MovieChat Forums > The Great Raid (2005) Discussion > To those who view this movie as propagan...

To those who view this movie as propaganda


This is a long post, so please bear with me:
To start out, I will use a quote from another topic by daveb650. In his post, he stated that "oh ok it s one of THOSE movies again which rely on patriotism to get accepted by the American public.
Do not be afraid to say this movie sucked just because your grand-dad died during world war 2.
What makes this movie total trash is the fact that It s just too damn obvious that this is just another hollywood pearl harbor-like movie full of nice sets, make-up, hairstyles and fancy camera angles.
The japanese are of course, as one can expect from such a movie, depicted as despiseable, superficial scum-bags. The americans on the other hand are just one bunch of courageous and devoted soldiers. Oh yeah.. and there s a damn courageous and devoted american woman too in this movie...I guess it s just for American army "propaganda" fans. "

I"m sorry dave, but you are an idiot. To state that this movie is propaganda is moronic. If you did that, wouldn't you also state that this is a philippino propaganda film as well. The philippino people were dictated as brave fighters, but to me this movie didn't scream out "join the philippino army!", let alone join the american army. To all people who call this movie propaganda, you sound like the average anti-american american who bi*ch and cry anytime america, or american people are labeled as good.

The americans were dipicted courageous in the film, because they were in real life. The mission to go rescue the POWs at Cabantuan was a sucidal one, where only about 100 rangers could go. All 600 rangers voluntered. To me thats courageous. Not all americans were labeled as self-sacrificing either, what about "red", who ran from camp knowing if he was caught 10 others would die with him.

If you had done your research you would have known that the japanese were dispicable in this war. The whole country was brainwashed that they were superior to the "american dogs". They did horrible stuff, i'm not sure if your familiar with japanese water tourture, they would stick a hose in someone mouth and turn it on high, when the stomache was swelled they would stomp on it till some of the internal organs had ruptured. Hmm, i wonder why the japanese soldiers were depicted as bad soldiers(not the entire japanese race), maybe because they did bad things

And about margeret, maybe if you had watched the whole movie you would have realized that she was awarded a medal, for being a "damn courageous and devoted american woman" does it make you mad that there are patriotic people in our country, who have fought and died so morons like you have the freedom to say the pedantic things you do.

There are probably quite a few mistakes in this post, and to all the perfectionists who are looking for them to make yourself seem smarter, i'm am sorry for them

all those in doubt read ghost soldiers, or God forbid use google

reply

[deleted]

Nic_gc56....thank you sir. My husband is an Army Ranger, and we have just recently watched this movie together. In reading the other thread about how this film is nothing short of propaganda...I am hurt. I do not understand how these men can be regarded as anything less than heroes. We thoroughly enjoyed this movie and the story that it told. I am every day in awe of the accomplishments and the sacrifices that my husband made and still makes....I am proud of him. Just as I am proud of my ancestors who fought in the American Revolution, Civil War, Korea, Vietnam, WWI and II, and my friends who are involved in OIF and OEF. Anyone who would put their lives on the lines for the sake of freedom is inspiring. Now, I am not asking for insults to be flung at me. Indeed I am not. I looked at my grandparents when they were alive and often imagined them young as they were in photos when they were in Saipan, Germany, France, Italy and Poland. My father in Cam Ranh Bay. I wonder if I could have the same courage.

The remark was made about how people must read history books. I truly agree. I am a historian by profession and so I make it a point to learn and understand both sides of the story so to speak....every side has a voice. But I do not see the problem with making a movie that tells the truth. Even of just one side. It should force the viewer to want to educate themselves further. And what is wrong with seeing American soldiers as heroes? That I will never understand. It is just one side of the story, but why should be not be interested in seeing America succeed? It happened. It really did. Granted, there are exceptions to every rule, but I wonder if the Rangers depicted in this film had not been as brave as they were, had the "underground" not been as courageous as they were, what would have happened to those 500+ men who were imprisoned? they would have suffered the very real (and very true) fate of being burned alive in bunkers. The ending of the film with its actual footage of the men waving and going home gave me goosebumps...similar to the feeling any normal person would get while listening to the notes of the Star Spangled Banner.

The US is not a perfect country....what country is? But at least we are free. And it is thanks to men like those in the film that we are so. I do not understand why it would not be proper to make a film about them, so that they are recognized, and that we may be grateful for their sacrifices.

reply

rangerwife
Please do not be discouraged by some of the people who use this site to blather on with their anti-american hatred. Some people are so stuck in the 60's-era mindset that they will believe anything that positively portrays Americans as being nothing but propaganda. Fortunately, these people are hardly a majority of Americans; they are just the loudest ones.

Also, thank you for the service your husband is doing for this country. It is people like him who allow us to live our lives and allow us to have our freedoms.

reply

Whothewu,

Thank you for your reply. I've heard/read enough of people's goings-on standing on their soap boxes so to speak....enough that I am used to them. Even to rolling my eyes. But every once in awhile, it's just so......irking to read that anything that might invoke the slightest amount of patriotism or pride in our history and who we are now is without question propaganda. It's a shame that the loudest folks are the ones who make the name for this country...

Thank you also for your gratefulness towards my husband. And thank you for being a voice.

reply

Don't let the idiots get to you. Most are just unhappy anyhow and wouldn't know something good if it fell on them.

Folks like your husband keep us free. Most people outside of armchair movie critics know the sacrifice.

reply

"rangerwife
Please do not be discouraged by some of the people who use this site to blather on with their anti-american hatred. Some people are so stuck in the 60's-era mindset that they will believe anything that positively portrays Americans as being nothing but propaganda. Fortunately, these people are hardly a majority of Americans; they are just the loudest ones.

Also, thank you for the service your husband is doing for this country. It is people like him who allow us to live our lives and allow us to have our freedoms."

W: What freedoms? Freedom to be a slave to your property and job? That's all propaganda. Holland and Canada have more freedoms than we do. Read what this lady wrote, quoted in my book, as well as what other immigrants, travelers, and foreigners say about America. They are real life opinions which are common, but never quoted in the US media.

For example, A Russian girl from Moscow had this to say about the USA:

Elvira:
“To be honest i don't like usa at all, i can move there but only if it is strongly needed (if i fall for an american). Many of my friends was there(with families or for student exchange Work&travel usa) and say something similar to: "they have no culture, but the money... money and nothing more is interesting for them", Doesnt sound inspiring..”

And a Ukrainian American lady had this to say:

“There are many things that can be said about main stream American culture (or non-culture, I should say), but the bottom line is that it is a paper plate consumer focused culture ... All things are judged in value according to their "use" or productivity, and then thrown aside when they are used up or no longer producing ... Usually, the corporations decide what is to be valued, and the people, with blind faith and obedience, look to the corporate conglomerates' commercials and their commercial sponsored media for the answers to everything ...

There are no parents in America; there are only property owners. There are no children, spouses, partners, friends, or lovers; there is only property. Americans don't really have freedom or independence; they have dependence and bondage to their cars and other properties.”

An African American man on my list observed:

“You can tell most people in other parts of the world are more cultured and morally more disciplined than most Americans. Most Americans think possessing material wealth is being cultured, and that they are socially more superior than other races…What an ILLUSION in their mind!!... They unfortunately so believe their illusions they fail to realize they are dead WRONG! North America is good to live in if you like to acquire material wealth period! And that is good provided you do not loose your morals of human compassion and relations.”

Another Russian American male immigrant I know had this to say in response to my observation that US women are the least friendly to strangers and the most paranoid in the world. (imagine him saying this with a thick Russian accent lol)

“Hey Winston.
It is good you noticed the difference. But it is not only women it is all americans are very different. Americans have empty eyes. Even those people on TV. Because there is no soul in this country only money.“

Back in college, a Greek friend used to often tell me:

“Americans have no inner life. All they do is consume!”

