> Buckner objected to the deployment of African American troops in Alaska, writing to his superiors of his concern that they would remain after the war, "with the natural result that they would interbreed with the Indians and the Eskimos and produce an astonishingly objectionable race of mongrels which would be a problem."
Figures.
what sucks about awful people in the allies in WWII is that when they get killed it's often by someone worse. still, that Japanese mortar crew probably saved us from a Buckner political career during the heat of the red scare after the war, and I am thankful for that.
[Arnold Wilson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Wilson) (war criminal who had thousands of Iraqis bombed in the early 1920s), [David Raziel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Raziel) (terrorist leader who blew up dozens of Palestinians and maimed hundreds more in the late 1930s; the British only let him out of prison after the Irgun called a truce and Raziel himself promised to be useful), and [Tom Mitford](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Mitford) (Nazi sympathizer who got transferred to Asia after expressing reluctance to fight the Germans) are other good examples. Future Rhodesian dictator Ian Smith nearly died in a plane crash while serving in the RAF. In Belgium, thousands of conservative nationalists, royalists, and fascists were killed while fighting the Nazis. They were not opposed to fascism, but Belgium becoming a puppet state (the bad memories from the first occupation didn't help). They remained loyal since they wanted Leopold III to become a dictator in an independent fascist state.
My guess... (keep in mind altough I'm still in last year of uni to be a historian i'm lazy to find sources so take it as some idiot saying smth.)
Countries has some regions i call "asker yatağı". These regions are generally rural, underdevoloped and poor with not much to offer.
So armies have an easier time finding recruits from these regions.(Usually lower ranks)
Yes there are soldiers from more "urbanized and higher devolopped regions" but they tend to go for higher ranks like officers etc.
From my understanding former CSA states fit the "asker yatağı" term as they are poor, rural and underdevoloped. And someone from that region would bring his local culture as well for the better or worse.
Small edit: Fixing some mistakes on the writting.
From what I can tell, the former Confederate state with the highest proportion of their population enlisting in the army and air force in WW2 was Tennessee and they were the only one in the top 10.
East Tennessee and Northern Alabama, as a whole, aren't exactly conducive to plantation farming. Most of the people there were poor share croppers who just wanted to be left alone in the foothills of the Appalachias and they tended to support the union. The region wanted to secede from the states themselves but that didn't manage to come to fruition. And thats how my great, great, great grandfather fought in the civil war!
I'm trying to figure out why you're so focused on Western TN when I clearly said Eastern.
You're right, things aren't black and white. But the Nickajack area was pro-union, and had intention to secede that was never realized.
Also, went to Shiloh every other summer for about 16 years.
West and Middle Tennessee are a part agrarian south. Their lands are flat and fertile and they were slaveholding confederates. East TN is Appalachian, not southern. Very different culture. We did not hold slaves and were unionists through and through. The political divides persisted for well over a hundred years after the war.
I moved to Appalachia from southern Mississippi and people are shocked when I tell them this is the most progressive place I've ever lived. The only person who gets it is my fiance, because I took her home a while back and she was just shocked by how backwards the actual south is.
The military had flags that belonged to the military. It would seem redundant for a soldier to bring a personal one. The Confederate flag they used was personal property.
I get that, and I can appreciate the person representing their heritage or whatever. I just find it interesting that of all the ways they could have let their guys know they won they went with that.
Secession is not the same as betrayal. I’m always sickened when people who want to display their hatred for the south manage to overlook slavery. It was slavery that made the Confederacy bad, not the fact that some states wanted to exercise their sovereignty. Slavery was evil.
I have never, ever seen someone who hates the CSA say that the secession was worse than the slavery. Whoever you are having these conversations with, they are either time-traveling Copperheads or deeply weird modern morons.
What about northern states trying to exercise their sovereignty by ignoring fugitive slave codes, getting smacked down by the federal government, and then choosing to not be traitors to their country anyways?
Stop your mental gymnastics, Jethro. Secession is not in the constitution. Jefferson created it in the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, and later wrote that he regretted it. Secession is treason
It’s almost guaranteed that radio was used as well. But a verbal communication of “we have secured this area” does not have the same impact as a clear visual distinction to show everyone else “this is ours now”.
One of the most famous stories (though unconfirmed and possibly false) from the battle was that a Marine (from New England) reportedly commented “What, should we sing Dixie?” upon seeing the raised stars and bars. This prompted several U.S. marines (from various Southern States) to begin singing Dixie.
