Thursday, May 28, 2015

"National Character" - Part 7

     Most people outside of Asia think of the Philippines as a small Pacific island country populated with people with strange Spanish sounding surnames and speaking English and native dialect called Tagalog.  The Philippines and the Filipinos are all that, and much more!  The Philippines is made up of over 7,000 islands comprising 115,831 square miles.  It has a population of well over 100 million people that speak 19 different dialects!  The main languages are Tagalog, Visayan, Llocano, Bicolano, Waray, Llonggo, and thirteen more!  The population is said to be 90% Christian, of which 80% are Catholic and 10% Muslim.  Those are official government figures.  The Philippines is the 7th most populated country in Asia and 12th in the world with over 12 million Filipinos residing overseas!  So, it is not a little island country in the Pacific, it is a country of significance, both in size and population.
     Early Filipino history consisted of various small kingdoms and sultanates, populated and controlled by a variety of different ethnic groups.  Depending on the island, it was ruled by Muslim Sultans, Hindu Rajahs, native Datus and Lakans Chiefs, and Chinese Huangs.  If ever there was a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural area, it was the archipelago that came to be known as Philippines. The Spanish colonized it beginning in 1521 when Magellan first landed. In 1543 it was named Philippines by Ruy Lopez de Villalobos in honor of King Philippe II of Spain.  The Spanish colonized the islands and established an oppressive rule for over 300 years. 
     Throughout Spanish rule, there were numerous periodic attempts by various groups to overthrow the Spanish, but none succeeded.  It wasn't until the Spanish-American War in 1898 when Spain was kicked out of Philippines and America stepped-in.  American rule was not quite as oppressive or brutal as the Spanish, still, it was a foreign power that ruled over Philippines. 
     There was briefly Philippine's First Republic after the Philippine Revolution of 1896, but it was unsuccessful.  Essentially, it wasn't until 1945 with the birth of the Second Republic that Philippines became an independent nation.  Prior to that, it was Spanish for over 300 years, then American for half a century or so, and Japanese for four years with their brutal wartime occupation of the islands.
     Given these historical circumstances, it is not surprising that Filipino "national character" had not been identified until very much later.  It was perhaps with the country's most recognized hero, Jose Rizal (1861-1896), that the "national character" began to emerge.  Rizal was a true Renaissance Man who was a novelist, poet, scientist, artist, and a doctor to boot!  Rizal's status as a Philippine's national hero is somewhat debated in some circles.  Some say that he was more of a creation of the United States, who pushed him forward as a figure of national hero because Rizal was a non-violent revolutionary.  The thinking is that the U.S. wanted Filipinos to take Rizal's non-violence lead in their protest against U.S. rule.
     Rizal opposed Spanish rule, but lived in Spain and Germany for a period and was educated in those countries.  Rizal was arrested and executed by a firing squad for being a revolutionary in 1896 at the age of 35!  This was during the time when the Philippine Revolution was taking place.  Actually, his only guilt was that he associated with some true revolutionaries. While he himself never participated in any physical acts that can be considered as anti-Spanish, he did write anti-Spanish material, and as mentioned, associated with known revolutionaries. 
     Jose Rizal is the first Filipino identified as a national hero who opposed Spanish rule and died for his beliefs.  There were others, of course, like Andres Bonifacio who is given credit for starting the Philippine Revolution and establishing the secret organization, Katipunan.  Also, Emilio Aguinaldo, who split from Bonifacio to challenge his leadership.  But overall, it is Jose Rizal that is celebrated as the greatest national hero!
     Like the Vietnamese, the Filipino "national character" is tied to opposition to foreign rule.  However, unlike the Vietnamese Trung Sisters who fought the Chinese almost 2000 years ago, the Filipino national heroes are much more recent.  Rizal stands out as a giant, but there were many more that appeared during World War Two.
     Next to the Chinese, the Filipinos had the largest guerrilla force that opposed the Japanese.  Over all, there were said to be over a million Filipinos who participated in one form or another of resistance to Japanese.  However, the Philippine government recognized only about 260,000 individuals as having participated in the fight against the Japanese, because after the war, the government had to pay restitution to the participants. Some believe that the government officials purposely kept the numbers low so as to avoid paying too much money! There were dozens of guerrilla groups ranging in sizes anywhere from a couple of hundred to thousands of men and women.  Many guerrilla groups were led by American soldiers and officers who fled to the jungles and hills to become guerrilla fighters rather than giving up to the Japanese. 
     Filipinos had many guerrilla groups such as the 10,000 man army that Ramon Magsaysay led.  Magsaysay after the war became a very popular president of the Second Republic.  Another guerrilla group was known as Hukbalahap (Hukbong Bayan Laban, sa mga Hapon), which translates into English from Tagalog as, "People's Army Against the Japanese."  The Hukbalahap was a large 15,000 man communist guerrilla group.  Its first leader was the charismatic Luis Taruc, popularly known as "El Supremo." 
     After the war Hukbalahap became a problem to the Philippine government and it was one of Ramon Magsaysay's success stories when he was able to rid the country of the communist insurgency.  Even the controversial and disgraced Ferdinand Marcos claimed during his life that he had led a guerrilla group against the Japanese.  Later investigations proved that, like so many of his claims, it was all a lie.  Marcos never led any guerrilla groups during World War Two.
     Perhaps the most interesting figure to come out that part of Filipino history was a woman guerrilla leader during the war, Nieves Fernandes.  Nieves was a mild, mousy-looking spinster school teacher in her thirties when the war broke out and the Japanese occupied the Philippines.  The Japanese atrocities and brutalities against the Filipinos changed her completely.  She organized a small guerrilla group of perhaps a dozen or so, mainly women, and began a terror campaign against the Japanese.  By the end of the war her guerrilla group had grown to a force of about 100 men and women.  The Japanese even had a 10,000 Peso reward for her capture or death!   Regular "Wanted, Dead or Alive" posters circulated around Tacloban, Leyete, where she operated.
     So, the Filipinos, like the Vietnamese, like to identify their "national character" as that of perseverance in the face of adversity, loyalty and belief in the cause, and courage in the face of danger and hardship.  Perhaps phrased differently, but basically the same as the Vietnamese "character."  Considering what took place during World War Two in Philippines, it is not very difficult to agree with the assessment made by Filipinos of their own "national character."