He couldn’t be more right. Our lifestyle is one of perpetual consumption in excess. To see an obvious example of excess consumption in America, go to a typical home and look in the garage or basement, and notice the excess of things stored there that are never used, making moving a total pain in the ass. As ancient wisdom goes, too much of anything is never any good. But alas, there is little else to do in the routine of American life.

A Russian American who read an earlier version of this treatise, had this to say:

“Anyway, to cut a long story short, everything you wrote in your treatise is precisely to the point. I am a Russian who has lived in the States long enough to know. I came to the country expecting to find some flavor, as I had been able to do in France and Germany. Alas, what I ran into was a sea of blandness.

I took me a while to realize that there was a chasm of difference between the media picture of America and real life, but when the truth hit home, I felt very disappointed and empty. I even had a lapse of self-condemnation as I thought the problem was in me. I have gotten over it now and can see clearly. Your writing puts all the pieces of the puzzle together very well.”

And a reader of an earlier version of this treatise gave this summary of life in America:

“Winston,

Interesting to read your writing on America....after 20 years living on the US, I gradually have come to a similar conclusion. Now I tend to see US as an extremely luxury prison, and experience life here as a shell, hollow with little content except if your life is all about making money or being fully committed to a career...

Regards,
*** ****
NJ”


“Hi Winston,
nice to hear u like lithuania and it's people! and yes, i live here most of the time, but i'm travelling a lot as well and this fall i'm leaving for half a year. i've spent two summers in the states as well, so i do understand why u liked lithuania or europe in all, i could never live in that country, honestly, i guess i'm just love europe too much and couldn't get used to that feeling that everything and everyone was so fake over there, sorry if my opinion about the states seems rude, but i'm just being honest:)
talk to u later, got many things to do!
take care,
.....”

For instance, see how this Bulgarian reader of mine described the tradeoffs he faced between living in the US and Bulgaria:

"Dear Winston,

First of all, my friend wrote a much more eloquent and descriptive essay on this same subject, but I refuse use his work. BTW he has only been in US for 6 months and his English surpasses that of natives. As a 19 y.o. Bulgarian immigrant to the US (10 years ago) I have experienced everything you mention, in the exact way in this society. I do not normally go out of my way to write to strangers, but having come up to your website has made me happy for all of what you write about is what my family, Bulgarian friends, and I have been criticizing all this time. Fortunately my culture has prevented me from absorbing "americanism" and I have been able to see all of the disparities in this country. I have nothing to comment on the empty "culture" here since you have covered almost everything. My happy memories from childhood in Bulgaria and my recent visits have prompted me to question my situation- stay in America with my generous income and soulless toys or go to Bulgaria to enjoy friends, spirituality, "true" freedom, and sex, but at a country where the avg. teacher makes $150/month? To tell you the truth I would be ready to give up what I have here except I have an opportunity to "hit" the big banks through credit and leave. The complete absence of a social life (a fake social life for the "cool" people) and the widespread hypocrisy has had me. I do, however, give credit to those genius Jews in the media who have painted America pink. My once hateful feelings of Americans are of respect and pity, for they are stuck in this atmosphere completely unawares. I do, however, completely appreciate the positives of America such as business freedom and socioeconomic mobility- mainly caused by the non-social democracy, low taxes, and the unlimited availability of hard work. The immigrant's plight is that if he stays he will miss the old ways and if he leaves he will miss the money- yes I am stuck and cannot definitively say one place is better. To those dissatisfied with America, America also grants the freedom to leave; in the end we may criticize but certainly not complain since it is up to us... Thank you and anyone else who attempts to educate the brainwashed, both here in America and across the sea."

W: You can see many more such opinions at:

www.geocities.com/wwu777us/Supporters_and_Fans.htm


A Lithuanian anti-capitalist immigrant wrote a very vehement treatise against US foreign policy and its aims, here:

www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/1120/america31.html

reply

Hey Winston,

We here in America really don't care what you think or any of the other people who think we are of no substance. So just keep on hating us, okay, buddy? If that's what it takes to give YOU substance in life, you just keep on hating.

Who knows, you could probably get elected to Congress if you ran in California or Massachusetts.

reply


Well, I think that's a bit over-the-top - a lot of the materialistic, non-culture sickness is pervasive all over the west (I notice a lot of your quotations come from non-west-countries).

A woman in pretty much any country in the west can go and buy some indian scarf and a sitar music-CD, and then put on some incense and think she's SO spiritual, when she wears that scarf, looks at some silly buddha-statue while listening to the ear-piercingly awful sitar sounds, and eating hamburgers in the light of an aroma candle.

So this 'you can purchase spirituality'-mentality is not an american phenomenon, it's all over the west.

Americans are weirdly nationalistic people; even when they are trying to say bad things about the western lifestyle, they think it's only America, where this is all happening.

It's always the same - whether it's good things or bad things that are actually happening all over the west, the american poster always thinks it's happening only in America, and nowhere else - and often refers to American as "this country", without realizing that internet is .. well, INTERNATIONAL, and his post can be read in pretty much ANY country (except North Korea and possibly China).

America may take things to the extreme, but some of those quotes could be very well said about a lot of western countries. Is Canada really that much more cultured? Don't they have MacDonald's there? Are all European countries completely immersed by their own, special culture, or could it be that they have adopted the 'american way of life' quite faithfully, especially by picking up ridiculous trends from the hollyweird movies and TV shows?

You could go to a lot of European countries and be amazed at how 'americanized' they actually are. Hamburgers and consumption-culture everywhere, corporations and media are worshipped as divine, and american actors are revered as gods. It's not that different from America.

And yes, I've been to America, and although I really didn't like it much, I didn't see that many 'cultural differences' - just smaller things, like "the walkways are very narrow" and "Americans seem to use private automobiles for everything, whereas Europeans would take the bus, bike or walk", and "oh, people expect you to have a pre-programmed, repetitive smalltalk-routine with them every time you meet them, even if they are just casual acquintances or neighbourgs", and "oh, american people actually LEAVE food on the plate and then throw it away instead of just eating it all (which would be considered a sign for wanting more food) - how wasteful!

But I never bumped into any kind of 'Americans are SO much less cultured than Europeans, who always think of other things besides consumption or money, and consider monetary things to be just a tiny sidenote in life that doesn't matter at all'-phenomenon. Europeans are just as mad, evil, greedy and consumption-ready as the Americans, and all west is pretty much the same nowadays. There are only minor differences.

Americans are NOT THAT SPECIAL. They are very similar to other idiots on the planet, get over it, and stop advertising the country as some kind of 'special phenomenon', when it's just 'one phenomenon among dozens', or just 'part of the same phenomenon that's rampant all over the west', okay?

Americans. They have to be number one even in how bad things are in the west, sheesh.

The next time you have an urge to say 'Americans', 'This country" or 'In America', try to substitute that for "Westerners", "The west" or "In the western world", and see whether your message would still hold true. Chances are, it would. And if so, use that expression from thereon, if you want to be honest and truthful.

(I have used the word 'America' in this post a lot, but of course the truth is a bit more complex - what is "America", really? I mean, there's North-America, South-America, and .. is there a middle-America? There's the United States OF America (or should it be 'for America' originally?), and then the non-united States of America .. which are treated as separate countries anyway. Which they are, actually? So is 'America' a country, a continent, a.. what the heck is it, really? Is Argentina a country or a state, a non-united state of America, and thus being a part of America? If it's a country, how can it be part of another, larger country, called 'America'? Or if 'America' is not a country and not a continent, what is it?)

reply

Americans are NOT THAT SPECIAL. They are very similar to other idiots on the planet, get over it,


So what & who cares?




Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?

reply

The japs were really brutal. For instance, after Doolittle's Raid, the Japanese Army murdered 250,000 civilians in China in the province where they landed for revenge for them helping Doolittle's men.

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

My late father in law was due to hit the main Island of Japan just before the Bomb hit as an Army sargeant with Combined Operations. Slated to go in on the second wave. As pointed out elsewhere, over a million American casualties were to be expected if this happened. Instead, he was with the occupational forces there with the 225th Ordinance while disarming the Japanese military. Although he grew to like the Japanese people afterwhile (stayed with a Japanese family while stationed at Sendai) He did find some unnerving things that he withheld for many years fearing no one would believe him.

Like as his patrol was going through some medical warehouses, he came across some glass jars full of human body parts....specimens taken from experimentations on American POWs and labeled so. Only recently, in the last few years, have the Japanese even admitted to human experimentation not much different from the Nazis did.

The film was an oldfashioned WW2 film about the Pacific Theater few ever see filmed anymore. No CGI, if at all, and done quite well considering. The raid was shown straight forward and honest. The 6th Rangers and Filipinos pulled off a difficult mission with as few losses as possible. Thanks to them, alot of brothers, sons and husbands did come home. There is no "propaganda" here...unless you call a "job well done" just that.

Freedom comes with a price. To keep it, the debt might be called in at anytime. I am a Military brat (Navy) and know this from all those times my father was called away. He was in Vietnam and I hated the way some people treated the servicemen and women when they came back. The same to those who think the present situation in Iraq is another "Vietnam". Well, go read your history...it aint.

So to the wife of the Ranger....Thank YOU for your support. To your husband, Thank You for a "job well done"!



reply

Yes, some Japanese were very brutal--I'd avoid the term "Japs" very dated and generally considered bad form. The Kempaitai did execute a number of the raiders that were captured in Japan though. I'm not sure about the 250,000 that seems to me to be rather high.

reply

Well, if we'll make it 150K dead, would that be better? The Japanese slaughtered Chinese almost like the Nazis slaughtered jews

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

The Nazis killed most of theirs in the camps. The Japanese killed almost all theirs in the street.

reply

Sort of true. What about those who died in POW or bio-war camps? SS Einsatzgruppens machinegunned over a million Jews in Russia alone. They just weren't as industrialized in their approach to death as their Nazi pals.

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

"I'd avoid the term "Japs" very dated and generally considered bad form"

Hey Kiddies, Look! We've got ourselves a free speech ranger!

reply


Almost nothing good can be said about the Japanese conduct during WW2. They were killers and sadists, all of them. At least with the Germans, the common soldiery were not terrible- it was the Gestapo/SS who were responsible for the worst crimes. Among the Japanese, it was everybody from top to bottom. You name the way of making people suffer, they were guilty of it. No, this movie isn't propaganda. It's time a movie showed what the Japanese were doing during the war.

reply

They were like Genghis Khan, slaughtering whole districts!

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

i find it very unfair to refer to all Japanese as kiillers and saditsts. in the book Ghost Soldiers, Hampton Sides even gives instances of kind-hearted Japanese soldiers. he even specifically mentions that commander Homma had tried as hard as possible to ensure the proper treatment of the American and Filipino forces after their surrender. and if you read any world war II book that isnt completely biased, you'll find that, although somewhat of a rarity, there were still Japanese soldiers and commanders that treated their enemies with respect or kindness.

reply

propaganda or not
the film tells a tale of hero's from WW2. Based on true events you have to respect the indivuduals who put their lives on the line for the pow's. from these survivors point of view this film is not propaganda.
but there are 2 elements that can make you think that it is. first of all the hollywood tendency to show things in black and white, you're either good or bad.
all american soldiers are nice honourable fellows, non of them have a bit of negativity. you can say red was bad because he caused 10 others to be executed but still he is depicted as a man of his word and a man of action, both charactaristics of a hero. Also you can say the japs were evil but to what extend did they have a choice in their actions, revusing orders weigh a bit more in japan than in the west.
the second point is the timing of its release where the american people are more and more questioning the sending of troops to the middle east and less people are registering for the army, this picture send out the message: in the army you are good, you won't get killed (i remember 1 casualty of the raid) and america is on the good side.
in mind that it lay 3 years on the shelves i can't ignore the timing and have to classify it as propagandish, over the backs of people that deserve the respect, honour and graditude.

reply

I don't understand how anyone could think this is propoganda. This movie was filmed in 2002 before Iraq, are you saying that Miramax knew a war was going to happen and intentionally held the release date so that they could use it as propoganda. The Weinsteins are as liberal as Hollywood can get but somehow they managed to conjure up this plan to support the president three years later. This movie along with about dozen other films were dumped into theaters within a three month period as part of the Miramax-Disney divorce. Most of the movies were released in August and September, which are two of the slower grossing months at the box office annually. They were released on a limited scale with little or no marketing because they were never meant to make money. The Weinsteins were going to stick Disney for this enormous loss because many of these films were fairly high budgeted.

reply

This movie was actually made about the same time the Iraq war started. You could say that if they thought this movie was going to fuel young men and women to join the army, that is why they shelved it for a few years as to not promote that to happen.

The Great Raid is one of the finer war movies out there that no one has seen. Having a pretty extensive knowledge about WW2, I always find it strange that when people talk about the genocide of WW2, they always focus on the Jews by the Nazi's, but on the other side of that continent there was alot of genocide by Japs on eastern China. Ask around. Your casual friends and co-workers. I bet not many even knew this happened. And it is only just recently, some 60 years later, that Japan is finally acknowledging this happened and apologizing to the Chinese people (but I think their history books still don't make much if any reference to this event. If you don't talk about it, it didn't happen mentality).

Its good to finally see a movie try and shed some light on this topic. And if they thought they were making a "gung-ho" war movie that supported people to enlist in the army, kudos for them for releasing it 3 years after the Iraq war started, not in the beginning when emotions in this country were riding high.

reply

Wow, you're really trying to stretch the timing of the release to fit a propaganda viewpoint. You might as well remove your first paragraph altogether, because your argument is a very sneaky attempt to "sound" neutral.


"...this picture send out the message: in the army you are good, you won't get killed (i remember 1 casualty of the raid) and america is on the good side."


The movie showed two US soldiers who die in/from the raid. The kid helping the Sarge (got sniped), and then the Doc (not shown on screen) from the mortar wound. That number is EXACTLY how many US soldiers ACTUALLY died in the raid.

Oh and in WW2, America wasn't on the good side? Perhaps we should've joined the axis?

So basically you're really trying to stretch the timing because I don't think you know the history behind the movie that well.



"Also you can say the japs were evil but to what extend did they have a choice in their actions, revusing orders weigh a bit more in japan than in the west."


Bull, everyone has a choice. The right choice, to disobey, would've been extremely hard to make, never the less, if enough of them had made that choice things may have been different.

So in your vision of the world, accessory to a crime isn't even close to being as heinous as actually committing the crime? Very rarely is there someone who isn't an accessory or doesn't have the ability to at least work to prevent something before it happens. Unfortunately, they usually make the wrong choice. Everyone is good or bad, and it's never more clear in this example. You can choose to be good and work to stop the killing of the prisoners or you can choose to be bad and not even try.

In WW2, the majority of the Japanese soldiers choose to go along with it. Their actions should be condemned so it doesn't happen again.

I would think those of you who who relish the concept of PROTEST, would understand that.

Or is protest fine only so long as YOU don't get hurt in the process?

reply

can someone explain to me why only ONE American on the raid was shot. ONE.
there were 4 killed, and 21 wounded on the actual raid.

and something else

"Tagline: Two proud races, brothers-in-arms... A daring mission that will earn them the respect and admiration of the entire world."

hmm lets see. i saw about 7 or 8 filipinos shooting guns, and well, rows of americans shooting. there were actually almost twice as many filipinos on the actual raid.