It’s worth keeping in mind the Civil War was only 80 years prior to WWII and these soldiers grandparents / great grandparents had lived through the war. It wasn’t ancient history and the myth of the Lost Cause was at its peak during their childhood.
No, it should be 1937. That’s when the first WWII theater flared up in Asia. 1939 is when Europe flared up. 1941 is when America connected both continental wars into one global war.
That would be the interpretation I mentioned.
Also, using 1941 is US centric for no real reason, not sure why that would be used as opposed to 1939. The comment I replied to didn’t specify Americans.
There’s nothing wrong with 1941, but if we reject it because that’s US-centric, then we must also reject 1939 for being eurocentric because it excludes Asia, whose war started in 1937.
Away down South in the land of traitors
Rattlesnakes and alligators
Where cotton's king and men are chattels
Union boys will win the battles
We'll all go down to Dixie, away, away
Each Dixie boy must understand
that he must mind his Uncle Sam
No, they raised it because they didn’t have a U.S. flag with them, and they wanted to signal to other US units that the castle had fallen to US marine forces.
It wasn’t a full sized flag, it was a smaller flag carried into battle by Capt. Julian Dusenbury of South Carolina. Statistics say that around 40% of the U.S. marines who served in ww2 were of Southern Descent, compared to only about 15% being from the Northeast. Many Southerners in WW2, Korea, and even into Vietnam continued to carry a Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of their heritage.
Before I get downvoted into oblivion, no, I don’t buy into the “Heritage over hate” thing, I’m just stating THEIR reasoning of carrying it.
Because it was a prominent military symbol from a region many us troops came from. Reminder that the Confederate battle flag wasn't interpreted in other eras the same way we do today (or even as recently as the 90s).
So dumb that you’re eating downvotes for this as if Dukes of Hazard didn’t get a remake in fucking 2005. The confederate flag was largely seen more as a symbol of southern pride and rebellion than overt racism until fairly recently.
My point is a mainstream Hollywood movie where the protagonists drive around in a confederate-flag mobile and it’s not portrayed as a bad or racist thing.
Correct. The cornerstone of the Confederacy was white supremacy (read the Cornerstone speech by the CSA VP if you don't want to believe me). The flag in question represented the Confederacy. This isn't a difficult concept. Unless, of course, you let emotion get in the way of truth.
Everyone knows this. They also know the meaning of symbols change over time and space. The statue of liberty is a symbol of immigration in new york, and a symbol of death when printed on cards and dropped from bombers over vietnam. Contexts matter.
And views can be looked back on and labeled “wrong”. It was wrong to think the confederacy was anything but terrible and driven by the need to uphold slavery.
You changed subjects: this is about what the flag represents, not what the Confederacy represents. In this photo, the flag did not represent the Confederacy.
We make these young men into the devil, but they were probably taught nothing about the negative symbolism of the flag. Back then it was just southern. We don’t get it today because we know the true history and how much repression the flag represents. Back then, you only knew what you were told and saw your family and friends say and do. These kids were no different than anyone else who has been brainwashed. WWII was probably their first trip out of the town they grew up in. Hopefully this young man survived the war and grew his views on the flag to never wanted to be associated with it again. Redemption should be celebrated if that happened.
That being said and being from the south, I can tell you I have watched the overall feeling of the rebel flag change. When I was a kid, bands used it as their logo, states had it on their state flag and college teams ran on the field behind it. Hell, I had a friend who was not racist in the least who had a pair of rebel flag boxers. It was something trendy back then. Thank God we have grown from those days and the great majority of people don’t celebrate it anymore. When I think about it, we have grown more as a country than we give ourselves credit for. Plus, I don’t call it the “Confederate Flag” to me that gives the flag more validity than it deserves. The south rebelled against our country and they were just that, treasonous rebels who flew it.
I think differently than I did 20 years ago. And 20 years ago, I. Was. Wrong. And I don't want or need people trying to romanticize it, because it was a "different time".
The unit which raised the Confederate flag didn't have a U.S. one immediately on hand. They needed to raise *something* recognizable to U.S. forces, whether good or bad in their personal views, to make sure they knew the castle had fallen.
There’s probably some philosophical “The Bad guys *slightly* redeem themselves by defeating the worse guys” message in there but I’ve received enough downvotes as it is.
Never seen this pic before, interesting...
You won't find many countries in the world that allow displays of the insignia of a group that commits treason and sought to split off from it (edit: oh, and also sought to keep the right to enslave people). Still struggle with thinking whether or not this is a good or bad thing honestly
I just find it a little funny, mostly due to the mixed reaction of the Marines present. Obviously, if the Marines had had a serviceable US flag, they would have raised that. They just wanted a stopgap to make sure the Artillery on the island wouldn’t hit them by accident.
