#center for war and society

[back-and-totheleft]

World War III may be inevitable

Iconic director Oliver Stone is not optimistic.

Fifty years after the end of the Vietnam War, and nearly 35 years since his film "Platoon" debuted, America is still hopelessly enamored with violence, and Washington, encouraged by the tandem power centers of Wall Street and the media, is still engineered for war.

“Our country is sabotaging itself. Why do we keep going back” in search of a necessary enemy? He asked. “We track a pattern of intervention, there is a repetition” that will eventually lead us to another world war.

Grim thoughts, given in a conversation moderated by (Ret.) Col. Greg Daddis, Iraq War veteran and director of the Center for War and Society at San Diego State University. Daddis is also USS Midway Chair in Modern U.S. Military History (Thursday’s event was held on the USS Midway museum) and a board member at the Quincy Institute, which partnered in the event.

Stone’s own experiences as a 20-year-old Army infantryman during the most tumultuous years in Vietnam (and politically, socially, back home in the U.S.) — 1967-1968 — formed the basis for Platoon, which won Oscars for Best Picture and Best Director in 1987 and is considered one of the most important and viscerally impactful Vietnam War films in Hollywood history. It is the first in his Vietnam War trilogy, which includes "Born on the Fourth of July" (1989), and "Heaven and Earth" (1993).

As a young man inspired by the tales of mythological Odysseus and a father who had served in World War II, he was driven to war by wanderlust and the frenetic unfocused energy youth. His time in combat there, in his words, took the scales from his eyes and upon returning to an “country he no longer knew” set him on a course of discovery, his mind and creativity coalescing around a burning skepticism of the government, social convention, and conformity.

This is all detailed in his excellent 2020 autobiography, “Chasing the Light” which charts Stone’s youth, his time in Vietnam, and his screenwriting/directing career though “Platoon.”

He didn’t directly mention the recent elections or the current conflict in Ukraine on Thursday night, but insisted that the “strong compulsion” to use war not only as a driver of industry but as the first tool in the box for resolving foreign disputes, still fueled Washington policy. Despite all of the failures of the last 50 years, “it’s impossible to break that lock” that war has on the collective psyche, he said. Even “Platoon” which is a searing indictment of the what he calls the Three Lies of the military and war, has failed to turn the society against interventionism.

“No film is going to change people if you don’t want to be changed,” he said, charging that military recruitment had actually gone up after the film was released.

In recent years, Stone has courted controversy with his series of interviews with Vladimir Putin and his questioning of the Washington/Western narrative of that war. The only mention he made to that was that “I have been passionately driven and for that I’ve paid a price,” and criticized censorship (his 2016 documentary "Ukraine on Fire" had been initially banned on You Tube and then reinstated).

“Free speech is a right, not a privilege” he said, to applause from the room. Of the current political dynamic, he lamented that the “neocons are here from the last administration as well as this administration, they are not going away."

“We’ve made one mistake after another on foreign affairs, there is no reason why we cannot be partners with Russia and China. We don’t need a war.”

Unfortunately, the country’s love for was is “a religion,” he said. All one can do is keep resisting it. His entire life after Vietnam seems to have sprung from that adage. “Be a rebel, and that’s the best way to be.”

-Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, "Oliver Stone: World War III may be inevitable," Responsible Statecraft, Nov 16 2024

[i-bring-crack]

A–Aventio TGCF idea?? Wherein Civil God Veritas Ratio meets the infamous Ghost King Aventurine during his first mission cuz cuz like— The "live for me" paralels?!? The one who has all the luck partner as well?!? The villain who was actually not the Villain this whole time!?!? The loving humanity a little too much it causes their downfall !?!?!?

Rant AU in the tags proceed with caution

[autismmydearwatson]

I hate Chiss naming customs. Who was the genius who said "hey what if your family determined irrevocably how your name, THE CORNERSTONE OF YOUR IDENTITY, was formed, and the only way to change it was to go to another family and you cant be free of it unless you reach a certain rank in the military! And what if your social status was determined by whether you're adopted!" Shut the fuck up I am going to kill you in real life

[flagwars]

Vexillological Association Flag Wars: Round 4, Bracket 1

[rotzaprachim]

Y are u so specific about your hatred of the intersection of loss of fics with some intersection of a/b/o soulmates and loss of reproductive autonomy/baby fics and it’s like well well well do I have some specific shadow and bone related stories to tell you/

[evandore]

desperately trying to still figure out the name of the sport caroline plays cause everything i come up with sounds stupid until i look at real sports and its like. football...baseball....basketball....