OKAY< whatever, i had to say a few things. i liked this movie until every single japanese soldier got killed, but of course thier commander put up a great fight.

reply

i havent seen the movie, but i have read that the Pentagon did assit with this movie. Not saying that means it is propaganda, but the Pentagon usually helps and assists a movie that promotes a pro us military position. They do not assist with films that do the opposite. For example the Pentagon refused to help with "13 days", "Platoon", "Born on the 4th of July" , and "Full metal jacket" but they gladly helped the filming of "Pearl Harbor" , "general patton", "Top gun".
Even one scene in a military movie that portrays an american soldier as a sadist, psychopath, or cold blooded killer can hamper any future cooperation with the Pentagon.

This is an irrefutable fact about hollywood's relationship with the Pentagon, it doesnt directly imply propaganda.

reply

[deleted]

none, i was just stating a simple fact

read this article from the associated press for more information -

http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/2001-05-17-pentagon-helps-hollywood.htm

Disney paid the pentagon $1 million for the shooting of the movie Pearl Harbor.

reply

[deleted]

"I still fail to see your point. Quid pro quo? So what? As the person said, "If you want to use the military's toys, you've got to play by their rules." Is anything else to be expected? "

my point was that what is considered propaganda by some, might be more of a form of damage control by the Pentagon. They are very sensitive about any minute thing that might potray them in a negative light.


Films which obtained cooperation:

• Air Force One

• The Caine Mutiny

• A Few Good Men

• From Here to Eternity

• Armageddon

• The Longest Day

• The Hunt for Red October

• Pearl Harbour

• Patton

• Patriot Games

• Top Gun

• Windtalkers

• The Jackal

• Hamburger Hill

• Hearts in Atlantis

• The Longest Day

• GoldenEye

• The American President

• Behind Enemy LInes

• Apollo 13

• Tomorrow Never Dies

• Tora! Tora! Tora!

• A Time to Kill


these films were rejected:

• Broken Arrow

• Die Hard 2

• Forrest Gump

• GI Jane

• Independence Day

• Mars Attacks!

• Memphis Belle

• Sgt Bilko


This film (the great raid) in particular the Pentagon chose to work with the filmmaking team. Whether you like it or not, the Pentagon does have some say on the direction of the script, or characters. I could see how a normal person would percieve this as propaganda, but in fact it is more complex and not as insidious as many claim. I wasnt making the claim that the military is evil and controlling, i was just trying to point out why anyone would naturally assume a film dealing with the us military positively would be "propaganda" because in some senses it is. The definition of the word propaganda according to most dictionaries is defined as - "information that is spread for the purpose of promoting some cause" or "The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause".

reply

[deleted]

" can't even think of what Independence Day or Mars Attacks would have wanted from the Pentagon...."

it is extremely expensive for people to rent military equipment. When filmmakers become associated with the Pentagon, the pentagon supplies the following

-free equipment usage and rental (the filming of pearl harbor would have never taken place had the us military not essentially loaned them over 5 battleships)

-free usage of military locations for shoots.

-free database for information regarding specifics of military practices or technical information about weapons, vehicles, or planes.

with the advent of CGI however, this is becoming much less of an issue. Around 20 years ago it was nearly impossible to make a movie about the military without its cooperation due to the overwhelming cost.

reply

[deleted]

they would have cost less money to make, you didnt seem to read the entirety of my post.

reply

[deleted]

"No US military resources were given at all to the production of Pearl Harbor."

i really dont have much to say except that you are a flat out wrong... here is a quote from...Naval History Magazine

"In his preliminary request for assistance, the producer asked permission "to try to recreate Battleship Row, using ships from the Reserve Fleet at Pearl Harbor. We would like your assistance in moving and anchoring approximately eight ships—first to an area where we could construct set pieces on board and do refurbishment and then to specific placement in Battleship Row for filming." The company also wanted to film on board the newly arrived battleship Missouri (BB-63)" and ........."In turn, on 15 February 2000, Strub advised Bruckheimer that the Pentagon had approved military assistance in Hawaii, on board the aircraft carrier Constellation (CVA-64), and at mainland locations. The agreement to cooperate did not end negotiations to correct historical inaccuracies in the script, however. Jack Greene, the Pentagon's designated historical advisor, observed later that efforts to make changes created "a massive amount of work."(http://www.usni.org/navalhistory/articles01/nhsuid6.htm)



"The Movie Final Countdown was made with Navy support, though it was paid for down to the penny by the Studio."

i see, but i was never claiming the military or pentagon gave money to filmmakers, but resources, sets, equipment, and military knowledge is expensive. If you use a so-called "tank farm" you are paying substantial amounts of money to rent that equipment, if you use the military's decomissioned vehicles you are getting a huge discount. Same goes for if you use a military expert instead of a 3rd party outside expert for military knowledge.


"How do I know this? I am in the Navy!"

i guess your military authority counters the amazing amount of real facts out there? It seems like you barely read my posts, i specifcally said Mars Attacks and Independence day had ZERO military support.

"o my advice to you is stop assuming, and dont open your mouth unless you know what you are talking about!"

you have your information (which appears like it came from a a military source, most likely a commander of yours) and i have my information (from the associated press and reuters...the two most widely read news/media outlets in the world)

"Your claims are typical of the average internet bandit that assumes he/she knows everything."

i dont see how you are not an "internet bandit" if you so easily describe me this way, you have no secondary resources to backup these so called facts you preset, however i have many, see for yourself.....

http://www.amctv.com/article?CID=1284-1--0-15-EST
http://www.vnis.com/story.cfm?textnewsid=1098
http://film.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/Guardian/0,4029,543821,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2005-02-07-military-projects_x.htm

please do not waste my time with "Those are all liberal media news sources" or "you got them from the internet" because until you present secondary or backup information resources yourself, i wont be as inclined to hear you out.

lets continue this civil debate
Robbie

reply

[deleted]

"What you fail to realize is that filming decommissioned vessels, has nothing to with the military itself, which is exactly what I explained to you. It has nothing to do with military support. Those vessels north of Ford Island they used for Battleship Row, just sit there, they will never be used again, they are maintained by Civilians. That Battleship they used is not maintained by the Navy, does the museum get federal funds yes, nothing to do with the military. The Aircraft Carrier Constellation, also decommisioned and not maintained by the US Military. Your errors in realizing the difference are the problem."

i may be factually incorrect in stating that, but why do the producers of Pearl Harbor continually speak of a $1 million dollar payment made to the Pentagon for use of military information and facilities? I myself do not understand the full details of the arrangement, for the pearl harbor bombing scene may have little to with the military's involvement.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

No offence, Super, but I'm an accountant for a very large company, and I can assure you that dubious, unrecorded dealings are pretty much commonplace. What you think may happen, isn't necessarily what actually happens.

"Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you"

reply

[deleted]

"I can assure you dubious unrecorded dealings with anything to do with the military are not commonplace and non-existant!"

if you have this much faith in anything you might need to take a step back and think things over

reply

[deleted]

Wow Superbm2day so you have inner access to the top secret, covert workings of the military, eh? Then, we should be truly honoured by your presence on here today...

Accountants are far more privy and have more control over things than you may think. Someone has to look after all that money, whether earned legitimately or not... never underestimate us. Doctors can ruin individual lives by a bad decision - we can ruin hundreds or even thousands of lives by doing the same...

Talk about naive...

"Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you"

reply

[deleted]

"Yeah, you should. He's actually put his life on the line for his country. So have I. "

i didnt want to resort to this, but your response and logical fallacies are extremely typical of a young military combanant. If you realized the facts i am saying are true, which they indeed are, it would burst the fiction bubble you have surrounded yourself with. The military would not be an effective weapon unless they act as an army of one, and you my friend have been severely brainwashed by your military experience. I dont know what led you to that profession, but at this point you have become a us military apologist and nothing more.

have a good day.

Robbie

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

"You can find all the little internet rumbling you want about anything"

wow, somehow i knew you would say this... Please actually read the links i sent you more closely. You keep denying my claims without presenting any evidence, when i continually present evidence contrary to your claims.

and also please present secondary sources as i have in my earlier posts. Your "word" is not very convincing, especially when you discount & completely ignore the countless news articles (not internet rumblins as you call them) i have shown you.

reply

"All in all no Armed Forces involvement were present in the production of Pearl Harbor."

but this is simply false, i can fax you typed physical mail correspondence between the producers of pearl harbor and the military commandars who were involved in the project.

reply

I just have one question.....why can't one enjoy or not enjoy a movie without insulting another? It's one thing to debate, it's another to hurl insults. It's not my place....but I posted earlier in this thread, and it seems to me that the whole point of the original topic was lost throughout it all.

The only reason I even posted in this discussion originally was because I wanted to see when the movie was made after I watched it and I happened to see the discussions (if you can even call them that) and took a look. It's a bit sad really. I don't mean that to be insulting towards anyone...just a fact.

It's a movie folks...if you hate it, you hate it, if you like it, you like it. No need to insult another. Anyway. To you folks, Super(something or other...I'm sorry, sir, I can't remember your full screen name) and Ta2etc...thank you for your service to this country. You two are heroes.

I don't mean this to sound smarmy and all "make nicey nice"....but stuff like this gets to me...again, for reasons that I said way back when.

Have a great day.

-S

reply

by - videohoax (Sun Jan 8 2006 14:50:57 )

"i havent seen the movie, but i have read that the Pentagon did assit with this movie. Not saying that means it is propaganda, but the Pentagon usually helps and assists a movie that promotes a pro us military position. They do not assist with films that do the opposite. For example the Pentagon refused to help with "13 days", "Platoon", "Born on the 4th of July" , and "Full metal jacket" but they gladly helped the filming of "Pearl Harbor" , "general patton", "Top gun".
Even one scene in a military movie that portrays an american soldier as a sadist, psychopath, or cold blooded killer can hamper any future cooperation with the Pentagon.

This is an irrefutable fact about hollywood's relationship with the Pentagon, it doesnt directly imply propaganda."

This is true.

Maybe it doesn't prove that it's "propaganda", but if the Pentagon assists, it pretty much proves it's pro-war, pro-america, pro-freedom or whatever...

If someone thinks that producing a movie for free (well, with alot of aid), with access to any cool military accesories you ask for, won't affect the script or how the movie will turn out, that person is not very clever.

Top Gun, Pearl Harbour, and now this. If you enjoyed the movie, fine. But wake up and realise that a good movie is not = what really happened.

Oh, and to the person posting as "Rangerwife", if you don't want people to be "insulting", maybe you should learn how to separate fiction from reality, and Movies from what War really is.

reply

What would that have to do with people being insulting towards one another? I can perfectly distinguish between fiction and reality, thank you very much. And I can also without error realize the difference between war and movies. It's not a difficult concept. Imagine that.

All I've said is that it's a movie. Or maybe you didn't read that I actually wrote that, and just rather chose to insult me? I wouldn't be surprised. I enjoyed the movie, so why is that call to insult me? That is what I don't understand. So, I am going to take the advice of the other folks who originally responded, and ignore people like you. You have nothing good to say.

Have a wonderful day.

reply

Quick and simple answer to why Americans are portrayed better than what happened in reality: It's an American movie.

It would be likely that the opposite would happen (more heroic, more numerous Filipino fighters fighting alongside the few Americans with facts and numbers exaggerated) had the film been a Philippine production.

reply

what's funny about this "secret" raid, was that every filipino in all the Nueva Ecija towns the Americans went through, knew they were coming days ahead of time, in one town, the mayor even prepared a special welcome party with drinks and roasted pig much to Muncy's chagrin.. But guess what the japs didnt even have a clue. But without the locals help, guiding the americans through the sea of tall grass on the way to Cabanatuan, informing them of the japs major movement toward Dalton Pass moving thorugh Cabanatuan, and such simple acts as tying up their dogs mouths ahead of time b4 the american raiding party arrived in their vilage so as not to arouse jap suspicions... the raid would not have even had a prayer of taking place..

reply

Nice post. Never knew this forum had a such a PC angle to it.

Anyhow...good to see the Japanese camp soldiers portrayed realistically for a change...murderous savages.

Bratt was good....flawed but good.

And the fellow executed was very nice too.

I did get the feeling though that they had too much story to try to tell in the film.

Again...nice post...shame you have to explain what used to be common truth to folks

reply

hehe its kinda fun that anyone would call a japanees person a "savage" when in fact most of our tecnology is based on theirs. We went around with sheeps and cows when they printed money on fine paper. And guess who got us gunpowder? etc. Just becouse a warrior is murderous dont make him a savage.

I feel the same way about all theese movies. I cant help but think (and feel) that its allways the evil vs good, the ugly vs the pretty, the kind vs the sadistic etc. I allways end up with a feeling that if you dont "celebrate" the allied forces in their glorius victories on screen than you are one of the enemie.

Why cant a movie protrait war as it is, why most heroes allways exist in so large numbers? Ofc. There is a LOT of heroes in war, but that they nearly all is allied, or even american and if there is some slight chance of actualy beeing and "evil" american than he is either sympathick with the nazi`s or he is just a bully. Movies like this one, pearl harbour etc. dont feel real, they dont seem like warmovies, but "the way war should be movies" or even "Uncle sam needs you to fight for FREEDOM movies".

reply

Chinese are the inventor of gunpowder and technique of printing. Through out the eight years of occupying part of China, Japanese soldiers brutally murdered millions of Chinese civilians and raping, who knows how many, Chinese girls/women (the worst of all is called Nanking massacre, 200,000 to 300,000 civilians were killed by Japanese soldiers in 6 weeks and two soldiers used their swords to kill 100+ Chinese civilians each in one day – the story was on Japanese newspaper). They also used Chinese civilians to do medical experiments. I am not against Japanese race but against Japanese Imperial Army during WWII. Please read the following links for more info or you can do your own research on the web. (Warning: some of the websites are graphic!)

http://www.gendercide.org/case_nanking.html
http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/germwar/germwar.htm
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/SOD.CHAP3.HTM

We, Chinese, thank the brave American soldiers (and other participating Western world soldiers) helped us to fight against evil Japanese Imperial army during WWII.

You should also read the stories of "Flying Tigers". http://www.flyingtigersavg.com/tiger1.htm

reply

But we should have stayed and knocked Mao and his cutthroats out too.

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

Yes you should. Please ask President Roosevelt why did he agree to give Manchuria to Russia to gain Russia's promise to open war with Japan (Russia later gave all the Japanese surrendered arms to Communists in China), and ask General Marshall why Nationalist demilitarized 1.5 million troops after WWII and Communist did not, and ask President Truman why was he against General MacArthur plan (attacks Communist China from North Korea and Nationalist troop attacks southern China from Taiwan.)

By the way, China was ruled by Nationalist party under Chiang Kai-shek during WWII. Mao took over China in 1949 after he won the civil war against Nationalist. The brutality of Mao's regime does not belong to this discussion.

reply

You might also ask FDR and Churchill why did they agree to give Formosa (aka Taiwan) to the ROC? Since the ROC didn't exist when Formosa became part of Japan and for 95% of Chinese history Formosa was not part of China and even when it was "part of China", Chinese control of Taiwan was limited at best.