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

"National Character" - Part 6

     Vietnam in its early history was called the Kingdom of Au Lac, which was conquered by a Chinese general by the name of Zhao Tuo in 207 BC and renamed Nan Yue .  In 111 BC, Emperor Wu of Han Dynasty annexed Nan Yue, and it became a part of the Chinese Empire from that date for over a thousand years.
     In 40 AD, two warrior sisters named Trung Trac and Trung Nhi, better known as The Trung Sisters, rebelled against the Chinese and led a rebel force mostly made up of women, and overthrew the Chinese rule. The Trung Sisters established a Vietnamese rule which lasted only for three years before the Chinese once again reconquered Vietnam.  The Trung Sisters were killed and thereby martyred. 
     To the Vietnamese, the Trung Sisters are the founders of Vietnam and heroic figures that are worshipped.  They represented Vietnamese resistance to Chinese rule and demonstrated perseverance and the overcoming of superior forces, the very essence of Vietnamese "national character."  It is quite apparent that at least at that time, Vietnam was very much a matriarchal society.  It appears that women had no obstacles whatsoever in the Vietnamese society and could hold any position or do anything that a man could do.  The Trung Sisters are celebrated in Vietnamese history as the greatest "patriots" of that country who not only fought for the country, but gave their lives!
     It is interesting to note that all incidents or individuals from Vietnam's historical past that illustrate the country's "national character" are:  1. women, 2. women who helped to oust foreign rulers, or at least tried!  All of the important events in Vietnam's history center around fighting and getting rid of foreign powers that ruled over them, which in this case was China.  The Trung Sisters' exploits were recorded by Chinese historians, and although the Chinese versions were not quite as colorful as the Vietnamese, nevertheless, it is clear that they did lead a rebellion against the Chinese and ruled briefly before being killed.  The Trung Sisters are the greatest heroic figures in Vietnamese history.
     After The Trung Sisters, another woman made an appearance, at least according to the Vietnamese accounts, and fought the Chinese.  Somewhere around 225 to 248 AD a woman warrior known as Lady Trieu (Ba Trieu) whose name was Trieu Thi Trinh, led an army of women warriors and fought the Chinese.  She did not succeed in ousting the Chinese, but is said to have caused a lot of problems for the foreign rulers.
     Lady Trieu is described as being very big and strong, an Amazon Warrior!  When someone asked her why she chose to become a warrior, she reportedly responded by saying:  "I'd like to ride storms, kill sharks in open seas, drive out aggressors, reconquer the country, undo the ties of serfdom, and never bend my back to be the concubine of whatever man!"
     Although Vietnamese records and folklore mention Lady Trieu, the Chinese historians make no mention of her whatsoever.  It is apparent that she existed only in the imaginations of Vietnamese story tellers.  She was a fantastic figure who wielded a gigantic sword and rode an elephant like most people ride a horse!  Some accounts claim that she was nine feet tall, a huge, fearsome woman.
     The Trung Sisters are idealized and described as extraordinarily beautiful, epitome of Vietnamese beauty and womanhood.  Indeed all depiction of the two warrior sisters show them to be very beautiful and feminine.  Lady Trieu, on the other hand, is not shown as a beautiful, feminine individual.  Rather, she is portrayed in paintings as a sort of a fantastic figure, like a comic book super hero character.  Whatever the case, Lady Trieu also demonstrated incredible courage, perseverance, patience, and patriotism.  She is said to have killed herself rather than be caught by the Chinese.
     It is not surprising that the Vietnamese people think of The Trung Sisters and Lady Trieu as their national heroes who demonstrated true Vietnamese "character."  In the more recent times, Vietnam has had to fight two wars against superior forces to oust the foreign invaders or rulers.
     In 938 AD Vietnam was finally able to shed the yoke of Chinese rule, become independent and establish their own dynasty.  There were civil wars and internal strife from time to time, but overall, Vietnam was an independent country with a series of dynasties until 1862 when the French came and colonized the country.  In its own way, the French rule was even more oppressive than the Chinese.  At least the Chinese did not treat Vietnamese as inferior beings, which the French did!  Throughout the French colonization and rule, there were uprisings and attempts to free the country, but it wasn't until the early 20th Century that anything really happened. 
     In 1941 the French Indochina, of which Vietnam was a part (French Indochina consisted of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia), fell under Japanese rule.  The French had capitulated to Nazi Germany earlier, and the Japanese simply walked in when they invaded Southeast Asia in 1941.  Neither the French nor those who sympathized with the French did anything to get rid of the new invader.  The Vietnamese communists, however, led by a man called Ho Chi Minh, fought the Japanese, and in doing so, allied themselves with the United States.  Ho and his followers called Viet Minh, helped America by rescuing downed pilots and guiding them back to safety.  For their help and effort, the United States not only commended Ho and his Viet Minh but promised to help them gain independence when the war was over. 
     Of course that promise was never kept, and Ho and the Viet Minh ended up fighting a bloody war known as the French-Indochina War, and despite the militarily superior French forces with tanks and planes, they were able to defeat the French and gain control of the northern half of the country.  During the entire campaign, Ho and his generals reminded their soldiers of the heroics performed by The Trung Sisters and Lady Trieu.  They reminded the troops that it wasn't the superior arms or equipment that will bring them victory, it was patience, perseverance, and belief in their cause that will lead to victory.  Ho and the Viet Minh surprised the world and defeated the French.
     The French were out of Vietnam but the country was divided, like Korea, north and south.  Ho didn't waste any time and quickly established a guerrilla movement known as the National Liberation Front, and its participants were called Viet Cong.  The Viet Cong began a campaign of terror to disrupt and in some cases simply destroy the established system.  Initially it was just some terrorist activity, but soon it grew into a guerrilla war. The United States got itself enmeshed in that war and before long, it escalated into a full blown war.  The Vietnamese were in an inferior position in that they did not have an air force to support their ground troops, and did not have the latest high tech war equipment.  What they did have was patience, perseverance, belief in their cause, and willingness to fight for as long as it was needed. 
     Once again, they demonstrated those traits that were evident earlier with The Trung Sisters and Lady Trieu, as well as with Ho and the Viet Minh in the French-Indochina War.  Ho constantly reminded his followers to have patience,  He said that America did not have the will to stay the duration in this war and that the anti war public sentiment in America would finally end this war.  He was right, of course.  We didn't lose the war, we left before it was finished.  At one point, after the 1968 Tet Offensive, we had practically destroyed all of VC and NVAs ability to fight in the south.  But, instead of finishing, we went into the "Vietnamization" and left it in the hands of the corrupt South Vietnamese government and army.  Within months of our pull out from that country, it fell to Ho and his communist followers.
     In all of these cases the Vietnamese demonstrated incredible patience and perseverance.  They also believed in their cause and were willing to wait for as long as it would take to attain their goal.  That is the Vietnamese "national character."  You may not agree with the assessment, but that is how it is portrayed and how the Vietnamese see themselves.  Apparently, The Trung Sisters and Lady Trieu are alive and well in the Vietnamese psyche.