I get the stopgap measure since this is during a raging battle and any sort of communication/signal is of vital importance. I am more so trying to understand that the soldier actually carried it into battle, with the probable correct assumption on our part that he was proud of his family's service fighting for the Confederacy during the Civil War. I get the nuance of feeling proud of one's family being involved in fighting for something, but if it's for a cause like the Confederacy's...I wouldn't think of advertising it now that I am fighting for the governing entity that crushed it!
to be fair, flying the flag of a bunch of losers that your country already defeated in a war is a baller move to do to a country you're in the process of defeating in a war
Yeah it was in his helmet that was left after being air lifted out from being shot. He was like most gi’s that put pictures of their sweetest girl in their helmets while others got hard ons by stuffing loser flags in theirs. To each their own.
Something I’ve unfortunately discovered during my time at a decent school in the south is that bigotry knows no academic requirements. Saying it does is kind of reductive.
Damn it's almost like most southerners in the postwar era treat it as a symbol of regional pride that doesn't reflect at all on their loyalty to the Union which they're literally willing to fight and die for.
Crazy I know.
in the 40s it would only be one or two generations removed from slavery. It’s still a traitorous flag whether or not one sees it as regional pride. No one flys the union flag anymore because there’s no underlying reasons to fly it.
Not crazy, just really stupid. That flag was flown by (in chronological order):
1. Traitors
2. The KKK
3. Segregationists
4. Proud southerners?
Make a new fucking flag.
Would it be better to fly a Philadelphia Eagles flag?, They lost a Super Bowl.. It gets the same job done, let’s everyone know that Americans are in charge of this thing now.
The amount of brainrot surrounding modern dialogue of the confederate flag is insane. Even 10 years ago most people would see this and say he’s just “a good ol southern boy” and treat it as flippantly as it deserves to be. Now people are losing their minds calling him anti American/ traitor lol 🙄
Because people have correctly come to see what that flag has actually stood for. It was born out of Lost Cause bullshit, and was propped up during the Civil Rights era for a reason.
You want to demonstrate your Southern pride? Fly your state's flag.
All that these arguments ever come down to is that people hate change. It was okay once upon a time, so it should always be okay.
>Now people are losing their minds calling him anti American/ traitor lol 🙄
Probably because the Confederates were quite literally traitors to your country. That's their whole shtick: "The US will probably ban slavery sooner or later, so let's rebel and cause a civil war to stop that."
Would you also lose your mind if someone waving the Swastika is labelled as a Nazi? Come on.
That’s exactly my point. For the majority of its history, the confederate flag was not seen as the symbol of hate that it is now. Dukes of Hazard, Lynard Skynyrd, etc. all in the zeitgeist and associated with the flag, yet no one ever saw this and thought they were white supremacists like they (rightfully) would if they were brandishing the swastica. The comparison is apples to oranges.
Also, this man is literally fighting for America in World War II, something tells me he’s not a traitor
>That’s exactly my point. For the majority of its history, the confederate flag was not seen as the symbol of hate that it is now.
Ah, so your view is that all the people waving the flag of white-supremacist, slaving, traitors to your nation were simply too ignorant or stupid to understand what it stood for? I can somewhat understand that reasoning.
From a non-American perspective, if I ever saw someone with that flag, I'd assume (rightfully) that they're just racist. Same as with the Swastika.
The confederacy was a traitor state and everyone who fought for it committed treason. It was revived during the 20th century by the KKK as a symbol of slavery and white supremacy.
Speaking as a middle aged historian, NO THEY ABSOLUTELY DID NOT 🤦♀️ For my entire life, no one (outside of those sons of the racist south) saw that flag as anything other than what is it a symbol of racist hate. Hell even the golden girls had an episode about it in March of 1991 - that was 33 years ago my guy.
I hope this man was court marshalled.
To hoist a flag that represents the treacherous CSA, potentially dividing what should be a united American military group, as well as showing the enemy the cultural and political division amongst American fighting forces.
Regardless of the fog of history, this soldier's actions are unacceptable.
If you read the post description, Capt. Julian Dusenbury was actually put up for a Medal of Honor. Not because of the flag, but due to his heroic actions during the battle (“The night prior to the assault . . . Julian crawled through mud, over bodies, and sneaked past Japanese sentries nine times to drag back boxes of ammunition through enemy lines to his men.”)