One could also ask, since the legitimate sovereign of Formosa was Japan, the UK and the US had no right to give Formosa to anyone nor did the ROC have any right to ask for it. I don't seem to recall anyone asking the Taiwanese what they wanted? Of course after the Nationalists came in, it may have been a little dangerous to ask questions--just ask the 3000 dead after 2-28 or the thousands that vanished during the "white terror" period.

China during World War II wasn't ruled by much of anyone. Eastern China was under Japan, most of the rest was under the rule of warlords and a few places like Qiongqing was under the KMT and other places by the CCP. Basically from 1912 until 1949, China in whole wasn't ruled by any single political entity.

The reason why Truman didn't want to expand the war to China was because Truman wanted to contain the war to Korea and not have a major war with China and perhaps a nuclear-armed Soviet Union on its hands.

The KMT army didn't really prove itself in the second half of the civil war (1946-1949), I doubt Truman had much faith in the KMT army moving across 120 miles of sea and landing in Fujian, fighting to establish a beach head and then moving inland to recapture Fujian, Guangdong, Hainan, Zhejiang, etc and then moving west and north. Same reason the PLA can't take Taiwan today--well first they would have a major war on their hands with a nuclear armed enemy, but even if the US stayed out of it--crossing 120 miles of seawater, getting a beach head and then moving inland is difficult for even very good armies and the KMT army then and the PLA army now simply weren't or aren't that good.

The KMT army did manage to hold off a PLA advance in early 1950 at Jinmen (Kinmen) but there was still water between the two sides. It wasn't even able to hold Hainan and pulled those forces off for the island in 1950 and redeployed them to Jinmen. I just don't think the KMT army in the 1950s was very good and damn lucky the Korean War broke out and the 7th fleet put itself between Penghu and China.

reply

We were already committed in Europe against Stalin and many felt that China could take care of herself. It was a mistake, but MacArthur has no credibility after he walked into the Chinese traps along the Yalu.

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

No. The US foreign policy establishment after World War II was dominated by "Europe Firsters." It wasn't that the ROC could take care of itself, but that to them Europe and to a lesser degree Japan was more important. It was based no doubt partially on racism--that Germany or France was more important than China but also because the State Department was filled with Maoists, who didn't want to see the KMT survive. Tailgunner Joe may have been wrong about many things, but he was right about State though.

reply

Can you blame us for concentrating on Europe first. But TG Joe was right about some of them, who helped spread the lies about Mao's 8th Route Army and all their "exploits and hardships".

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

The Chinese made an enormous contribution to the Allied War effort- the fact that the Nationalist and Communists could fight together was really something.

reply

Ask anyone who was a subject or a prisoner of the Imperial Japanese who were the good guys.

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

"Ask anyone who was a subject or a prisoner of the Imperial Japanese who were the good guys. "

Yes, but what would you expect them to say?

reply

My friend's father grew up in an internment camp for Dutch civilians in Java and 1/2 his family died. Let's ask him! I could give a fig about the Japs these days one way or another, but the Japanese are some of the most racist people on earth, 99% of the country is pure blood. Name me another country like that!

What are they doing? Why do they come here?
Some kind of instinct, memory, what they used to do.

reply

Can you please stop using the term Jap--it is no less offensive than n*igger and I am sure you won't go around saying that, would you?

Korea for one, which is save a few thousand Chinese 100% Korean and is the most homogenous nation on the planet.

Again, I am sure if you ask any POW of the Japanese they would be clear who the "bad guys" were--but who really cares? What do you expect? I am sure if you got some Confederate prisoners that were detained along Lake Erie they would tell you the Union guards were a bunch of sadistic bastards. And if you got some Union POWs from Camp Sumter (aka Andersonville) they would say the same thing. Your friend's father is not exactly an objective source now is he?



reply

i agree with you on the "jap" thing. but on the subject of the "bad guys", i have to disagree. while most prisoners would probably dislike their captors, you have to understand the rampant mistreatment of pow's by Japanese forces. torture, mass murder, slave labor. at Japanese pow camps, there was a death rate of 25%. thats one in every four pows dead. in american camps, it was only 4%. granted, the mistreatment of prisoners was caused by the general view of the Japanese from surrender, but that does not absolve them from blame nor ameliorate the cruelty with which they acted.

reply

Gunpowder was a Chinese invention as well as paper--not the Japanese. And it coming to the West was not from the Japanese either.

reply

The camp guards were not part of the regular IJA--there as at most POW camps were guarded by the Kempaitai--the Japanese Military Police. Not all Japanese were murderous savages.

reply

I don't disrespect your previous positions Super and ta2me92704, but I would still argue that neither of you have/had secret access to many of the higher, inner workings of the US army, claim as you might that you do. Every cent may well be accounted for in some way, I'm sure it is - both in and out - but you yourselves still don't know exactly where it goes...

I'm not particularly a conspiracy theorist and I've never seen the X Files, though I've no doubt you have. You do seem to have disrespected Videohoax all the way along this thread, without producing any real contrary eveidence apart from just routinely insisting that you "just know things don't work that way"... I'm sure there are things even George Bush doesn't know about, so what makes you so informed?

Actually, I didn't follow you here - don't flatter yourself. It was babybyrd2000's postings that led me here...

"Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you"

reply

[deleted]

Hmmm.... I certainly have no idea what you're talking about. You continually talk about this security clearance. How do you suggest I find out who you are or what you did? Type 'Superbm2day' into the Google search engine?

Your profile says you are a 28 year old wounded combat veteran. Whilst not belittling you, I could write that on my profile too. It took me years of study to get to my level of profession - I'm 38. So you're ten years younger than me, have seen active combat, and yet still know all about the multi-billion dollar purchase orders and other monetary dealings of the US military? Instead of just hinting at what you did, why not give us a little more insight? At least then I may be able to believe you, 'cos presently you're offering no substantiating evidence whatsoever... Come on, this is only a movie website, not likely to be scanned by the government, so give us some info...

We all have time on our hands, not just me, or we wouldn't even be here...

"Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you"

reply

Listen, the guy you are arguing with doesn't have much going on in the clue department, but he is absolutely correct about the DoD supporting the film 100%. Yes, the DoD was reimbursed, but you better believe they supported it.

And I know better than you because I spent a week on the set as a military advisor during the first week of shooting on Ford Island and the USS Missouri.

In the future, if you are going to pontificate on something, you'd best know what the Hell you are talking about.

reply

[deleted]

I wouldn't say ALL Japanese were dispicable in this war nor were all brain washed. But the people who ran the POW camps--the Kempaitai were a very brutal lot and the conditions in the camp as shown in the movie was very accurate.

reply

Guess what...America can be a pretty lousy...Look at japanese internment and................

America's planned invasion of canada!

Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:35:53 EST
From: FLOYD RUDMIN
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada


A 1935 US Plan for Invasion of Canada

Submitted by F.W. Rudmin
Queen's University
Kingston, Ontario Canada

Email: [email protected]
FAX: (613) 545-6611

The following is a full-text reproduction of the 1935
plan for a US invasion of Canada prepared at the US Army
War College, G-2 intelligence division, and submitted on
December 18, 1935. This is the most recent declassified
invasion plan available from the US archival sources.
Centered pagination is that of the original document. The
spelling and punctuation of the original document are
reproduced as in the original document, even when in error
by present-day norms.

This document was first identified by Richard Preston
in his 1977 book, "The Defence of the Undefended Border:
Planning for War in North America 1867-1939" (Montreal:
McGill-Queen's University Press.) Preston's reference
citation (p. 277) identified this to be archived at the US
Military History Collection, Carlisle Barracks, Pa., coded
AWC 2-1936-8, G2, no. 19A. It was located by the US
National Archives and supplied on microfilm.