Monday, May 25, 2015

"The Fall of Saigon, Iraqi Style!"

     In January of this year, President Barak Obama announced that the war against ISIS/ISIL was on the road to victory.  In his words, "ISIS was under control."  Everyone in Washington echoed the President's words, everyone from Kerry in the State Department to Carter in Pentagon said that things were under control, as far as ISIS was concerned.  Three months later, in March, ISIS instead of being on the run, appeared to gain considerable amount of territory in Iraq.  Our government, as part of the "deal" with Iran, allowed Iran's "special ops" general and his troops to enter Iraq to help fight ISIS.  Our Joint Chief, General Dempsey stated that anything we can do to defeat ISIS was good, even if it meant allowing Iran into Iraq.  Poor Dempsey, caught between a rock and a hard place.  What could he say?  If he said anything counter to the administration's line, he would have become one of the shortest lived Joint Chiefs in our history.
     Iranians were mostly disguised as Shiite Militia, since it would not have been a popular move to show an influx of Iranian Special Operations troops in Iraq.  It was not possible to disguise their leader, the Commander of Iranian Special Operations, the "Shadow General" who ironically, was responsible for teaching the insurgents in Iraq and Taliban in Afghanistan how to make and deploy roadside bombs which have killed and maimed so many American soldiers!  By mid April Iranians seemed to have propped-up the sagging Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and were regaining some lost territory.  Iranian prestige soared in the Arab world while Sunni Arabs like the Saudis became not only very nervous, but angry at our game of playing "footsies" with the Ayatollahs!
     Lo and behold, while the controversy over our so-called "nuclear deal" with Iran was still bubbling, the Iranians and the Shiite Militia,  had retaken Tikirit, one of the cities occupied by ISIS.  Iranians, it seemed, were able to do what the ISF could not.  This was a bit puzzling at first, since Iraq had fought Iran to a standstill in their long war.  Neither side showed much fighting ability during that war, just a lot of poorly planned operations and needless casualties.  But it was obvious that this time, the Iranians are motivated while the ISF is not!  Shades of Vietnam!  The VC and NVA were motivated while the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN) was not, so when we left, the South fell apart and the ARVN ran, abandoning perfectly good equipment and arms.  In fact, the communists received such a windfall in arms and equipment abandoned by ARVN, that when they fought PRC in their short war a few years later, they used our old air assault tactics and carried their troops to battle in UH-21s, just like we did! They had the largest helicopter fleet in Southeast Asia at that time!
     Now, we are sending a couple of thousand missiles to Iraq so ISF can shoot the tanks and armored personnel carriers that we gave them, which they abandoned when they ran from ISIS!  ISIS is no longer the rag-tag lightly armed unconventional force.  They have captured (or simply picked up)  ISF equipment, so now they are fully motorized and have an armored force!  What an incredible fiasco!  We are sending missiles to Iraq so that they can be used to destroy equipment that we gave them in the first place!
     Now, Ramadi fell, essentially without a fight.  The Iraqi troops have an advantage of about 10 to 1 in numbers over ISIS, yet they ran without fighting, abandoning tons of equipment, some of it brand new!  President Obama referred to this latest development as a "technical set-back."  Technical set-back?  I guess the fall of Saigon was a "technical set-back," as was the fall of Baghdad to Saddam Hussein when we occupied that city!  Our Secretary of Defense blames the whole thing on ISF..."its their fault," he said, "ISF didn't fight."  No kidding Mr. Secretary!  Surely you can come up with a better explanation, like our "our strategy (if we have one!) is not working."
     As I have repeatedly noted in earlier blogs that, like the Republic of South Vietnam of the past, the current Iraqi government is corrupt and incompetent.  The corruption extends all the way down to even lower level bureaucrats and NCOs in the military, just as it did in South Vietnam.  The average ISF soldier joins the army because it is the only work he can get and be fed and paid.  The officer corps and the NCOs are generally corrupt, take advantage of the troops, misuse and abuse them.  Why would anyone in such an army fight?  As soon as things get hot in battle, most of the NCOs and officers disappear, leaving the troops to fend for themselves.  Under such circumstances, just as in South Vietnam, the troops simply abandon their weapons and equipment and flee the battlefield.
     Our strategy of supplying air coverage or bombardment in support is not working.  Air power by itself never works, it has to be in conjunction with the ground  forces.  After all the bombing, someone has to seize the ground and hold it.  The same thing applies to artillery, without ground troops, artillery or missiles by themselves cannot hold the ground!  It is obvious that the ISF cannot hold the ground because they are unwilling or unable to face the enemy and fight.  This means US ground troops are necessary if we want to defeat ISIS.  As unpopular as that move can or will be, it is the only recourse we have if we want to destroy ISIS.  To simply bomb them and rely on ISF to "degrade" their ability as Obama put it back in January, is not going to work.  If we simply "degrade" ISIS's ability, they will in turn regroup and rebuild to give us problems again.  The only solution is to destroy them, not "degrade" their ability to fight!
     Our policies and strategies seem to be always just stop-gap measures.  This whole business with the Iran "nuclear deal" is nothing but a delaying, stop-gap measure.  Washington admitted as much by saying that the "nuclear deal" will "delay" Iran's ability to build a bomb, not stop it all together.  So I guess we are simply delaying ISIS's ability to do damage in our country.
     These stop-gap measure, "Band-Aid" policies and strategies are all based on the fact that they are politically motivated.  It is the mentality of "as long as it doesn't happen on my watch."  The idea is that the "Band-Aid" will satisfy the constituency and in the meantime, postpone the inevitable and let the next guy worry about it!  Sadly, this sort of mentality has always existed in our government, ever since the days of the Korean War.  The last war that we fought where everyone was committed 100% to final victory was World War Two.  After that each war was fought with political constraints and commitment to the war depended on public opinion more than anything else.  With very, very few exceptions, no congressman or senator, or any of the cabinet post officials will ever risk going against public opinion, even if they know in their heart that they are right.  The all mighty need for reelection is just too great in our system.
     So now we are faced with a situation very similar to what happened in Vietnam.  All the "experts," official and those in the media, insist that we can't make comparisons with Vietnam. "This is a different war," they say, "a different situation!"  Of course it is a different war and different situation!  But it seems it is being handled the same way and the final outcome is beginning to appear much like it did in Vietnam!  I am not saying that Iraq will fall to ISIS and that Baghdad will fall just like Saigon.  But ISIS does control more than half of the country now, and some of the major cities like Ramadi have fallen to them.  We can reverse the situation, but obviously, we can't do it with ISF or even the much vaunted Iranians!  As unpalatable as it may be, the only way to do it is to put US ground troops to fight ISIS and not depend on ISF or a proxy force like Iranians.  However, the use of US ground troops is unlikely, since President Obama has repeatedly said that he would not commit US troops.
     The administration keeps saying that it is not our fight, it is Iraq's job to defend their country.  That may be true in theory, but ISIS's goal is not to just take over Iraq, their ultimate goal is to do harm to us, here in America.  Do we want a whole nation that is made up of ISIS fanatics, which is what will happen if they gain control of that country.  Will fighting ISIS on our shores be easier?  I am not too sure why the administration insists that fighting ISIS is not our job, but Iraq's!

