Tom Hanks is no historian...And his movies aren't historically correct either.
Posted on 03/06/2010 10:05:05 AM PST by jimbo123
To the young Tom Hanks, history was as dull as an algebra equation. For Hanks — a classic baby boomer, born in 1956 — World War II was just a string of long-ago muzzle flashes in black-and-white. Yet he did have a more direct connection to the global cataclysm. His father had been a U.S. Naval mechanic (second class) in World War II. But Amos Hanks wasn't the type to tell his son tales of bravery and sacrifice. "Growing up, I always knew Dad was somewhere in the Pacific fixing things," Hanks says. "He had nothing nice to say about the Navy. He hated the Navy. He hated everybody in the Navy. He had no glorious stories about it."
-snip-
Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as 'yellow, slant-eyed dogs' that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what's going on today?"
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
Not so long ago, movie stars were handsome.
“Certainly, we wanted to honor U.S. bravery in The Pacific,” Hanks says. “But we also wanted to have people say, ‘We didn’t know our troops did that to Japanese people.’ “
Stick to the movies, Tom.
Shut Up and Act!!
Hanks is a moron.
“Not so long ago, movie stars were handsome.”
Not so long ago, they were patriots too.
Stupid is as stupid does.
So we wanted to defeat the Japanese because they were different from us?
It’s insight like this that keeps Time magazine flying off the shelves.
Tom Hanks is no historian...And his movies aren't historically correct either.
>>‘We didn’t know our troops did that to Japanese people.’ “
Oh crap. I have a feeling it’s one of those “US guilt” movies where WE were at fault..as usual. Why dont these libtard fruitcakes get it over with and make a movie of Bush going back in time and dropping the bomb on Hiroshima?
Douglass Brinkley has a thing for re-writing military history.
After all, he wrote John Kerrys biography.
Nothing like just making up history out of whole cloth.
How about Japan wanted raw materials to feed a growing empire? They attacked America because we stood in their way to overrunning the Philippines.
I think you might have stumbled into something there, Tommy boy.
My dad was in the Navy in the Pacific during WWII and he felt exactly the opposite. Maybe that's why I'm a conservative and you're a "Me, Me, Me," liberal.
All he heard is that we were MEAN to the Nisei when we put them into the camps, BAD Americans.
That's the sort of idiot you find here in California, courtesy of the screaming Leftist schools.
How about the Japanese actually wore uniforms? How about the Japanese collectively surrendered. How about Al Queda doesn't, and won't.
I hate to pick nits, but Nimitz was a man during WWII, and Coral Sea was a battle. Are you sure your friends weren't talking about some other war?
Hanks should've kept his mouth shut for this interview - if anyone is counting on him as a historian, they will be sadly misled.
That is, of course, also true. Hanks fails on every level in his argument.
If we had wanted to annihilate Japan, we could have easily done so. Tom Hanks can ESAD.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.