Ju 88P-5 What If GB Build on MMM

Rheged · March 23, 2013, 06:05:26 AM

A lot to think about, here.

First, an absolutely first rate bit of modelling; WELL DONE.

Second, forum members appear to have been reasoned and reasonable in their postings, and respected each others points of view........again, well done. Narses has a taxing enough job moderating without us complicating the issue for him. Thank you Chris!

Third, my own preference is not to use a swastika. This choice was reinforced by discussions with German friends some years ago. However, I can recognise the desire to produce an "accurately whiffed" creation and appreciate excellent workmanship without necessarily espousing the philosophy of the supposed operators of the creation.

eatthis · March 23, 2013, 06:10:13 AM

Quote from: Weaver on March 23, 2013, 05:59:03 AM

I also think that the sense of offence in both swastika and general modelling issues is very selective and parochial. Nobody seems to object to Imperial Japanese markings on models, even though Japan behaved every bit as appallingly as Germany in WWII and has made far less convincing attempts to apologise and make recompense. Likewise, any offence that Soviet stars might cause to victims of the gulags seems to be regarded as trivial. I've often wondered what would happen if an Iraqi came onto the site, complaining that a model of a Tornado with a Paveway hanging off it offended him, because his family were killed by one only a few years ago? Would all such models be immedately removed, or would he be given short shrift? I strongly suspect the latter.

In general, I think the "offense-response" in society as a whole has now been exaggerated to ridiculous levels, partly as a result of the offence-equivalent of ambulance-chasing lawyers, who have given people the idea that they can sue for discrimination and emotional trauma if somebody remarks that their farts smell bad... We need to grow thicker skins and accept that the price, well worth paying, of living in a free-speech society is that you will sometimes see and hear things that you don't like or agree with. The correct response to such things is to use that free speech to argue agains the things you don't like, not to campaign to remove that right from your opponents so that you don't have to.

excellent points there
id you wanted to be fair and even about it then why does nobody bat an eyelid when somebody builds enola gay? how many 1000s of innocent civillians were killed by the 2 atomic bombs which by their very nature are indescriminate?

Tophe · March 23, 2013, 07:57:46 AM

I agree with eatthis

, while... this is politics and maybe brings anger rather than friendship $:-\$ Maybe we should focus on models in this forum, no? moderator?

Weaver · March 23, 2013, 09:44:17 AM

It IS about models: it's about what models you should or shouldn't build, what symbols you should or shouldn't stick on them and what you should or shouldn't write about them. The whole swastikas/Nazis/whatever issue keeps coming up precisely because it IS relevent. What we do here, either implicitly or explicitly, is re-write history, and that can't not be political. It's based on the writer's opinion of what would happen if factor x or event y was different, and that's a function of his or her analysis of the politics of the real world.

Let's leave Nazi's and WWII out of it for a second: what if Britain joined America in the Vietnam war? Off the top of my head I can think of roughly three categories into which responses might fall:

1. It's a silly what if because it could never have happened due to factors x,y,z etc....
2. It could have happened but it wouldn't have made any difference because Vietnam was unwinnable...
3. It might have made all the difference an achieved a very different outcome....

Whichever side your opinion fall on (there might be more than these three), it's due to your opinion and understanding of the politics of the 1960s: can't not be. Even if you don't write any backstory, but just do "what if plane y was built instead of plane x", it's still political, because every military aircraft ever built was the result of a political process.

eatthis · March 23, 2013, 10:11:54 AM

Quote from: Weaver on March 23, 2013, 09:44:17 AM
It IS about models: it's about what models you should or shouldn't build, what symbols you should or shouldn't stick on them and what you should or shouldn't write about them. The whole swastikas/Nazis/whatever issue keeps coming up precisely because it IS relevent. What we do here, either implicitly or explicitly, is re-write history, and that can't not be political. It's based on the writer's opinion of what would happen if factor x or event y was different, and that's a function of his or her analysis of the politics of the real world.