Sunday, May 24, 2015

"National Character" - Part 5

     As I have mentioned in Part 3, there is a tendency for nations to write history in their favor, always portraying their country, their leaders as being in the right, etc.  Several blogs earlier, I also mention how a same battle seen from both sides of the participants can be very different.  So, it is not surprising that European nations tend to view their military leaders as being the greatest ever in world history, be they land army commanders or naval commanders.  This is especially true when it comes to general public and the media.  In military academies and war colleges, it may be a bit different.  For instance, Chingis or Genghis Khan is considered a military genius and his tactics studied in military academies.  The same thing is true of Sun Tzu, the great Chinese tactician.  However, the general public and the media consider Chingis/Genghis a nasty murderous barbarian, nothing more, and Sun Tzu is practically unknown.
     To most people of the western world (Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand), the greatest naval commanders in world history are all from Europe.  America considers John Paul Jones to be one of the greatest, and most Anglophiles will consider Admiral Nelson as the top guy.  But, surprisingly, among those who are familiar with naval history, there is an Asian Admiral that holds a very high position in this category. 
     George Alexander Allard of the British Royal Navy and a Naval Historian considers Korea's Yi Sun Shin to be the equal of Lord Nelson!  He stated that it is difficult for him to admit that there is a naval tactician and leader as great as Lord Nelson, but if there was an equal to Nelson, it was Yi of Korea!  The great Japanese Admiral, the hero of the Russo-Japanese War who destroyed the Russian Pacific Fleet, took exception to being compared to Yi Sun Shin.  At a ceremony where he was being honored, he was called an equal to Lord Nelson of England and Yi Sun Shin of Korea.  Togo responded by saying:  "It may be proper to compare me with Nelson, but not with Korea's Yi Sun Shin, for he had no equal!"
     Just who was this man who was thought of so highly by naval authorities of other countries, including one from its former enemy state!  Yi Sun Shin was a Korean Admiral during the Imjin Wars (1592 -1598) that raged between Korea's Chosun Dynasty and the invading Japanese forces of Toyotomi Hideoshi.  Yi Sun Shin took command of a much smaller Korean Navy and defeated the Japanese at sea time and again!  He fought the Japanese in a total of 23 naval battles during the six year Imjin Wars and defeated the much larger and superior Japanese forces every time!  In his greatest victory of the Battle of Myeongnyang, Yi's 13 ships faced a fleet of 133 Japanese ships!  Yet, by using superior tactics and improvised maneuvers, Yi's much smaller force defeated the Japanese fleet, sinking around 33 and damaging another 30 or so of the Japanese ships without losing a single Korean ship!  The Japanese fleet was forced to pull out, limping out of the battle area.
     It is generally thought that Yi had invented the so-called "turtle ships," the kuhbuksun also written as geobukseon.  Yi did not invent these ships but improved upon their original design, making them more effective in battle.  The "turtle ships" were ironclads of sorts.  Their body was shaped like a turtle that was covered with armor and spikes (to prevent boarding) and with a figure head shaped like a dragon.  Each side of the ship had eleven canons and the figure head had four cannons.  The turtle shaped armored body had port holes for firing mortars and other weapons.  For that time and period, it was a formidable weapon of war.  It was highly maneuverable, propelled by 24 oars on each side, and it had masts and sails that could be raised to use the wind when not engaged in combat.  It was an engineering marvel, something that the world had not seen anywhere at that time.
     Yi used the tactics of stealth to approach Japanese ships and attack at night.  The figurehead would spew flames when the four cannons were fired and one can imagine what a fearful appearance it made.  Contrary to popular belief, Yi did not use a whole fleet of turtle ships.  In each battle he used at most a half a dozen of these specialized ships, the rest of his fleet was made up of conventional warships of the time.  The turtle ships were "Special Operations" ships and used for the initial attack at night to create havoc and panic with the enemy.  At a time when most people believed that there were such things as dragons and sea monsters, the turtle ships must have appeared frightening to the Japanese sailors.  Yi never lost a battle, even in his last battle when he was killed, his ships defeated the Japanese!
     Yi Sun Shin is a national hero and there is a huge statue of the great Admiral in Seoul, South Korea.  He is celebrated in songs, poems, books, movies, etc. The "turtle ship" is considered an early example of Korean engineering ingenuity.  Yi's superior and at times unconventional tactics are also an example of Korean ingenuity and ability to improvise and apply appropriate tactics to the situation. 
     Like the girl in the folktale who disguised herself as her father to fool the great white tiger, Yi Sun Shin employed turtle ships to gain an advantage on his enemy.  Ingenuity, improvisation, courage and perseverance, all demonstrated by the girl who killed the great white tiger and by Yi Sun Shin with his turtle ships in the naval battles that he fought.  To Koreans, Yi Sun Shin and the turtle ships and the 23 naval victories are a perfect illustration of Korean "national character."

