cleansings - I suspect it would help a lot of people to understand the world better. I think I find the "it couldn't happen here" attitude very disturbing, especially as it has happened here.

My ancestor, Jeremiah Moulton, was in command of troops that massacred an entire Indian village (over 200 people). When he was a child (1692), he was taken captive and his parents and seven other of my ancestors were killed by Indians (who were probably clients of the French (from Canada) and may have been accompanied by French soldiers). A good number of the survivors of the York massacre abandoned the town and moved to Salem, Massachusetts, where some of the girls, whom I presume were suffering from what we'd call PTSD today, accused some of their neighbors of witchcraft.

Nothing happens in isolation. Genocide is committed by people who think they are doing what is right - or at least, just doing their jobs. Teaching that to children would be too subversive, I fear.

[threeliesforone.livejournal.com]

oh, but sabotabby! they're talking about genocide in the twentieth & twenty first centuries! if anything ever happened to the first nations in canada it happened a very looooooong time ago! it doesn't count!

eye roll.

[seaya.livejournal.com]

I'm surprised no one has posted about Prescott Bush's indictment for supporting the enemy.

See here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html

[gillen.livejournal.com]

1. If we had we might not have come to the point where a US President was in a stolen Palestinian town getting all verklempt over photos of dead Europeans.