The military planning context of this document is War
Plan Red, which was approved in May 1930 by the Secretary
of War and the Secretary of Navy. War Plan Red and
supporting documents are available from the US National
Archives on microfilm, in the Records of the Joint Board,
1903-1947, Roll 10, J.B. 325, Serial 435 through Serial
641. In War Plan Red, the US Army's theatre of operations
is defined to be: "All CRIMSON territory" (p.80), and the
US Army's mission, in bold type: ULTIMATELY, TO GAIN
COMPLETE CONTROL OF CRIMSON (p. 84). CRIMSON is the
colour code for Canada. In 1934, War Plan Red was amended
to authorize the immediate first use of poison gas against
Canadians and to use strategic bombing to destroy Halifax
if it could not be captured.

In February 1935, the War Department arranged a
Congressional appropriation of $57 million dollars to
build three border air bases for the purposes of
pre-emptive surprise attacks on Canadian air fields. The
base in the Great Lakes region was to be camouflaged as a
civilian airport and was to "be capable of dominating the
industrial heart of Canada, the Ontario Peninsula" from p.
61 of the February 11-13, 1935, hearings of the Committee
on Military Affairs, House of Representatives, on Air
Defense Bases (H.R. 6621 and H.R. 4130). This testimony
was to have been secret but was published by mistake. See
the New York Times, May 1, 1935, p. 1.

In August 1935, the US held its largest peacetime
military manoeuvres in history, with 36,000 troops
converging at the Canadian border south of Ottawa, and
another 15,000 held in reserve in Pennsylvania. The war
game scenario was a US motorized invasion of Canada, with
the defending forces initially repulsing the invading Blue
forces, but eventually to lose "outnumbered and outgunned"
when Blue reinforcements arrive. This according to the
Army's pamphlet "Souvenir of of the First Army Maneuvers:
The Greatest Peace Time Event in US History" (p.2).

The following document is a declassified public
domain document and may be freely reproduced. This should
be of particular interest to people in the Halifx and
Quebec City regions, then considered to be the most
strategic cities in Canada.


-40-

SUPPLEMENT NO. 3

TO

REPORT OF COMMITTEE NO. 8

SUBJECT:

CRITICAL AREAS OF CANADA AND APPROACHES THERETO
_______________________________________________
.

Prepared by:

SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 3

Major Charles H. Jones, Infantry, Chairman.
Lt. Col. H.W. Crawford, Engineers.

I. Papers Accompanying.
___________________
1. Bibliography. (Omitted, filed in Rec.Sec.)
2. List of Slides. "
3. Appendices (1 and 2). "
4. Annexes. (Incl. A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,K, and L) "

II. The Study Presented.
___________________
Determine under the geographical factor, the critical areas in
Crimson (Canada) and the best approaches thereto for Blue. A critical
area is assumed to be any area of such strategic importance to either
belligerent that control thereof may have a material bearing on the out-
come of the war.

III. Facts bearing on the study.
__________________________
1. General Considerations:
An area in Crimson territory may be of strategic importance from
the viewpoint of tactical, economic, or political considerations. In the
final analysis, however, critical areas must be largely determined in the
light of Red's probable line of action and Crimson's contribution to that
effort.
2. Geographical Features of Canada.
a. Location and extent. The location and extent of the Dominion of
_
Canada is shown on the Map herewith (see Exhibit A). It comprises the
entire northern half of the the North American continent, excepting only
Alaska and the coast of Labrador, a dependency of the colony of New-
foundland.
The principal political subdivisions are those located along the
border of the United States. These from east to west are:
(1) The Maritime Provinces:
Prince Edward Island.
Nova Scotia.
New Brunswick.
(2) Quebec.
(3) Ontario.
(4) The Prairie Provinces:
Manitoba.
Saskatchewan.
Alberta.


-41-

(5) British Columbia.
Newfoundland, while not a part of the Dominion of Canada, would
undoubtedly collaborate in any Crimson effort.
b. Topography. (Slide 14852)
_
The great area in eastern Canada underlain by rocks of Precambrian
age is known as the Canadian Shield. Its northern boundary crosses the
Arctic archipelago; the eastern boundary lies beyond Baffin Island and
Labrador, and reaches the depressed area occupied by the St. Lawrence, a
short spur crossing this valley east of Lake Ontario to join the Adirondack
Mountains of New York. The southern boundary runs from this spur west to
Georgian Bay thence along the north shore of Lake Huron and Lake Superior,
thence northwest from the Lake of the Woods to the western end of Lake
Athabaska. Its average elevation does not exceed 1500 feet. The greatest
known elevations are in the eastern part of Baffin Island and along the
coast of northern Labrador. Peaks of the Torngat Mountains of Labrador
have elevations of between 4000 and 5000 feet. The coast is one of the
boldest and most rugged in the world, with many vertical cliffs rising
1000 to 2000 feet high. Occasional exceptions occur in which there are
reliefs of several hundred feet, as in the hills along the north shore of
Lake Huron and Lake Superior. The area is dotted with lakes, large and
small, and of irregular outline. A lowland of considerable extent
stretches for some distance into Ontario and Manitoba from Hudson Bay.
Extending south and west form the Canadian Shield, between the Ap-
palachian Mountains on the east and the Cordilleras on the west, lies the
Great North American plain. The northeastern portion of this plain called
the St. Lawrence lowlands occupies southern Ontario, south of a line ex-
tending from Georgian Bay to the east end of Lake Ontario; eastern Ontario
lying between the Ottawa and St. Lawrence rivers, and that part of Quebec
lying adjacent to the St. Lawrence between Montreal and Quebec.
The plain west of the Canadian Shield, known as the Interior Plains,
stretches northward to the Arctic Ocean between a line approximately join-
ing Lake Winnipeg and Lake Athabasca, Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake
on the east, and the foothills of the Rocky Mountains on the west.
That part of the St. Lawrence Lowlands lying in the eastern angle of
Ontario, and in Quebec south of Montreal and extending down the St. Law-
rence is comparatively flat and lies less than 500 feet above sea level.
On the lower St. Lawrence it is greatly narrowed by the near approach of
the Appalachian system to the Canadian Shield. The part lying adjacent to
Lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron is of less even surface, has its greatest
elevation of over 1700 feet south of Georgian Bay and slopes gently to
the Great Lakes.
The Interior Plains region is in general rolling country with broad
undulations and a slope eastward and northward of a few feet per mile,
descending from an elevation of 3000 to 5000 feet near the mountains on the
west to less than 1000 feet at the eastern border. The rolling character
of the area is relieved by several flat topped hills, by flat areas that
formed the beds of extensive lakes, and by deep river valleys.
The Appalachain and Arcadian regions occupy practically all that part
of Canada lying east of the St. Lawrence, with the exception of the lowlands
west of a line joining Quebec City and Lake Champlain. The Applachain
region is a continuation into Quebec of three chains of the Applachain
system of mountains. The most westerly of these ranges, the Green Mountains
of Vermont, stretches northeast into the Gaspe peninsula, where it forms
flat topped hills some 3000 feet high. The Acadian region, which includes