Saturday, May 23, 2015

"National Character" - Part 4

     Japan's "national character" was best portrayed by the three actual incidents in their historical past.  There are numerous folktales and legends that also could be used, but the three historical incidents used in the initial blog on this subject best describe Japanese "national character" - or so it is thought by most.
     Like Japan, China also has numerous historical incidents that could be used and the story of Ssu Ma Chien, the great historian, is possibly the best of all.  At the same time, the folktale about the archer in the "Warring States Period" is also considered to be an excellent example of representing the Chinese "national character."  Chinese folktales and legends abound with stories that might be used to illustrate this point, but the story about the archer is perhaps the most popular.
     Korea also has its share of historical incidents as well as folk tales and legends that illustrate their "national character."  But perhaps the best known folk tale in this regard is the story about the "Great White Tiger," the Paek Horang as it is called in Korean.  It is a story about patience, guile, adaptation and innovation.  Koreans pride themselves in their ability to adapt to new conditions and circumstances and at their ability to be innovative.  They have demonstrated this time and again in modern times in their electronic and automotive industry!  But most of all, the tale is about loyalty and duty to one's parents, and vengeance!
     The story begins in the northern part of Korea, in the region of the Long White Mountains, the almost mythical mountains of northern Korea that border Manchuria, Paek Too San.   Paek Too San is the region where Korean communist's legend claims that their founder Kim Il Song was born!  It is a mountain range that has mythical status in Korean folklore and legends.  It also has the same status with Manchus, the Jurchen tribe (the one that conquered China and established the Ching Dynasty) that consider it as their birthplace and holy grounds.  The Jurchens call the Paek Too San mountain range "manjhur", and they called themselves by that name!  You can easily see where the name Manchu and Manchuria originated!
     At any rate, somewhere in that region lived a famous Korean hunter.  The old hunter was a widower and had one child, a beautiful young daughter.  He taught his daughter all of his skills on hunting and woodcraft and she was an accomplished huntress by the time she was a teenager.
     There was a great white tiger in the area that the old hunter had been trying to kill all of his life.  It was a white tiger that had killed his wife, the mother of his daughter, and had also killed his parents before that.  The tiger was considered to be supernatural and it was thought that it could not be killed by a mere human.  Then one day while the old man was hunting in the mountains, the white tiger killed and ate him!  The young teenaged daughter was left an orphan.
     Some of the relatives of the girl wanted her to come and live with them, but she refused.  She had numerous offers of marriage by rich men, for she was very beautiful.  But she refused them all and continued to live in the little hut in the forest and survived by hunting as she did before with her father.  
     All the while she was preparing to go after the white tiger.  What she did to prepare herself was to practice walking, talking, and acting just like her father.  After she had practiced for a period and was satisfied with the results, she put on a disguise, a moustache and a beard just like her father had, donned his clothes, and set out after the white tiger.  At the base of Paek Too San she met the white tiger.  The white tiger was so surprised at seeing the old man that he thought he had killed and eaten, that he froze and stared at the apparition before him in total surprise. He had watched this "old man" approach him for he had recognized the walk, so he was totally stunned.
     "You may have thought that you had killed and eaten me, but you were mistaken!" The girl spoke to the surprised tiger in her father's voice. "You cannot kill me!  Now I have come to kill you!"
     The tiger was so shocked at seeing the old man and hearing his voice that he was momentarily paralyzed.  This gave the girl enough time to plunge the spear that she carried and kill the white tiger.
     The girl knew that she could not just go after the tiger and hope to kill it.  Her father, who was even a greater hunter than she was, had failed and was ultimately killed by the tiger.  So, she had to devise a plan, a way to gain an upper hand.  She did this through deception, by disguising herself as her father and thereby confusing the tiger and succeeded in killing it.  By killing the tiger and carrying out the act of vengeance, she had fulfilled her duty to her father as a good daughter!
     This story not only illustrates that sons and daughters must be dutiful to their parents, but that a girl could be just as successful at doing what is considered man's work.  Despite the fact that like all Asian countries Korean society tends to be sexist and favor men, it is still possible for women to be successful.  One of the most successful Korean king or queen of the historical past was the last Korean Queen, Queen Myeongseong who was popularly called Queen Min, and was murdered by Japanese in 1895 before Japan annexed Korea.  She was the greatest obstacle to Japan's annexation of Korea.  She was very progressive in thought and wanted to ally Korea with western powers.  Queen Min's death (murder) is considered one of the greatest if not the greatest tragedy in Korean history.  Today, South Korea's president is a woman, Park Geun-hye, who is considered to be a very progressive thinker and one of the best presidents that they have had so far.
     So, the folktale about the killing of the great white tiger by a girl has many layers, one of them being that a girl can do anything, if she sets her mind to it.  It demonstrates Korean "national character" by way of showing innovation, adaptation, loyalty, fulfillment of duty to parents (and country, in this case), and that a woman can be successful in whatever she pursues.  This Korean "national character" has been demonstrated amply in modern era, particularly in recent times with their economic prosperity, electronic and automotive innovations, and leadership by a female president of the country!