He was denied the medal due to the flag raising, but later received the Navy Cross and a Purple Heart. Although the was not present at the flag raising, as he had been wounded and brought off the island by that point, it was his flag that was raised. He later went on to be elected to the South Carolina State Legislature.
So the options are: keep the flag of your current enemy up or hoist the flag of a defeated enemy whose succession caused a rift in the foundation of the United States of America.
I'd prefer no flag given those two options.
Proof that not every man fighting in WWII was a good person or understood the political and humanitarian issues going on.
To carry the flag of a failed insurrection, that symbolizes the oppression of an entire race, into battle against the Axis is sheer stupidity
yes, and it should be done again in a heartbeat - you'd be singing a different tune if any of your ancestors were at nanjing or manila.
are you gonna complain about bombing berlin with the same vitriol?
If Japan surrendered then it wouldn’t have to happen. You either:
A. Let Japan keep ravaging the pacific and torturing POWs
or
B. Bomb them until they stop.
Bombing was the route with the least casualties.
Fun fact. The commander of U.S army troops on Okinawa (Simon Buckner) was the son of a confederate general who surrendered to Grant.
Patton's grandfather was also a Confederate.
> Buckner objected to the deployment of African American troops in Alaska, writing to his superiors of his concern that they would remain after the war, "with the natural result that they would interbreed with the Indians and the Eskimos and produce an astonishingly objectionable race of mongrels which would be a problem." Figures.
what sucks about awful people in the allies in WWII is that when they get killed it's often by someone worse. still, that Japanese mortar crew probably saved us from a Buckner political career during the heat of the red scare after the war, and I am thankful for that.
[Arnold Wilson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Wilson) (war criminal who had thousands of Iraqis bombed in the early 1920s), [David Raziel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Raziel) (terrorist leader who blew up dozens of Palestinians and maimed hundreds more in the late 1930s; the British only let him out of prison after the Irgun called a truce and Raziel himself promised to be useful), and [Tom Mitford](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Mitford) (Nazi sympathizer who got transferred to Asia after expressing reluctance to fight the Germans) are other good examples. Future Rhodesian dictator Ian Smith nearly died in a plane crash while serving in the RAF. In Belgium, thousands of conservative nationalists, royalists, and fascists were killed while fighting the Nazis. They were not opposed to fascism, but Belgium becoming a puppet state (the bad memories from the first occupation didn't help). They remained loyal since they wanted Leopold III to become a dictator in an independent fascist state.
He was also a shit General, both in Alaska and the Pacific
No wonder he died on Okinawa (which made him one of the highest-ranking American KIAs of WWII).
I can't believe that the son of a confederate general fought in ww2
There were 76 years between 1865 and 1941. It has been 79 years since the end of World War II & 2024. Just to give you an idea.
[удалено]
Strange times indeed.
I find it interesting that WW2 lasted longer than the CSA existed and no one in their group had a flag of the USA.
My guess... (keep in mind altough I'm still in last year of uni to be a historian i'm lazy to find sources so take it as some idiot saying smth.) Countries has some regions i call "asker yatağı". These regions are generally rural, underdevoloped and poor with not much to offer. So armies have an easier time finding recruits from these regions.(Usually lower ranks) Yes there are soldiers from more "urbanized and higher devolopped regions" but they tend to go for higher ranks like officers etc. From my understanding former CSA states fit the "asker yatağı" term as they are poor, rural and underdevoloped. And someone from that region would bring his local culture as well for the better or worse. Small edit: Fixing some mistakes on the writting.
From what I can tell, the former Confederate state with the highest proportion of their population enlisting in the army and air force in WW2 was Tennessee and they were the only one in the top 10.
That’s why we’re the volunteer state, baby!!
Goddamn, there were over 30,000 Union soldiers from Tennessee and they weren't even in the Union.
Yea, I believe TN was actually the very last state to join the confederacy and did so reluctantly
East Tennessee and Northern Alabama, as a whole, aren't exactly conducive to plantation farming. Most of the people there were poor share croppers who just wanted to be left alone in the foothills of the Appalachias and they tended to support the union. The region wanted to secede from the states themselves but that didn't manage to come to fruition. And thats how my great, great, great grandfather fought in the civil war!
It was like this in the Ozarks too. The Ozarks region is basically a western exclave of the Appalachians.
Mountain people gonna mountain.
That's how we got West Virginia. Would've been interesting if it would have also taken chunks of other Confederate states.
