The idea of a disconnect between the homefront and soldiers in the war interested me. In the introduction, Terkel wrote, “children on the homefront who knew or did not know what the shouting was all about” (162). This reminded me of the war today in the Middle East because people know there’s conflicts and soldiers in the Middle East, but some of them don’t understand why there are American troops there today or why American troops were sent there in the first place. It seems like during WWII Americans had a better understanding of why America became involved in the war. Maybe this was because of fireside chats, which allowed the president to communicate with Americans, or because the daily life of Americans was greatly impacted by the war. But today people can choose to ignore politics and the daily life of Americans isn’t as affected by the war, so many people don’t think it’s important to understand the war.
One quote from the introduction was about the turning point for America as a country. It says, “In 1945, the United States inherited the earth...at the end of World War II, what was left of Western civilization passed into the American account” (167). While America had been significantly involved in international affairs for thirty years, the end of WWII seems to mark where the US became a world superpower. America had overcome the Great Depression and won wars against Europeans and the Japanese, so it had proved itself to other countries. Until that point, America had been hesitant to immediately enter global conflicts and had been dealing with internal issues. But at the end of WWII America had a powerful army, a recovered economy, and confidence. WWII also marked a change in the government’s role. An admiral said, “World War Two changed everything...Our military runs foreign policy. The State Department has become the lackey of the Pentagon. Before World War Two...the ultimate control was civilian” (169). Something I’ve noticed this year is the progression of the federal government’s role from being relatively insignificant to intervening on every single internal and external conflict. During WWII Americans were happy to let the government take control because the economy was terrible and there was a major war. But now that there isn’t a global war or a severe economic crisis, I wonder if the extensive role of the government is outdated or unnecessary.
Rasmus’s feelings about the use of nuclear bombs on Japan were surprising but understandable. He explained, “We ended halfway across the Pacific. How many of us would have been killed on the mainland if there were no bomb? Someone like me has this specter” (188). To Rasmus, the use of the bombs saved the lives of thousands of soldiers because so many Japanese people and Americans would have been willing to fight and die in the war, so the fighting might never have stopped. But in a book we’re reading for English, a Japanese civilian gave her account of her daughter being killed by one of the bombs, and this made the use of nuclear bombs seem inhumane. Using the bombs was a tradeoff: is it worth it to prevent an infinite number of military casualties and deaths, or is it worth it to preserve the lives of civilians and let thousands more soldiers die?
No comments:
Post a Comment