Sunday, May 17, 2015

"National Character" - Part 3

     Although I wanted to move on to another country, discuss their so-called "national character,"  I thought it would be worthwhile to stay with China a bit longer, since there is another side of the "national character" that is unique to China that has not been covered yet.  After all, China is the world's most populous country with an incredible number of dialects and a diversity of ethnic groups.  China is not like Japan and Korea, two homogenous countries with one language.  Although there may be slight dialectical differences in accents and word usage from region to region, with the exception of Ainu and Okinawan languages, the basic language spoken is the same.  Not so in China, linguistic differences are much more pronounced.  Someone speaking one of the northern region dialects like Manchu would not understand at all a person speaking Hakka or some other southern dialect.  This does not include the two main languages, Mandarin and Cantonese, two completely different tongues!
     But, we are not here to discuss ethnic variety or linguistic differences.  Rather, it is China's unique characteristic of recording history as accurately as possible.  In most cultures and countries, history is recorded in favor of that country, that is natural.  No one wants to leave a legacy that portrays them in a negative light.  So, sometimes events or actions of the past are recorded in a favorable light, regardless of how it really happened.  For instance, our view and portrayal of the Mexican-American War is totally different from that of Mexico's.  To Mexicans, the U.S. was the aggressor who sought to expand its territory and took Mexican land by force.  But according to our history books, the Mexican-American War occurred because of alleged disagreement between the two countries. 
     Japan still refuses to admit to some of its wrong doings during World War Two and has not changed its history books in schools.  That has been a bone of contention between Japan and China and Korea since the end of World War Two.  That is just how countries are about their history!  Nobody really wants to record things accurately that might show them as aggressors or "villains!"
     Chinese historians are an exception to that rule.  China has had official historians since their "Warring States Period" which dates back to around 500 BC.  One notable historian that emerged after the "Warring States Period" became the preeminent historian of China.  He set the standard by which all Chinese historians were to record history in the future.  He was also responsible for writing the great classic, the Shiji or The Record of Grand Historian, written in 109 BC
     Ssu Ma Chien (145 - 86 BC) was the official historian for the Han Dynasty (206 BC - 220 AD) and he compiled this grand works, Shiji, which was essentially a history of China from the earliest period to his time.  It became a great classic and was required reading for all scholars, one of the three pre-Chin texts; the book of history, the book of philosophy, and the book of literature.  It was absolutely essentially for anyone in China who wanted to pass the civil service exams to be familiar with these texts.  In other words, the "classics" were required reading for anyone wanting to succeed in China, right up to the Ching Dynasty in the 20th Century!
     Ssu Ma Chien was meticulous about recording events as accurately and truthfully as he could.  He did not take sides, and believed that history should be recorded with absolute accuracy.  This made him the greatest historian in China, but also almost brought about his downfall.
     During one of the important battles that the Chinese army fought against the northern barbarians, the hsiung-nu, the Chinese general in charge of the army mishandled the whole affair and the Chinese were badly defeated with over 10,000 deaths.  The general was an incompetent, but he was also the king's favorite.  Ssu Ma Chien immediately began recording the fiasco as it really happened.  The king learned of this and ordered Ssu Ma Chien to change his writing, to present the general in a more favorable light, to place the blame on another general.  Ssu Ma Chien refused.  He told the king that it was his duty to the king and the country to record history truthfully and not to change things to suit the needs of individuals.  The king became angry and threatened to have Ssu Ma Chien beheaded, but the historian refused to budge.  So, the king in his fury had Ssu Ma Chien castrated and thrown in jail!
     The castrated Ssu Ma Chien languished in prison for several years, but still managed to record history while imprisoned!  When Ssu Ma Chien was released from prison he resumed writing history and his reputation had grown tremendously, to a point where it would have been foolhardy for anyone to try to force him to change his writing.  With his incredible act of courage and steadfast belief in recording history accurately, Ssu Ma Chien had established a precedence in Chinese historical writing.  All Chinese historians since that time (more than 2000 years!) have tried to emulate Ssu Ma Chien and record history as it really happened, not how the king or some ruler wanted it to be recorded.
     Unfortunately, what the governments produce today are not really a reflection of that country's history and China is no exception when it comes to its government. What the Chinese Communist Party claims is history really has no true bearing on history!  But Chinese scholars, historians, still follow the path established by Ssu Ma Chien more than 2000 years ago!  Most scholars of history will readily agree that Chinese history as recorded by their scholars is the most accurate record of what really took place in the past. 
     Most first time readers of Chinese history are sometimes confused and other times disappointed that the history of that great country seems to read like a "soap opera!"  There are countless betrayals, poisoning, assassinations, acts of cowardice, petty bickering, etc., things that one usually does not encounter in reading histories of other countries.  But that is because Chinese history, as recorded by scholars, is recorded accurately, the way things really happened.  There are, of course, recordings of acts of incredible bravery, sacrifice, etc., as well.  But in general, history is recorded as it really happened, as people really behaved and carried on!
     Because of the reputation and proclivity of Chinese historians to record history accurately, many scholars doing research on other neighboring countries such as Japan and Korea will read Chinese historical texts on that country!  Chinese texts tend to be neutral and not biased as they can be when written by other historians.  For example, the most accurate recording of Mongolian history is Chinese texts called the Secret History of Mongols.  The Mongols' own version the Ssanang Ssetsen tends to read more like a folk tale, glorifying the Chingis Khan era and skipping over more negative aspects of that time.
     So, the Chinese "national character" may be defined as discussed in the previous blog, that of practicality!  Chinese are possibly the post pragmatic people in the world, and it shows in their attitudes and behavior.  But, there is also this interesting quirk of character, that of recording history accurately, even if it portrays some of their alleged heroes and past leaders as cowards, liars, and cheats.

Thursday, May 14, 2015

"National Character" - Part 2

     As you can surmise, China's "national character" is identified quite differently from that of Japan.  Whereas the Japanese character is tied to warrior tradition and seppuku, the Chinese character is tied more to practicality, the very essence of Chinese - pragmatism!
     During the period of "Warring States" which began roughly around 500 BC and lasted for a century or so, the art of war was developed to a fine science in China.  There were seven states that fought each other during that period, and as you can guess, there was a lot of changing sides, intrigue, betrayals, etc., among the warring states.  It was during this period that many of the Chinese folk tales and heroic sagas found their beginning.  But, they are quite different from those of Japan and other countries in Asia.  One such story, according to some, depicts Chinese "national character" perfectly.
     During the "Warring States Period,"  the State of Chu had a famous archer, supposedly the best in the land among all archers in seven warring states.  His fame had spread throughout and he was feared so much that in many cases, battles were settled by merely having him face the best archer of the enemy!  There was no need to waste all the manpower by subjecting all the troops to combat, all they had to do was agree with their enemy to have their best archers duel each other, therefore, only two lives would be at stake.  This was a perfect illustration of Chinese pragmatism.  Why waste all those troops and effort when everything could be settled by just two men?
     So it was that the State of Chu that was at war with the neighboring state of Wei decided to sent their archers to face each other in battle.  The Emperor of Chu called his archer and ordered him to go and face the enemy archer the following day at an agreed upon time and place.  The Emperor told the archer to do battle with the enemy, and that was that!
     The top archer of Wei happened to be an old man, an old man who was the teacher of the younger archer of Chu who was considered now to be the best in the land.  At one time, the old archer was the best, but not anymore.  Sort of like the fastest gun in the West who was no longer the fastest!  This presented a dilemma to Chu's top archer.  He was very fond of the old man, his teacher.  In fact, the old man was like a father to him.  He was Chu's archer because Chu's Emperor offered him the most money for his services, otherwise, he probably would have been still together with his old teacher.
     The Chu archer could not sleep that night.  He thought of his old teacher and just could not even bear the thought of killing his old master.  It wasn't that he was "soft,"  he had killed many enemy, after all, that is how he built his reputation.  But to kill his old teacher, that was another story.  He struggled and thought about it all night.  Next morning as he prepared himself to go to battle, he had decided on his action.
     Dressed in full battle regalia, he arrived at the designated location with his orderly.  He took his bow and a quiver full of arrows and set out into the open field where he could see his opponent at a great distance, a distance still too far for arrows to reach.  He took a position, still too far from target, and fired off his arrows, emptying his quiver.  This surprised his orderly, for he was not in range to be effective.  But, the archer, after emptying his quiver, turned back and mounted his horse and told his orderly that he had accomplished his mission, he had faced the enemy and had shot off his arrows.
     He returned to the palace and reported to the Emperor of Chu.  He said that he had done as he was ordered.  He had gone to the battle field, faced the enemy archer, and emptied his quiver.  Unfortunately, his arrows did not find their mark.  The Emperor was perplexed, but didn't do anything because, after all, the archer had followed his orders, and he didn't want to lose the best archer in the land, so he let it go! 
     The archer's reasoning was that he had done as he was told.  The fact that he was out of range was just a technicality, the Emperor did not specify at what distance he was to face the enemy!  So, in his mind, he had obeyed the Emperor and carried out his order, but at the same time, he did not kill his teacher, the old master!  This, in its basic form, was a demonstration of that Chinese practicality!
     A Japanese Samurai, not wanting to kill his former master, would have simply committed seppuku after writing a farewell poem.  He could not carry out the order, so he had to take his own life, pure and simple. 
     An English knight would have struggled with this, then faced his King and would have said something to the effect, "Do as you wish with me, my Lord, but I cannot carry out your order and kill my former master."  Depending on the king's mood, he would have either been spared or beheaded!   
     A Teutonic knight would have gone out and killed his former master, despite the fact that it caused him much anguish and mental sorrow.  But he was a knight and orders were orders!
     But a Chinese knight (archer), found a solution to the problem, at least to his own satisfaction and peace of mind.  It may not appear to be the perfect solution and to some may even seem dishonest, but in his mind, and to the Chinese mind, he had satisfied everyone concerned.  It is not only an example of a Chinese practical mind, but also how people think differently, interpret the same things differently.  No wonder we have such problems in our foreign affairs!