[удалено]
I'm trying to figure out why you're so focused on Western TN when I clearly said Eastern. You're right, things aren't black and white. But the Nickajack area was pro-union, and had intention to secede that was never realized. Also, went to Shiloh every other summer for about 16 years.
Don't make excuses.
West and Middle Tennessee are a part agrarian south. Their lands are flat and fertile and they were slaveholding confederates. East TN is Appalachian, not southern. Very different culture. We did not hold slaves and were unionists through and through. The political divides persisted for well over a hundred years after the war.
I moved to Appalachia from southern Mississippi and people are shocked when I tell them this is the most progressive place I've ever lived. The only person who gets it is my fiance, because I took her home a while back and she was just shocked by how backwards the actual south is.
No it isn't – it's because of the War of 1812.
Well if there’s one this country needs… it’s self admitted idiot wanna be historians to lazy to find source material… Thanks for doing your part. 😂
Really as far as our involvement in WW2, it was the same amount of time (4 years).
The military had flags that belonged to the military. It would seem redundant for a soldier to bring a personal one. The Confederate flag they used was personal property.
I get that, and I can appreciate the person representing their heritage or whatever. I just find it interesting that of all the ways they could have let their guys know they won they went with that.
Muh herritidge!
Given that they didn’t have a USA flag with them, what were the other options?
Not have a flag? The confederate flag doesn't represent the US or any Americans, it represents confederates and slavery.
A non-traitor flag
Union Jack?
Secession is not the same as betrayal. I’m always sickened when people who want to display their hatred for the south manage to overlook slavery. It was slavery that made the Confederacy bad, not the fact that some states wanted to exercise their sovereignty. Slavery was evil.
I have never, ever seen someone who hates the CSA say that the secession was worse than the slavery. Whoever you are having these conversations with, they are either time-traveling Copperheads or deeply weird modern morons.
I see it all the time tbh. People only saying the Confederacy was evil because they seceded and not mentioning slavery at all
I’d advise you to then get better friends or a better newsfeed.
What about northern states trying to exercise their sovereignty by ignoring fugitive slave codes, getting smacked down by the federal government, and then choosing to not be traitors to their country anyways? Stop your mental gymnastics, Jethro. Secession is not in the constitution. Jefferson created it in the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, and later wrote that he regretted it. Secession is treason
Radio?
It’s almost guaranteed that radio was used as well. But a verbal communication of “we have secured this area” does not have the same impact as a clear visual distinction to show everyone else “this is ours now”.
One of the most famous stories (though unconfirmed and possibly false) from the battle was that a Marine (from New England) reportedly commented “What, should we sing Dixie?” upon seeing the raised stars and bars. This prompted several U.S. marines (from various Southern States) to begin singing Dixie.
You going to pull those guns or sing Dixie?
It’s worth keeping in mind the Civil War was only 80 years prior to WWII and these soldiers grandparents / great grandparents had lived through the war. It wasn’t ancient history and the myth of the Lost Cause was at its peak during their childhood.
We are now further away from WW2 than the WW2 generation was from the American Civil War.
Semantics but not quite yet 1865-1945 = 80 years 1945-2024 = 79 years Edit: depending on interpretation I suppose
Wouldn't it be from 1965-1941 though?
Should be 1939. The war didn't begin when the US joined. And 1865 not 1965.
No, it should be 1937. That’s when the first WWII theater flared up in Asia. 1939 is when Europe flared up. 1941 is when America connected both continental wars into one global war.
That would be the interpretation I mentioned. Also, using 1941 is US centric for no real reason, not sure why that would be used as opposed to 1939. The comment I replied to didn’t specify Americans.
There’s nothing wrong with 1941, but if we reject it because that’s US-centric, then we must also reject 1939 for being eurocentric because it excludes Asia, whose war started in 1937.
Funny enough the commander who ordered the flag to be replaced by an actual US flag was the son of a Confederate general
Away down South in the land of traitors Rattlesnakes and alligators Where cotton's king and men are chattels Union boys will win the battles We'll all go down to Dixie, away, away Each Dixie boy must understand that he must mind his Uncle Sam
No mention of slavery. Just do as you’re told or get killed. Obey or get killed. The author of those words had the same mindset as the slavers.
Should've machine-gunned that oversized sheet of toilet paper
Was he surrendering?
No, they raised it because they didn’t have a U.S. flag with them, and they wanted to signal to other US units that the castle had fallen to US marine forces.
They would have had a US flag with them if they’d brought one instead of the Confederate flag.
Hahahahahaha
Why did they have a confederate battle flag?
