Studs Terkel Response #6

     The first story was of Peter Ota, a Nisei who was put in an internment camp during World War 2. The night of Pearl Harbor, Peter's father was put in jail after a wedding and the shame he brought to Peter's mother was so devastating, that she was put in a sanitarium. The rest of the family was moved to an internment camp without resisting. He talks of the Japanese word gaman which means "preserve". Ota says that Japanese "preserve. Take what's coming, don't react". The Japanese Americans complied with orders. Life for Ota after the war was much different. He was so discouraged with Japanese culture that he hid it. He also says that if he were to be forced to another internment camp today he would resist. In hindsight, of course, everyone would resist to try and prevent the suffering. I see a connection between Peter Ota's story and stories of families going to concentration camps in Germany. They were unaware of what was coming next and complied. Would Americans today recognize the injustices of internment camps if another attack was to occur?

     Betty Bayes Hutchinson was a nurse during World War 2. She immediately had the thought to become a nurse after hearing of Pearl Harbor. She thought it would be the quickest way to help war efforts. I was shocked to find that after all she had seen and experienced, she was still fairly stable. She said that the more wounded soldiers she saw in the hospital the more she became accustomed. Hutchinson said that she "was beginning to anesthetize myself". She had to become numb to the horrors of war she saw to remain functioning. She began to question the validity of the war. Betty was reassured at the thought that "it must have been okay if President Roosevelt said it was okay". This quote shows just how much trust the nation had in FDR. This is very similar to when 9/11 occured and the nation trusted President Bush's decision to invade Iraq. This trust was fueled by a common hatred towards the terrorists much like the common hatred toward the Japanese during WW2.

Band of Brothers Response + Studs Terkel #5

     I first noticed how anxious all the soldiers in the movie looked. As D-Day approached, soldiers became more knowledgeable as to how important their mission really was. Even though U.S. troops were at a disadvantage with Germans waiting for them on the beach, forces kept storming the French coastline because they were not going to have their years of training go to waste.

     The story of Peggy Terry is a story of the few people that were not entirely aware of the war. It was interesting to hear a very simplistic reaction of the war. Peggy says that the war turned her away from religion because of the disbelief of the killings. She recounts that the town had a bonfire to burn all Japanese-made goods. Her working conditions were not very good but she and her family were extremely grateful for the opportunity to work. Her total family income at one point was a mere $32 a week but says that "to us it was an absolute miracle". As society became more consumed with the war effort similar to the WWI frenzy, the business world and working conditions were also affected. Children were made to work with dangerous fumes and Peggy Terry said that she didn't even know that the bullets she was making were going to be used to kill people. Many know that when a soldier returns home, they often have post-traumatic stress disorder. I can't imagine what Terry's husband had to go through and also how she dealt with seeing him that way.


     A feeling of shame came over me as I read more of E.B. Sledge's recounts of his time in the war. I was in disbelief that American soldiers succumbed to the level of savagery. The feeling of hatred towards Japanese soldiers caused American troops to do horrendous acts such as knock gold teeth out of Japanese soldiers' mouths regardless of whether they were still alive or not. Back on the homefront the war was glorified but "Sledgehammer" says that "the war I knew was totally savage". Wars brutalize people. Sledge said that by the end, he was so numb to it all. This story showed me that not only were civil rights being violated back on the homefront, but many rights of humanity were being ignored by troops. This goes against the jus in bello section of the Just War theory. This also reminds me of the Abu Ghraib torture that American soldiers inflicted on Middle Eastern prisoners.

Studs Terkel #4

   My first thoughts on the stories I read were that they seemed like fond memories. Most of the recollections were of the good times and not of the bad. One veteran were horrified to see that the dead Germans he had just killed "were boys like us". This was a war of boys killing boys. They lost their innocence in battle. At home, the economy was booming during and after the war but it raised the question of is prosperity worth the price of soldiers' lives? Bob Rasmus' story really showed how naive these teenagers were of battle. They were excited to be thrown into battle. Soldiers soon matured and Rasmus says that "you look forward to the glamour and have no idea of the horrors". These stories connect because enlisting in combat is often emphasized and glamorized without the knowledge that battle is gruesome. Even today, joining the military is a way of bringing pride to one's family, yet the horrors are more clearly outlined and better known.