....Hawthorne is quoted as having
said....:.".We were successful in turning
the tide of the war in the Pacific."
Of course there are still a few who say
that the battle of Midway may also have
had something to do with that.
...IMHO, proper behavior, courtesy &
respect often should cause us to keep
silent, and let the old vets talk, and
happily remember their contribution &
sacrifices.
That's nice, but, as an old WWII vet myself,
I consider it somewhat condescending.
It is true that some of us may tend to
forget details and perhaps exaggerate wartime
experiences, however, I don't believe too many
of us who are still alive like to be patiently
listened to as if we were children, or, as if
senility was well advanced.
It is my view that In a forum such as this,
discussion should be confined as much as
possible to the historical record (about which we
can certainly argue and do) and that we should
try to avoid the hype which often seems to be
associated with some wartime activities, particular
those which involve the actions of those in the
armed forces who were members of a racial
minority group such as the Navajos, the
Japanese-American 100/442d, the African-American
"red tails." All of those groups performed admirably,
but so did many other groups and individuals among
the some 14 million Americans who served. It is no
favor to those Americans who were members of one
of the minorities to exaggerate their exploits or falsify
their war record even when such is done by one of their
own, either by accident or intent.
How often do we hear about the heroism among
our non-minority POWs of the Japanese who suffered
unspeakable horrors in the Japanese death camps? Or
the exploits of the 32nd Infantry Division. During the
bloody battle at Buna in New Guinea? In that action the
32nd Division earned 100 DSC's and 2 MOH for a ratio
of 1 to 50.
Compare that with the recent year 2000
politically-initiated upgrades from DSC to MOH because
of "alleged wartime discrimination" given 55 years after
WWII had ended to Japanese-Americans in the 442nd
RCT. The ratio then became 23 MOH to 30 DSC's, or 1
to 1.3.
Lt.Colonel Lee Allen, himself a prisoner of the
Japanese during WWII, has this comment in his website,
"Internment Archives at
http://www.internmentarchives.com/archives.php
"For decades prior to the (year 2000) MOH upgrades it
was claimed that the 442nd was the most highly decorated
unit in the history of the army, or words to that or similar
effect. One must wonder how the unit achieved this widely
publicized acclaim if there had been discrimination in
awarding medals for valor. Exaggerated and fabricated
claims of service and achievement are common to
Japanese-Americans in World War II..."
And, in the words of Army historian McNaughton:
"Even in segregated units such as the 100th Infantry
Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team (RCT),
white officers made sure that their Japanese American
soldiers received full recognition for valor."
There were 11,260,000 total (U.S.) Army personnel
serving in World War II. Of that number, there were,
according to the Army Command History Office, 145,000
Asian-Americans, including 100,000 Filipinos who served
under U.S. command. Accordingly, the ratio of
Asian-Americans to others who served was 0.0128 or just
over 1%. Total DSC's awarded for valor in WW II Army
service was 4,434. Total Asian-American DSC winners
were 104. The Asian-American DSC award ratio was thus
0.0234 of all Army DSC awards. Representing only 1% of
the troops, the Asian-Americans received 2% of the
Distinguished Service Cross awards. Where was the
discrimination? If anything the number of DSC's awarded
Asian-Americans reveals just the opposite - they received
more than their proportionate number in the award process....
Twenty of the of the 22 recent upgrades went to
members of the 100/442nd RCT. If, as seems clear, the
proponents of the recent upgrades believe that the
Asian-Americans should have received "Affirmative Action
" Medals of Honor in proportion to the number of their DSC's
awarded, and inasmuch as Asian-Americans in the 100/442nd
received 47 DSC's or 1% of all DSC's awarded by the Army
in WW II, a consistent conclusion would be that the 100/442nd,
which received only 1 Medal of Honor, should have received
3, or 1% of the 301 total of Army Medals of Honor awarded.
But instead of 2 additional, 21 additional Medals of Honor were
awarded to the 100/442nd RCT by the upgrade. Again we see
Asian-Americans, who had already been awarded a
proportionately larger number of DSC's, now receiving 10 times
the number of Medals of Honor as would be justified under their
DSC award ratio. Were the heroes of the 100/442nd ten times
more deserving of Medals of Honor for bravery as those in other
combat regiments? That would seem unlikely.
As Lt.Colonel Allen observes:
"Curious, as in other fabricated claims of achievement by
Japanese-Americans in World War II, is the utter absence of
voices in dissent. There seems to be no shame when credit is
claimed for the achievement of others, when false claims are
made or when accomplishments are exaggerated."
Is this because, as "a425 couples" tells us, "...proper behavior,
courtesy & respect often should cause us to keep silent, and let
the old vets talk, and happily remember their contribution &
sacrifices?"
I don't think so.
<UTF16-2028>WJH