Men or ideologists?

I took a break from my current obsession, Ratchet: Deadlocked, to sit in on the second half of K-19: Widow Maker.

Already I have too many asides. First: Simply coincidence that both items have titles broken by a colon? Second: I'm such a little bitch about movies - I always tell my wife that I'm not interested, but barring "How Stella Fried Green Ya-ya Pants", I'll usually sit though anything put in front of me. Of course, it helped that cable was out tonight. Which leads to, Third: I've had to listen to the radio all night for updates on the California special election. It's not like I'm missing an episode of Lost or something - why'd cable go out tonight?

K-19 got me to thinking about the War on Terrorism. Rather, the people who are fighting it. On both sides.

The History Channel makes a Holiday Season living by rolling out the stories about wartime Christmas truces, soldiers helping the enemy, chocolates for German children, etc. It never struck me before that this appears to be a European foible. I say appears, because I'm sadly not well versed in world-wide history.

I wondered if this could be easily explained by cultural connectedness. The Allies and the Axis (Japan excluded), both came from a similar background that can be traced back to before the fall of Rome. It would make sense that our holidays as well as our world-view are similar. Why not celebrate Christmas with the enemy? Maybe play a little soccer before the cease-fire ends? They may not always have understood eachother's language, but they shared the common tradition.

Then I wondered specifically about Japan during WWII. Was it simply a lack of cultural cohesion that made the fight so bitter? Is it just a relic of propaganda that makes us think mostly of the Divine Wind, or of their civilians throwing themselves off the cliffs of Iwo Jima rather than be captured?

As an aside, I remember doing a report in 5th grade in which I interviewed my parents about WWII. They were born between 1939 and 1940, and didn't remember much about the war. But I asked them about any stigma with learning foreign languages at this time, and they both remember nothing negative about studying German. Granted, it's long been a language in which the highest sciences have been explored. And even today, how many rural schools are teaching Japanese is America? Still, it struck me that even the dirty Krauts were worth studying, while the sneaky Japs, much less than having anything to teach us, were specifically ignored by all but Military language schools.

I decided that I believed it was in fact more about the ideology of the combatants, than the cultural ties. Although, to be honest, it could easily be argued that the ideology is the cultural difference. But for the sake of simplicity, we'll keep the thoughts separate.

If that same History Channel is to be trusted, the Japanese believed that the Emperor was a deity, or may as well have been. To die for the cause is the highest honor, the greatest reward. Surrendering represents the basest level of cowardice and purpose. While the American may have fought for intangibles like 'freedom', they were really fighting to stay alive; to return to their family and sweethearts. While I won't deny this simple desire to their Japanese counterparts, I believe that the intangible was in fact foremost in their minds. 'Duty', 'Honor', even 'Bushido'.

Still, even the Emperor eventually recognized that the needs of his people outweighed imperialistic design. Complete surrender was finally granted, and we can now enjoy Hello Kitty, inexpensive transistor radios and sushi while still being American.

Islamic terrorists, or at least the ones pulling the strings, don't seem to give a shit. With no specific nation or people for which to be accountable, these leaders can send wave after wave of cannon fodder against the enemy. And the fodder, who willingly die for the cause, are completely taken in with the ideology.

Is that too broad? Can we imagine GI's and Mujahadeen playing soccer together during Ramadan? Can we imagine that, man to man, they can look eachother in the eyes and disagree, but respect the others' situation? Or are we fighting not men, but ideology? Can the two be separated?