Saturday, May 9, 2015

"National Character"

     There are historians and other academics that claim there is such a thing as "national character," certain characteristics that are unique to that nations.  Whether that is true or not is debatable.  There are historical events, actual or fictional (folklore), that supposedly depict this national character.  Usually this is described in literature, ancient chronicles and sagas, and there are some traits that can be singled out as being unique to that particular culture, that nation.
     Take for example the act of disembowelment, more commonly referred to as hara-kiri or seppuku.  This act is almost immediately associated with Japanese and their Samurai culture.  There are countless accounts, both factual and fictional, of seppuku/hara-kiri being committed by individuals to demonstrate loyalty to a cause or individual.  Incidentally, hara-kiri means to "cut-stomach" - hara means stomach and kiri means cut.  Seppuku is the reading of the same kanji (Chinese characters) in reverse.
     To the Japanese, no event in their history depicts their "national character" better than the Ako Jiken (Ako Incident) which took place in the early 1700s.  This factual incident involved mass seppuku committed by 47 loyal retainers of Lord Asano. They had avenged the wrongful (as they perceived it) death of their master, Lord Asano.  But in doing so, they had broken the law of the land, so they had to pay a price, which was their life.  The story of the 47 Samurai or ronin (since they were unemployed at the time of their death!) is celebrated not only in Japan, but well known in the rest of the world.  Many books have been written about this incident and several movies were made in Japan.  Hollywood got into the act and made a movie called the 47 Ronin starring Keanu Reeves, a garbled version of the original story line.  Hollywood seems to do that (messing up the real story) all the time, as you will see.
     Then in the late 1800s, during the Meiji Restoration, another incident occurred that is often compared to the Ako Incident of the1700s.  This one was called the Shinpuren Jiken (Shinpuren Incident) and it involved a Samurai clan that refused to submit to modernization and hopelessly fought against the modern Japanese army armed rifles and machineguns, while they were armed only with swords, spears.  As with the Ako Incident, the survivors of this uprising committed seppuku in a traditional manner.  This incident is also celebrated in Japan as a depiction of Japanese "national character."  Hollywood made a movie of this incident as well, another garbled version called The Last Samurai starring Tom Cruise.
     In the more modern times, in 1932 there was an incident known as the Ni Ni Roku Jiken (the February 24th Incident) which involved a coupe attempt that was carried out by a group of Japanese Imperial Army officers.  The officers were opposed to what they felt was the "weak" civilian government and wanted a more aggressive, militaristic government.  Although they managed to kill several government officials, including the Prime Minister of Japan at the time, the coupe failed.  Some of the rebels were forced to commit seppuku while others were "forgiven."  The outcome of this "failed" coupe was that the militarists took over control of the government and shortly Japan invaded Manchuria and then China, and of course, ultimately led to the disastrous World War Two.
     All of these three incidents are very important to Japanese history, since they not only defined the Japanese society at the time, but formed new attitudes and at the same time demonstrated that "national character" or trait.  All three incidents demonstrated the act of gekkokujo (literally to go against), a uniquely Japanese trait.  In a society where everything is tightly controlled, where behavioral patterns are ruled by what the society dictates, one does not step out of line.  As I have mentioned before in earlier blogs on kamikaze pilots, tokkotai (boy soldiers), you just do not go against the norm.  As the Japanese proverb says, "A nail that sticks out invites a hammer!"
     However, if you do go against the norm for a "good" cause, you are generally forgiven for your transgressions. After all, you did it for the good of all.  Gekkokujo is going against the law, the norm, for the good of all or for what you believe to be good.  Therefore, the act, although it could be bloody and violent, may be forgiven!  The 47 Ronin broke the law when they sought revenge against Lord Kira, the enemy of their master Lord Asano.  By invading Kira's castle and killing his soldiers and killing and beheading him, they had committed murder in the eyes of the law.  But, they had committed gekkokujo because they committed the act with pure hearts in the belief that they had to perform their duty to their lord.  So, although they had to take their own lives, they were forgiven for their crimes.  The same thing applies to those involved in Shinpuren Jiken and later in the Ni Ni Roku Jiken.
     After the Ni Ni Roku Jiken, there was nothing that took place in Japan that was thought of in the same way.  There may have been some incidents during World War Two, including possibly even some tokkotai pilots acts.  But World War Two was such a negative experience for Japanese that it has been cast aside as something they don't want to think about or bring back even if only in memory!
     There was only one more "incident" in the modern era that earned that title.  It took place in November of 1970 and it is called the Mishima Jiken, "Mishima Incident."  Yukio Mishima was a somewhat controversial novelist who wrote some fascinating pieces of literature during his relatively short lifetime.  Mishima, at one point was considered a strong candidate for a Nobel Prize for Literature.  His works were most widely read, translated into more languages than any other Japanese author of the period.  Throughout his literary career, he was strongly opposed to and distressed by Japan's abandonment of its traditional values and only concerned with earning the mighty dollar!  He constantly harped in his writings about returning to the traditional values.  He culminated his literary career by writing a tetralogy, a series of four novels connected through the theme of reincarnation.
     On the morning when the last chapter of the fourth book of the tetralogy was delivered to the publisher, Mishima went (along with three of his followers) to the Headquarters of Jietai, the Japanese Ground Self Defense Force (Army), and attempted to incite the gathered troops to rebel against the system, to return to traditional values.  He was, of course, booed by the troops, called baka-yoro (fool), and worst!  He was no fool, and he knew damn well that no one was going to follow his plea for returning to the traditional values!  Mishima wanted to die! So, having failed to incite the troops to rebel, he committed seppuku!  That was the last known seppuku committed by anyone in Japan !  The Mishima Jiken, in its own twisted way, also demonstrated Japanese "national character."
     I started this blog on "national character" with Japan because Japan has the most easily identifiable three (discounting Mishima) historical incidents that can be classified in that category.  Others may not have as many, but each nation seems to have at least one work of literature or incident in history that is identifiable with "national character."