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

Stephenie Meyer's sci-fi novel The Host is like. it's almost so much. the alien bodysnatchers at the center of the plot are like Animorph's yeerks if they got really into cottagecore. no, they don't want intergalactic war and domination! they want intergalactic peace and domination! they make every planet they visit a peaceful socialist utopia and like, okay, yes, they have to violently take over the bodies of a planet's native inhabitants to do it. yes, they have to suppress the unwilling minds of their host bodies. yes they are for all intents and purposes committing a genocide of their chosen planets' initial inhabitants and then puppeting their husks around playing at homogeneous, sanitized versions of the cultures they destroyed. the alien main character mentions that even episodes of the Brady Bunch were scrubbed because they were deemed too violent. and they call themselves souls, which is so loaded on so many levels. impossible not to read into the spiritual connotations, especially when written by an author coming from the mormon church which so highly values mission trips. just by sympathizing with humans who don't want to be possessed, by helping them hide out and stay free, our protagonist becomes a pariah, an outlaw from her own society. peace is valued above all else but not peace for the colonized, who are meat to be processed. it's better this way. they had so much potential but squandered it with foolish violence so now we have the right to overtake them and make them live correctly. isn't it beautiful now? isn't everything perfect? there's like almost so much happening in this story except Stephenie's a fucking mormon so she never draws any meaningful connections to anything and the happy ending is that the alien brain parasite protag is gifted the body of a beautiful coma patient that she can "ethically" puppet around, easy peasy problem solved. also there's a fucking love triangle.

[delxenofic]

war bunny has a "fans of watership down will like this" blurb like every animal fiction book has to pull in readers but here it feels justified to me

[fuckyeahisawthat]

Controversial opinion among Dune book fans maybe, but I loved the changes they made to Chani's character. Making her a fedaykin who is already an experienced fighter before Paul arrives was a brilliant choice. Dune Part Two is a war movie, and this puts her at the center of the action, side by side with Paul, and gives her a much more active role than she has in the book.

We got a hint of where things were going in the beginning of Dune Part One. The first thing we ever know about movie Chani is that she's a fighter. She serves as a voice for the Fremen, telling us the story of their struggle from her point of view. I wrote here about the difference this change makes compared to other adaptations of Dune, what a perspective shift it is to have the world of Arrakis introduced not by an outsider, describing it as a dangerous but valuable colonial prize, but by one of its native inhabitants, who tells us before all else that it's beautiful, her home that she's fighting to liberate. I am so, so glad that the second movie followed up on this characterization.

I never found Chani and Paul's love story in the book particularly convincing, because why would this woman, who already has a prominent and respected place in Fremen society, even give the time of day to her deposed would-be colonizer, let alone fall in love and have children with him? Without a compelling reason for Chani to love Paul, she ends up feeling like a prize to be won, and "indigenous culture personified as a woman to be wooed (or conquered) by the colonizing man" is a trope we've seen and don't need to repeat.

But as soon as you tell me it's a barricade romance I get it. Cool cool cool, I know exactly what this relationship is now and it makes sense. Movie Chani doesn't respect or even particularly like Paul when she first meets him, and she doesn't think he's the fulfillment of any prophecy. She comes to respect him, and eventually love him, through his actions. He's brave--sometimes recklessly so. He fights well. He's willing to stick his neck out on the front lines with the other Fremen fighters. He can (after a little help) hack surviving in the harsh desert environment. He's not too proud to learn from others. He seems to genuinely want to be her equal in a common political struggle. All these qualities make sense as things she values.

Fighting side by side as equals is just about the only way I can see movie Chani falling for Paul. And it fits perfectly with the film's pattern of reversals that Paul's capacity for violence would initially be one of the things Chani likes about him, only for her to be repelled later when she sees what he becomes.