Let's leave Nazi's and WWII out of it for a second: what if Britain joined America in the Vietnam war? Off the top of my head I can think of roughly three categories into which responses might fall:

1. It's a silly what if because it could never have happened due to factors x,y,z etc....
2. It could have happened but it wouldn't have made any difference because Vietnam was unwinnable...
3. It might have made all the difference an achieved a very different outcome....

Whichever side your opinion fall on (there might be more than these three), it's due to your opinion and understanding of the politics of the 1960s: can't not be. Even if you don't write any backstory, but just do "what if plane y was built instead of plane x", it's still political, because every military aircraft ever built was the result of a political process.

id better not show you my tsr2 whifs then youd have a heart attack!!

nighthunter · March 23, 2013, 01:54:03 PM

As a student of history, and hopefully in a few years, a teacher of it, I am all about historical accuracy, and I for one believe that we need to keep dioramas as historically accurate as possible, because we, as modelers teach others by our dioramas. And if we show the horrors of war in 3D, it reminds us as human beings that we can not hide the horrors of war from our children, because if we do, we end up with adults with no real compulsion against killing. People will argue about the "Assault" weapons bans and try to ban violent video games, because they "de-sensitize" or create killers. I am vehemently against drones to be used in war, because we can lose sight of the costs. With putting our soldiers, sailors, marines and air force personnel at risk, we are reminded that war is not some game, but very very real, and the cost is very very high. I want us, as the human race, to never forget that. The atrocities that were committed by Tyrants during WW2 are just as bad as atrocities committed by the Allies. We as allied nations, also committed atrocities, but that is war, and war isn't and never really been civilized. Japanese-Americans could seriously argue that the US committed an atrocity by locking up millions of them in camps during WW2, and almost no Spies were caught, because they didn't exhist, or if they did, they got the heck out of Dodge before being rounded up. In short, Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. As whiffers, we do not have to hold ourselves to be "historically accurate", because it is not "real world". Wonderful kit, and well done!

Tophe · March 23, 2013, 06:12:05 PM

I disagree but this is politics, far from the Ju 88P-5... Maybe I will send you a PM in 10 days, nighthunter, I am busy now but I'd like to discuss about it with someone, and a US student in History could help me, this is true. Thanks. Now back to the Ju 88P-5... $:-\$

NARSES2 · March 24, 2013, 05:27:43 AM

Currently this has been a very reasonable and well argued discussion and I don't find it breaks rules. However it is one of those areas where people have strong views and are unlikely to change them. (I also have a view on this but it's staying off site for the moment) We are in danger of simply repeating points already made ? Therefore can I suggest that if anyone wishes to continue this discussion on the merits of representing the Swastika on models that they continue it via PM ?

Weaver · March 24, 2013, 05:54:00 AM

Fair enough - we all seem to be at the agree-to-disagree point anyway. I've no objection to calling it quits at this point.

It should really be on it's own thread rather than somebody's model thread, but the trouble is that such threads tend to get shut down.

Dizzyfugu · March 24, 2013, 11:15:02 AM

Quote from: Tophe on March 23, 2013, 07:57:46 AM
I agree with eatthis , while... this is politics and maybe brings anger rather than friendship $:-\$ Maybe we should focus on models in this forum, no? moderator?

Totally agree. I am through with the topic, have said what I wanted (since I had been asked), and anything else is subjective. I did not want to criticize or even offend the maker of the Cylon Raider - If I had wanted to do so, I would have posted a comment at the respective kit. It was just my opinion, and that kit came to my mind - rather randomly, so I am sorry if this caused confusion.

Let's build great models again, it's more interesting than pseudo-political or personal debates without being able to look into each others' eyes.

tahsin · March 25, 2013, 04:11:55 AM

Quote
Fw-190 was a product of the Nazi regime and should always be clearly recognised as such

One would be tempted to argue against for years. Hadn't Howard Hughes gone off slightly of the right track, he would be claiming it like hell. Not to fan the flames but I felt like writing it. For the model it really inspires but I also believe the square cut 188 tail looks always better.