Sunday, May 3, 2015

"Go For Broke"

     The history of America's most highly decorated military unit is pretty well known, I think.  perhaps not as well known as it should be, but there was a movie made about this unit back in the 1950s and books and numerous articles have been written.  But I do think that time has a tendency to blur some of those long ago memories, and much of today's generation probably has no idea of just what those amazing brave men accomplished.  I am, of course, talking about the 442nd Regimental Combat Team of Hawaii that was composed of primarily Japanese-Americans, mostly second generation Nisei.  Known by its popular Hawaiian slang name "Go for Broke" (the official unit motto), for all practical purposes, it was an entirely Japanese-American unit, however, as I will explain, there were none ethnic Japanese in the unit as well.
     At the outbreak of WWII, members of University of Hawaii ROTC program volunteered in its entirety, to serve in the army.  They were already a part of the Hawaii National Guard, but after Pearl Harbor, those of Japanese descent were discharged from the National Guard.  Undeterred by this unfair discriminatory act, the group offered their services anyway, offered to enlist.  However, their offer was refused at first, and the Commanding General assigned to oversee the defenses of the Territory of Hawaii even wanted these young men, those of Japanese descent, to be classified as enemy aliens!  Fortunately, after some thought, the Department of the Army decided to accept their offer and absorbed them into a separate unit of Hawaii National Guard's 100th Battalion.  The 100th Battalion was the first unit out of Hawaii, made up primarily of Japanese-Americans that went into training for combat.  The 100th Battalion of the 442nd Infantry Regiment had some members that were Hawaiians of Korean descent as well as a few of Chinese descent.  These were young men who were in University of Hawaii's ROTC program. The smaller number of white students who were in that program were commissioned and assigned to various units in the army.
     The 442nd Infantry Regiment was initially made up of 1,432 men, mostly of the 100th Battalion.  They were put through some of the most intensive training that any army unit ever received!  They kept training and training, mainly because the army really didn't know when and how to use them!  All of the officers were Caucasian!  Starting with the Commanding Officer down to Company Commanders, all were Caucasian.  Some hated the job, felt that they were being punished by the army being assigned to a none white unit, and they took it out on their subordinates.  Even some of the senior NCOs were initially Caucasian.  But by the time the unit was finally deployed to Italy for combat in 1944, all of the NCOs were from within the ranks, mostly Japanese-Americans with a handful of Korean-Americans, and even some platoon leaders, lieutenants, were Nisei who were in the ROTC program before.  It was the exigency of war that forced the army to allow some of the Nisei soldiers to become officers.  There just weren't enough officers to go around by 1944!  By the end of the war, 30 enlisted men in the 100th Battalion received battlefield commissions, the most battlefield commissions given to any single unit that size in the history of the U.S. Army!
     The battle history of the 442nd reads like a Hollywood movie.  They were constantly thrown into the thick of things, the worst places!  Many of the Commanding Generals of the area where the 442nd was assigned treated them like cannon fodder, still had distrust and dislike for those "Jap" soldiers, as one General referred to them.  The most infamous incident took place in a place just east of Biffontaine, France, when a Texas National Guard unit was surrounded by German forces, cut off from all U.S. units.  It was the element of the Texas National Guard's 141st Regiment that was referred to as the "Lost Battalion."  General Dahlquist, the Army Commanding General of that region ordered the 442nd to go and "rescue" the boys from Texas, as he put it.  He ordered the 442nd to go into the teeth of German resistance, to attack an overwhelmingly larger force with no adequate artillery or air support.  The 442nd went in against impossible odds and fought fiercely and rescued 211 Texans of the "Lost Battalion."  To rescue 211, the 442nd suffered 800 casualties, the heaviest casualties were suffered by the K and I Companies of the 100th Battalion!  But they weren't pulled out.  Dahlquist insisted that the 100th along with the rest of the 442nd continue to do battle until German forces were destroyed.  The battle went on for 3 weeks and the 442nd suffered 1,940 casualties!
     After that battle and horrific casualties suffered by the 442nd, Dahlquist ordered that a parade ceremony be held.  He was surprised at the small number of Nisei soldiers that appeared before him.  Of the 400 men in 100th Battalion's K and I Companies, only 26 soldiers were present for the parade, 18 for K Company and 8 for I Company!  Dahlquist demanded to know why there were so few, and Colonel Gordon Singles, the Commanding Officer of the 442nd responded,
     "Sir, those are all the men in those two companies that survived!" 
     Needless to say, Colonel Singles did not like General Dahlquist.  After the war, at Fort Bragg, North Carolina during a huge victory parade, the two officers met again.  Singles was now a Brigadier General but Dahlquist still outranked him.  Singles saluted Dahlquist, and Dahlquist responded by saying, "Let bygones be bygones!" and extended his hand.  Singles held his salute and refused to shake Dahlquist's hand before thousands of witnesses!  Yes, Singles did not like or respect Dahlquist, his commanding officer during the war!
     The 442nd had the highest casualty rate of any U.S. Army unit of comparable size in WWII.  The initial 4,000 men that comprised the 442nd Regimental Combat Team (A Regimental Combat Team is a beefed-up regiment, much bigger than the regular unit), that number had to be replaced 3 1/2 times.  A total of 14,000 men served in the 442nd with a casualty rate of 314%!    
     A total of 9,486 Purple Hearts were awarded to the soldiers of 442nd.  Some say that there should have been more!  There were 18,903 individual awards for bravery.  It started even before the unit saw any combat.  15 Soldiers Medals (a medal awarded for heroism, but not in combat) were awarded to 442nd soldiers who rescued civilians from drowning and other mishaps while they were still in training!  In all, 22 Medal of Honors, 52 Distinguished Service Crosses, 1 Distinguished Service Medal, 588 Silver Stars (28 of them were second awards!), 22 Legion of Merits, 5,200 Bronze Stars (1,200 of them were second awards!) were awarded.  These are the U.S. awards.  The soldiers of the 442nd also received foreign awards, 14 French Croix de Guerre (2 were second awards!), 2 Italian Crosses, 2 Italian Medal of Valor.   As I said earlier, no unit of comparable size in the United States military history ever received so many awards for valor!
     It is easy to forget what these men did, what they accomplished.  But think about it!  They did all those things during the time when they were treated like less than full fledged citizens.  Many had spent time in "Internment Camps" and some still had relatives in those facilities when they joined the army.  Initially, they were not even trusted to be NCOs, let alone officers.  They had to suffer through racial discrimination and mistrust, indignities that in today's world would justify a class action law suit, but they overcame it all.  They were truly giants.