And as for Paul, well, he's had people deferring to him his entire life. Someone who doesn't take any shit from him is probably refreshing. He seems to like people (Duncan, Gurney) who challenge him and engage in a little friendly teasing--and aren't afraid to go a few rounds in the sparring ring.

It's easy to speedrun a romance when you're spending all your time together in mortal danger fighting for a shared political cause. Especially if you then start winning in a war your people have been fighting for decades. Are you kidding me? That is the perfect environment for intense battle camaraderie to turn into romantic love, and lust.

It makes sense that this version of Chani never believes Paul is any kind of messiah. Of course a character like movie Chani wouldn't believe in or trust some outside savior to liberate them. She's been working to liberate her own people for years. The more Paul invokes the messianic myth, the more he starts sounding once again like someone who plans to rule over them, and the more uncomfortable Chani becomes. In this way she becomes a foil to Jessica, the two of them representing the choices Paul is pulled between. It's a great way of externalizing the political and philosophical debates that often happen within characters' heads in the book.

And of course this version of Chani would leave Paul at the end of the film. It's not just the personal, emotional betrayal--although that stings. What common cause does she have with someone who just declared himself emperor and is sending her own people off in a war of conquest against others? Given the important role she plays in Dune Messiah, I am super curious to see how they get her back into the story, but girl was so valid for being willing to just gtfo. Given that she has the last shot of the whole movie, I'm sure she'll be back somehow, and I can't wait to see what they do with her character in any future installments.

[wausaupilot]

History Speaks to cover internment of Japanese Americans during World War II

WAUSAU – The Marathon County Historical Society will present its next History Speaks program this week. “The Internment of Japanese Americans during World War II” will be held at 2 p.m. Aug. 12 at the Woodson History Center, 410 McIndoe St., Wausau. The program will be presented by Henry Kanemoto, sharing his experience in the Gila River internment camp. The presentation discusses the treatment…

[fadingtimetravelqueen]

Honoring the Heroes of D-Day: Preserving the Legacy of World War II Veterans

As we commemorate the 79th anniversary of the D-Day landings, it is essential to reflect upon the profound impact of this momentous event in world history(more)

[back-and-totheleft]

Director Oliver Stone leads lecture on impacts of Vietnam War 50 years later

During the Vietnam War, USS Midway’s below-deck hangar quartered iconic fighter jets like F-4 Phantoms and F-8 Crusaders. These days, the space is a showroom for the USS Midway Museum’s restored planes, helicopters, and flight simulators that help tell the story of the United States military’s proud tradition of aviation innovation.

There is also space carved out of the vast hangar for special events. Last Thursday, San Diego State University’s Center for War and Society and the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft hosted renowned American film director Oliver Stone to share a different story about our country's military history.

“Vietnam at 50: Documenting the Legacies of America’s Forever Wars,” the title of Thursday’s talk by Stone, examined how the Vietnam War, and other wars before and after, shaped foreign policy and American society, and set the tone for so-called “forever wars” the U.S. has found itself involved in since the end of Vietnam.

Academy Award-winning film director and screenwriter Oliver Stone leads the "Vietnam at 50: Documenting the Legacies of America’s Forever Wars" lecture aboard USS Midway on Nov. 14, 2024Open the image full screen. Academy Award-winning film director and screenwriter Oliver Stone leads the "Vietnam at 50: Documenting the Legacies of America’s Forever Wars" lecture aboard USS Midway on Nov. 14, 2024. (SDSU) Guided by questions from Gregory Daddis, director of the Center for War and Society and USS Midway Chair in Modern U.S. Military History, Stone began the talk with details of his early life, growing up a son to an Army Lieutenant Colonel who served on President Eisenhower’s staff in Paris, France and post-occupation Berlin, Germany during World War II, and how his father’s anti-communism stance influenced his own ideology.

“As the war ended and the U.S. became more conscious of the so-called Russian threat … He joined the band because I guess that’s one way to get ahead,” Stone said.

It wasn’t fear, so much, that pushed Stone to enlist in the Army during Vietnam. He talked about how he spent a year in South Vietnam as a teacher and left the country with more questions than answers.