-42-

New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island is an alternation of
upland with hills and ridges rising 2500 feet and higher. Adjacent to the
Bay of Fundy is a series of ridges rising in places to 1200 feet. Between
these two New Brunswick uplands, which converge toward the southwest is a
lowland forming the whole eastern part of the province. This lowland ex-
tends east to include Prince Edward Island, the western fringe of Cape
Breton Island and the mainland of Nova Scotia north of the Cobequid moun-
tains, which have an elevation of 800 to 1000 feet. South of the Cobequid
Mountains lies a long narrow lowland stretching from Chedabucto Bay to
Minas Basin, and along the Cornwallis Annapolis valley between North and
South Mountains. South of this lowland is a highland sloping to the Atlantic
Coast. The northern part of Cape Breton Island is a tableland 1200 feet
high with its central part rising to an elevation of over 1700 feet.
The Cordelleran region, a mountainous area bordering the Pacific
extends from the United States through Canada into Alaska and embraces
nearly all of British Columbia and Yukon and the western edge of Alberta
and the Northwest Territories. The eastern part of the Cordillera is occu-
pied by the Rocky Mountains, with peaks rising to 10,000 feet and 12,000
feet. They extend northwest and fall away towards the Liard River. The
western part of the Cordillera is occupied by the Coast Range and the
mountains of Vancouver and Queen Charlotte Islands. The Coast Range rises
to heights of 7000 to 9000 feet. Between the Rocky Mountains and the Coast
Range lies a vast plateau 3000 to 4000 feet high and cut by deep river
valleys.
3. Population.
According to the census of 1931, the total population on June 1, 1931
was 10,376,786, of whom 5,374,541 were males. The inhabited areas of the
Dominion are essentially confined to a narrow strip alolo the United States
boundary, generally south of the 56th parallel of latitude west of the Lake
Winnipeg, and south of the 49th parallel of latitude east of Lake Superior.
Approximately 10% of the total population are found in the Maritime provinces,
61% in Quebec and Ontario, 23% in the Prairie Provinces and 6% in British
Columbia.
Of the present population, 51.86% are of British descent, 28.22%
French, and the remainder of widely scattered nativity.
4. Climate.
The climate of southern Canada is comparable to that of the northern
tier of the states of the United States. The west coast of British Columbia
tempered by the Pacific Ocean is mild and humid. The prairie provinces
generally experience extreme cold weather from November to March, with heavy
snow fall. The climate of southern Ontario, the St. Lawrence Valley and the
Maritime Provinces is much milder that that of the prairie provinces, but
freezing temperatures are general between the end of November and the first
of April, and the ground is usually covered with between one and three
feet of snow. Any extensive military operations in Canada between November
1st and April 15th would be extremely difficult, if not impossible.
5. Communications.
a. Railways.
_
There are only two railway systems in Canada, both crossing Canada
east and west from the Atlantic to the Pacific. These lines generally
parallel the United States border, in some instances crossing through the
United States.


-43-

(1) The Canadian national Railways system (See inclosure B) belonging
to and operated by the government, has eastern terminals at Halifax, N.S.,
Portland, Maine (Grand Trunk), and through the Central Vermont, at Boston,
New London and New York. Western terminals are Vancouver and Prince Rupert
B.C. An extension from Cochrane, Ontario, to Moosonee, Ontario on James
Bay, was completed by the Province of Ontario in July 1932, to connect with
water routes to Churchill, Hudson Bay and with the northern route to Europe.
(2) The Canadian Pacific system (see inclosure C) has its eastern
terminus at Saint John, N.B. and it western terminus at Vancouver, B.C.
As indicated by the systems maps, there are numerous branch lines serving
the industrial and farming areas of the Dominion, and connecting lines ty-
ing in with various railroads of the United States.
From a military viewpoint, these railroads provide excellent trans-
portation facilities for Blue, if invasion of Crimson is decided upon, and
being located in close proximity to the border are, from the Crimson view-
point, very liable to interruption. This is particularly true at Winnipeg
some 60 miles north of Blues border, through which both transcontinental
systems now pass. This fact probably encouraged Canada to construct the
railroad from The Pass, Manitoba and develop the port at Churchill.
Complete details concerning all railroads of Canada are contained in
Appendix No. 1.
b. Highways.
_
In recent years Canada has greatly increased and improved her road con-
struction and while there are enormous stretches of country, particularly
in the northern portion of the Dominion, with few or no roads, the southern
portion is well served with improved roads. A number of transcontinental
motor roads are under construction or projected, the most important being
the "Kings International Highway" from Montreal to Vancouver, via Ottawa,
North Bay, Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie, Winnipeg, MacLeod, Crow's Nest Pass,
Fernia and Cranbrook. Another highway is being constructed from
Calgary to Vancouver.
The principal roads in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritime Provinces
are shown on Inclosure D, herewith. Roads in the Prairie Provinces and
British Columbia are shown on inclosure E.
The majority of improved roads are classified as gravel; macadam and
concrete construction amounting to only 7870 miles out of a total of some
95,000 miles improved. Gravel roads will require extensive maintenance
under heavy motor traffic, especially during the spring.
c. Water Transportation.
_
(1) Inland Waterways.
The Great Lakes, with the St. Lawrence River, is the most im-
portant fresh water transportation system in the world. At the present
time it affords a draft of 21.0 feet over all the Great Lakes and through
the Welland Canal into the St. Lawrence. From the Atlantic Ocean to Mon-
treal, the present head of ocean navigation on the St. Lawrence, a draft
of 30.0 feet is available, adequate for the great majority of ocean shipping.
For some distance above Montreal the present channel has an available depth
of only 14.0 feet.
The inland waterway is of prime importance to the economic life
of both the United States and Canada for the transportation of bulk com-
modities, especially for the movement of wheat from the western plains to
shipping centers on the eastern seaboard; of iron ore from the mines in
Minnesota to foundaries along Lake Ontario; and for coal from the mines of
Pennsylvania and West Virginia to Ontario, Quebec and the northwest.


-44-

The locks at Sault Ste. Marie, the boundary channels between Port
Huron and Detroit and to a lesser degree the Welland Canal are the critical
points on this waterway and effective control of such areas is vital to
Blue.
Navigation on the Great Lakes is generally closed by ice from
about the end of November to the first of April.
The St. Lawrence River is ordinarily ice bound for a similar period,
but somewhat later about early in December to the latter part of April.
While there are a number of Canadian lake ports of importance, Montreal is
the only one which would not be automatically closed by Blue control of the
Lakes. Montreal is also an important ocean port and will be considered
along with other deep sea ports.
(2) Ocean Shipping.
The Dominion of Canada owns and operates a cargo and passenger
carrying fleet consisting of some 57 cargo vessels and 11 passenger ships.
The principal ocean ports and the magnitude of Canadian ocean
traffic is indicated by the following tabulation:

A. Number and tonnage of sea-going vessels entered and cleared at the
principal ports of Canada. (For year ending March 31, 1934.)

SEA-GOING VESSELS
PORT arrived departed TOTAL TONS (REGISTERED)
____ _______ ________ _______________________
Halifax, N.S. * 1259 1484 7,540,990
Yarmouth, N.S. 535 519 1,102,191
St. John, N.B. * 684 688 2,924,822
Montreal, Quebec * 1078 907 7,266,569
Quebec, Que. * 397 308 3,388,829
Prince Rupert, B.C. 1141 1155 251,881
Vancouver, B.C. * 2332 2137 11,705,775
Victoria, B.C. 1927 1938 8,874,481
New Westminster, B.C. 678 700 3,123,606

IMPORTANT SECONDARY PORTS.

Churchill, Man. * 15 15 132,000
Three Rivers, Que 79 79 424,560
Windsor, N.S. 56 69 201,032

Note: The above figures do not indicate amount of commerce; Register tons
______
are gross tons. (Namely cubical contents in cubic feet divided by 100)
less deductions for crews space, stores, etc.

A brief description of the above ports to indicate size, avail-
able depths and important terminal facilities is included in Appendix No.
2.

reply

[deleted]

And my question would be so? I am sure the United States has plans for invasion of every country in the world and I'd be shocked if they didn't.

reply

Yes, the US had a war plan for all of the Major Powers (even England), and the Major Powers all had a war plan for the US. Hardly some sort of diabolical scheme, how ever odd it may seem in the world we live in now.

reply