Quote:
|
Originally Posted by whisper_kill
Ahh yes, but the pilots of the Enola Gay were in fact commemorated!
|
Show me where. Show me where the Enola Gay crew is commemorated and honoured and celebrated for their acts. Rememberance is one thing, commemoration is another.
p.s. even if you do manage to find such a thing, at least, in the very least, the Enola Gay and her crew can be said to be doing good (the bomb was dropped to saved lives that would be lost in the battle field). Yes there is controversy about how many lives were save versus lost, however at least the intention was good. A just ends was saught through an injust means. Whereas no such thing can be said about the German regime, its intention was explicitly evil. An injust ends was saught through injust means.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by whisper_kill
But my stance remains. My next door neighbours father was killed in WW2. He was part of the German army. He remembers all too well and still grieves (albeit to a lesser extend). Can you deny him his remembrance? He grieves his father, the soldier, not Germany the oppressor.
|
No one is denying his greivance or rememberance. Infact I encourage remembering all lost souls, Axis, Allied, or other. However you are failing to see the large gap between rememberance and greivance. It is good to remember Hans the german, Hans the soldier, but can you really morally commemorate Hans, the soldier who (forcefully or willingly) killed Allied forces, defending a concentration camp which slaughtered millions of Jews?