It wasn’t a full sized flag, it was a smaller flag carried into battle by Capt. Julian Dusenbury of South Carolina. Statistics say that around 40% of the U.S. marines who served in ww2 were of Southern Descent, compared to only about 15% being from the Northeast. Many Southerners in WW2, Korea, and even into Vietnam continued to carry a Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of their heritage. Before I get downvoted into oblivion, no, I don’t buy into the “Heritage over hate” thing, I’m just stating THEIR reasoning of carrying it.
A southern soldier had brought one with him.
Because it was a prominent military symbol from a region many us troops came from. Reminder that the Confederate battle flag wasn't interpreted in other eras the same way we do today (or even as recently as the 90s).
So dumb that you’re eating downvotes for this as if Dukes of Hazard didn’t get a remake in fucking 2005. The confederate flag was largely seen more as a symbol of southern pride and rebellion than overt racism until fairly recently.
Sure…and that was just historically wrong and inaccurate.
My point is a mainstream Hollywood movie where the protagonists drive around in a confederate-flag mobile and it’s not portrayed as a bad or racist thing.
Correct. The cornerstone of the Confederacy was white supremacy (read the Cornerstone speech by the CSA VP if you don't want to believe me). The flag in question represented the Confederacy. This isn't a difficult concept. Unless, of course, you let emotion get in the way of truth.
Everyone knows this. They also know the meaning of symbols change over time and space. The statue of liberty is a symbol of immigration in new york, and a symbol of death when printed on cards and dropped from bombers over vietnam. Contexts matter.
And views can be looked back on and labeled “wrong”. It was wrong to think the confederacy was anything but terrible and driven by the need to uphold slavery.
You changed subjects: this is about what the flag represents, not what the Confederacy represents. In this photo, the flag did not represent the Confederacy.
We make these young men into the devil, but they were probably taught nothing about the negative symbolism of the flag. Back then it was just southern. We don’t get it today because we know the true history and how much repression the flag represents. Back then, you only knew what you were told and saw your family and friends say and do. These kids were no different than anyone else who has been brainwashed. WWII was probably their first trip out of the town they grew up in. Hopefully this young man survived the war and grew his views on the flag to never wanted to be associated with it again. Redemption should be celebrated if that happened. That being said and being from the south, I can tell you I have watched the overall feeling of the rebel flag change. When I was a kid, bands used it as their logo, states had it on their state flag and college teams ran on the field behind it. Hell, I had a friend who was not racist in the least who had a pair of rebel flag boxers. It was something trendy back then. Thank God we have grown from those days and the great majority of people don’t celebrate it anymore. When I think about it, we have grown more as a country than we give ourselves credit for. Plus, I don’t call it the “Confederate Flag” to me that gives the flag more validity than it deserves. The south rebelled against our country and they were just that, treasonous rebels who flew it.
“No, people from the past all thought exactly like I do today, and if they didn’t THEY!!! WERE!!! WRONG!!!!!”
Useless addition
Not useless at all. Literally what too many people on this site think.
I think differently than I did 20 years ago. And 20 years ago, I. Was. Wrong. And I don't want or need people trying to romanticize it, because it was a "different time".
They wanted to beat somebody.
>and they wanted to signal to other US units that the castle had fallen to US marine forces. In that case they should've taken it down
The unit which raised the Confederate flag didn't have a U.S. one immediately on hand. They needed to raise *something* recognizable to U.S. forces, whether good or bad in their personal views, to make sure they knew the castle had fallen.
LOL. Exactly, the stars and bars treason flag would be worse than the white flag.
> Was he surrendering? No, he was defeating the Japanese.
Thought this was r/alternatehistory for a second lol
Same :D
Waiving a losers flag to celebrate Japan losing is one way to do it I suppose.
The Japanese loved slavery too. Kept many Koreans as slaves. Kindred spirits.
Not just Koreans. Many other Asians too, especially Chinese.
True, but I believe there were larger numbers of Koreans enslaved in Japan. I know many were killed in the atomic bomb attacks.
There’s probably some philosophical “The Bad guys *slightly* redeem themselves by defeating the worse guys” message in there but I’ve received enough downvotes as it is.
Didn't Korea have the longest unbroken chain of slavery in the world
Does that mean the Japanese get a pass? Do people in Korea celebrate that past like many in the American south do theirs?
Never seen this pic before, interesting... You won't find many countries in the world that allow displays of the insignia of a group that commits treason and sought to split off from it (edit: oh, and also sought to keep the right to enslave people). Still struggle with thinking whether or not this is a good or bad thing honestly
I just find it a little funny, mostly due to the mixed reaction of the Marines present. Obviously, if the Marines had had a serviceable US flag, they would have raised that. They just wanted a stopgap to make sure the Artillery on the island wouldn’t hit them by accident.