“I didn’t feel like my education was complete. I was still confused about what was going on because I didn’t understand all of the politics … I went back because I didn’t feel that I knew enough. I didn’t want to be a fraud,” Stone recounted. “I felt like I had to go to this war to understand it. I had to go back. I had already seen a bit of it from the fringes, but I went right into the heart of it in ‘67.”

He also briefly discussed a period of several years following his return from war during which he struggled with, and eventually overcame, various mental health challenges, and how he settled on film school.

“You can get a college degree from watching movies? Why not?” Stone quipped.

Stone went on to direct a trilogy of Vietnam War-focused films that address the brutality and politics of the conflict, starting with “Platoon” in 1986. The film was based, in part, on Stone’s own experience on the frontlines, for which he was awarded a Bronze Star for valor. The film won four Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Director.

“Born on the Fourth of July” (1989) is based on the autobiography of Ron Kovic by the same title. Stone again won the Academy Award for Best Director.

The last film of the trio was “Heaven & Earth” (1993), based on the memoirs “When Heaven and Earth Changed Places” and “Child of War, Woman of Peace” by Vietnamese-American writer Le Ly Hayslip, who was in attendance Thursday on USS Midway.

“No film is going to change people if they don’t want to be changed. A lot of people saw that movie and signed up. A lot of them went to the Iraq War … You can’t say that [it’s anti-war]. You can just say, ‘Here it is,’” he said.

Throughout the lecture, Stone spoke about the nation’s military-industrial complex and how it evolved and influenced U.S. action in different conflicts spanning the 20th century, and the aftermath of those conflicts on foreign policy.

One of Daddis’ final questions for Stone was about legacies, and what the most important legacy of the Vietnam War was.

“Obviously nothing. Nobody paid attention and we keep going back to war. We’ve made one mistake after another in foreign affairs. We’re not a very smart country diplomatically. Had we been cooler, we could’ve gotten along with everybody in this world, with one or two exceptions. There’s no reason why we can’t be partners with Russia and with China, and we could have economic competition. We don’t need a war,” Stone said.

“We as a nation continue to wrestle with the legacies of our long and divisive war in Vietnam, even 50 years on,” Daddis said. “So to have one of America's foremost film directors share his thoughts on that war with our students and community is truly special. It's vital for us to consider how popular culture and film shape our conceptions of war and of the militarized foreign policies we undertake. And because Stone is both a veteran and a director, he brings a unique view to how Americans consume stories about wars and the soldiers who fought in them.”

Stone’s lecture was the fourth in the Center for War and Society’s ongoing J. Fred and Susan Oliver Speaker Series. The lectures are intended to foster informed dialogue around the impact of a militarized U.S. foreign policy on society. Student involvement is a key to the sponsorship. Last Thursday, nearly 25 SDSU students attended the lecture alongside scholars, guests, guests and military-affiliated organizations.

This year’s lecture event was co-sponsored by the Quincy Institute, the Washington, D.C. thinktank whose mission is to “promote ideas that move U.S. foreign policy away from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace.”

-Rafael Avitabile, "Director Oliver Stone leads lecture on impacts of Vietnam War 50 years later," San Diego State University, Nov 19 2024

[doyoulikethissong-poll]

M.I.A. - Paper Planes 2008

"Paper Planes" is a song by British hip hop artist M.I.A. It was released on 11 February 2008 as the third single from her second studio album, Kala (2007). It samples English rockband the Clash's 1982 song "Straight to Hell", leading to its members being credited as co-writers. A downtempo alternative hip hop, pop track combining African folk music elements, the song has a less dance-oriented sound compared to other songs on the album. Its lyrics, inspired by M.I.A.'s own problems obtaining a visa to work in the USA, satirise American perceptions of immigrants from war-torn countries, and said that the issue was probably "them thinking that I might to [sic] fly a plane into the Trade Center".

M.I.A. had wanted to work with American producer Timbaland for the album Kala, but her application for a long-term US work visa was rejected. This was allegedly due to her family's connection to the Tamil guerrillas, commonly known as the Tamil Tigers, a claim M.I.A. denied. Her visa problems were also attributed to her criticism of the Sri Lankan government's discrimination and alleged atrocities committed against the Tamils, with whom M.I.A. shares an ethnic and cultural heritage. She expressed this on her politicised debut album Arular. The unexpected success of "Paper Planes" paralleled M.I.A.'s condemnations of the Sri Lankan government's war crimes against the Tamils, generating accusations that she supported terrorism.