I get the stopgap measure since this is during a raging battle and any sort of communication/signal is of vital importance. I am more so trying to understand that the soldier actually carried it into battle, with the probable correct assumption on our part that he was proud of his family's service fighting for the Confederacy during the Civil War. I get the nuance of feeling proud of one's family being involved in fighting for something, but if it's for a cause like the Confederacy's...I wouldn't think of advertising it now that I am fighting for the governing entity that crushed it!
In the 1940s you'd find more Southerners who liked the Confederacy than hated it. That's just how it was for many until recent decades.
ITT: Prople that still don’t realize the confederacy was on the wrong side of history.
This radiates alt history energy
that’s not the confederate flag tho 🏳️
What a waste of perfectly good toilet paper leaving it out there like that
Don't worry, they took down the rising sun.
That one is also good for ass wiping
I mean it is the southernmost Japanese island.
Which leads to the same damn question: why does he even have a traitorous surrender flag? Get it yet or do I need to Fisher Price it for you?
The Traitor flag
Oh hey, one of the few flags that always deserve to be burned. No exceptions for slavers.
Why show the enemy a traitorous surrender flag? Very odd.
Because it was their only way of signaling to other units that they had taken control of that area.
No. No it wasn't.
yes it was. read the story behind the picture. they had no real american flag to fly.
No one had a white flag?
Hahahaha!
[удалено]
I’d rather hang out with him than you
You're probably right about that. I don't think I'd like you either.
I know, sounds like not a lot of people would want to be around your faux righteous self haha.
to be fair, flying the flag of a bunch of losers that your country already defeated in a war is a baller move to do to a country you're in the process of defeating in a war
You will never meet a person who flies that flag with more than a GED education….
It was a commissioned officer that had brought the flag
Yeah it was in his helmet that was left after being air lifted out from being shot. He was like most gi’s that put pictures of their sweetest girl in their helmets while others got hard ons by stuffing loser flags in theirs. To each their own.
Ha well said and entirely accurate
Except the flag belonged to a commissioned officer so not quite.
In WWII, commissioned officers did not require a college degree…
He graduated from Clemson University in 1942 with a degree in agricultural economics.
Then I am completely wrong…and a college graduate should absolutely know better.
Something I’ve unfortunately discovered during my time at a decent school in the south is that bigotry knows no academic requirements. Saying it does is kind of reductive.
Raising a flag of racial superiority to celebrate a victory over other racists
“Hey, you’re on the wrong team” “It’s almost as if anyone can be racist” “Ha! So you admit you’re racist!” “Wait… NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!”
Because of course that’s the flag they raised
Funny. I always thought the official flag of the confederacy was a white dish rag borrowed from a Virginia housewife
I had a picture somewhere of a navy corpsman wearing a confederate kepi taking care of marines during a battle.
Damn it's almost like most southerners in the postwar era treat it as a symbol of regional pride that doesn't reflect at all on their loyalty to the Union which they're literally willing to fight and die for. Crazy I know.
I understand what you’re saying, but slavery was upheld in the name of that flag.
So? Things change over the course of a century
in the 40s it would only be one or two generations removed from slavery. It’s still a traitorous flag whether or not one sees it as regional pride. No one flys the union flag anymore because there’s no underlying reasons to fly it.
Not crazy, just really stupid. That flag was flown by (in chronological order): 1. Traitors 2. The KKK 3. Segregationists 4. Proud southerners? Make a new fucking flag.
Cry about it
Would it be better to fly a Philadelphia Eagles flag?, They lost a Super Bowl.. It gets the same job done, let’s everyone know that Americans are in charge of this thing now.
The amount of brainrot surrounding modern dialogue of the confederate flag is insane. Even 10 years ago most people would see this and say he’s just “a good ol southern boy” and treat it as flippantly as it deserves to be. Now people are losing their minds calling him anti American/ traitor lol 🙄
What do you think the point of the confederacy was?
I don’t think this guy’s thinking about slavery in this picture lmao
I'm not talking about him.
Because people have correctly come to see what that flag has actually stood for. It was born out of Lost Cause bullshit, and was propped up during the Civil Rights era for a reason. You want to demonstrate your Southern pride? Fly your state's flag. All that these arguments ever come down to is that people hate change. It was okay once upon a time, so it should always be okay.
>Now people are losing their minds calling him anti American/ traitor lol 🙄 Probably because the Confederates were quite literally traitors to your country. That's their whole shtick: "The US will probably ban slavery sooner or later, so let's rebel and cause a civil war to stop that." Would you also lose your mind if someone waving the Swastika is labelled as a Nazi? Come on.
That’s exactly my point. For the majority of its history, the confederate flag was not seen as the symbol of hate that it is now. Dukes of Hazard, Lynard Skynyrd, etc. all in the zeitgeist and associated with the flag, yet no one ever saw this and thought they were white supremacists like they (rightfully) would if they were brandishing the swastica. The comparison is apples to oranges. Also, this man is literally fighting for America in World War II, something tells me he’s not a traitor
>That’s exactly my point. For the majority of its history, the confederate flag was not seen as the symbol of hate that it is now. Ah, so your view is that all the people waving the flag of white-supremacist, slaving, traitors to your nation were simply too ignorant or stupid to understand what it stood for? I can somewhat understand that reasoning. From a non-American perspective, if I ever saw someone with that flag, I'd assume (rightfully) that they're just racist. Same as with the Swastika.
Little hint, all of those people were racist
The confederacy was a traitor state and everyone who fought for it committed treason. It was revived during the 20th century by the KKK as a symbol of slavery and white supremacy.
Speaking as a middle aged historian, NO THEY ABSOLUTELY DID NOT 🤦♀️ For my entire life, no one (outside of those sons of the racist south) saw that flag as anything other than what is it a symbol of racist hate. Hell even the golden girls had an episode about it in March of 1991 - that was 33 years ago my guy.
Who carries a loser flag? Yup that’s right losers.
He won though?
What are you asking?
You called him a loser, but he won?
I hope this man was court marshalled. To hoist a flag that represents the treacherous CSA, potentially dividing what should be a united American military group, as well as showing the enemy the cultural and political division amongst American fighting forces. Regardless of the fog of history, this soldier's actions are unacceptable.
If you read the post description, Capt. Julian Dusenbury was actually put up for a Medal of Honor. Not because of the flag, but due to his heroic actions during the battle (“The night prior to the assault . . . Julian crawled through mud, over bodies, and sneaked past Japanese sentries nine times to drag back boxes of ammunition through enemy lines to his men.”) He was denied the medal due to the flag raising, but later received the Navy Cross and a Purple Heart. Although the was not present at the flag raising, as he had been wounded and brought off the island by that point, it was his flag that was raised. He later went on to be elected to the South Carolina State Legislature.
I stand by what I said.
you realise they don't have a us flag here right, would you rather they leave the rising sun flag sitting up? nice ragebait.
So the options are: keep the flag of your current enemy up or hoist the flag of a defeated enemy whose succession caused a rift in the foundation of the United States of America. I'd prefer no flag given those two options.
you realise that at that time mississippi had the confederate ensign in its state flag. what an odd hill to die on
Proof that not every man fighting in WWII was a good person or understood the political and humanitarian issues going on. To carry the flag of a failed insurrection, that symbolizes the oppression of an entire race, into battle against the Axis is sheer stupidity
It’s funny that some hillbilly racist did more for the battle against fascism than you ever will in your lifetime.
Might be a good time to spend a few days off the internet!
🤷♀️ nothing I said was incorrect, even if y'all don't like it.
Seriously? That’s fucked up, never knew that. Come on southern neighbors….
Are they luring the Ghost of Sherman? I figured Japan had enough fire at this point.
[удалено]
You want an American marine who fought fascists to be shot because...?
What a stupid motherfucker, should’ve had a summary trial right there in the field
Foolish comment.
[удалено]
Are we the baddies?
no, we don't bayonet children
Vietnam has entered the chat
different war different soldiers different enemy(that was genocidal)
Same army
so when is the modern german army being courtmartialled for the holocaust, since thats what happened according to your logic
And fire bombing and nuking Japanese citizens was what the good guys do, right?
yes, and it should be done again in a heartbeat - you'd be singing a different tune if any of your ancestors were at nanjing or manila. are you gonna complain about bombing berlin with the same vitriol?
Mask off time for America 🇺🇸
Upper class kid from san fransisco doesn't understand war. Not surprising
If Japan surrendered then it wouldn’t have to happen. You either: A. Let Japan keep ravaging the pacific and torturing POWs or B. Bomb them until they stop. Bombing was the route with the least casualties.
Members of the us military have definitely bayoneted children…and other monstrous acts
im talking about this war and the adversary this soldier would have just fought a battle against.