The song received widespread acclaim from contemporary critics, who complimented its musical direction and the subversive, unconventional subject matter. It won awards from the Canadian Independent Music Awards and the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), and earned a Grammy nomination for Record of the Year. The song has received praise in publications such as NME, Pitchfork and Rolling Stone, each naming it among either the best songs of the 2000s decade or of all time. The review aggregator Acclaimed Music reports it as the second-most acclaimed song of the 21st century.

"Paper Planes" was used in the theatrical trailer for the 2008 stoner comedy Pineapple Express, directed by David Gordon Green, which catapulted the song to mainstream success in the US. "Paper Planes" and the DFA remix appear on the soundtrack to Danny Boyle's drama Slumdog Millionaire, released in 2008. The video game Far Cry 3 (2012) begins with "Paper Planes" used in the opening cinematic sequence.

"Paper Planes" received a total of 68,9% yes votes!

[macgyverphotography]

The Martin B-16B-25-MA Marauder "Flak-Bait" is undergoing restoration at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center. The plane flew 200 missions, including in suppport of the D-Day landings at Normandy and the Battle of the Bulge. The forward section of the plane was displayed in the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall, but now the entire plane is in the process of being restored.

[srslylini]

When I read the text and it said "At the center is Piltover" I genuinely knew everything I had to know about what happened in season 2.

And then he goes and talks about Zaun and the way it's portrayed? What.

"A society of thieves, smugglers and makeshift svengalis"?

The way this immediately tells us all we need to know about his views in this kind of social conflict. Who is the reason Zaun has no other choice, Linke? Why can't they do anything but steal? Why can't they live like the rich people in Piltover, Linke?

It's almost like the people who are rich and privileged, looking down on those who have no other choice, is EXACTLY the problem????

I thought they understood that rich people making themselves feel better, for example by calling (poor) people savages, is not actually the right thing.

In season 1, by the way, they showed the council doing crimes themselves and STILL making themselves feel better than those they deem less. If you remember it, they showed Jayce who was starting to get hated because he stopped the others from doing illegal shit. If you remember, they showed the council corrupting each others votes and fucking doing crimes.

I thought, and now this is totally on me, they fully understood that the privileged people had more than double the amount of blood money than those they deem "bad". I thought they also understood that the privileged people just have all the water in the world to wash the blood off and continue to act as if nothing ever happened.

So that's on me.

"The people of Piltover need to decide: Take back control of its city's underground by violent force and risk a civil war, or let Zauns dangerous evolutionary advances go their way"

eye twitching

I'm not even going there because what the FUCK. Dangerous? Evolutionary? Advances?

But do you know what the writers themself say with this? That they agree with Caitlyn.

They agree with Caitlyn on all, that also means they agree that there is "good ones in Zaun I guess", this means the first 3 episodes weren't actually setting anything up and that also means

"Vi is one of the good ones".

[kimyoonmiauthor]

Slight note about the system of food.

'cause adding it to the large doc might crash my computer?

I've realized that though historical fiction minds this more when set in pre-industrial times, that often fantasy set in agricultural societies doesn't seem to do this, though it should.

So I'll give you an example...

Almost everything in Korean food is centered and bred for two things: Kimchi and soy sauce.

But what you don't realize in your industrialized state how freaking long it takes to make these things and how much planning is involved and how much you have to mind the seasons in order to make it correctly.

Kimchi:

Baekchu (or other vegetables) that's often harvested in fall.

The salt, which was traditionally sea salt was harvested in the spring and summer months.

Garlic is a spring to mid summer crop.

The sweet rice that goes into winter kimchi takes a ton of work to make and can take from Spring to fall.

The fish sauce that goes into Kimchi that helps preserve it for over a year, takes and ENTIRE YEAR to make. Yes, a year. You really, really have to plan on that. And what do you do if the fishing is poor for that year?

Spring onions are faster to grow, but you still have to time it for the fall kimchi making.

The fish are seasonal. For example, Yellow Corvina is taken in Korea in the spring. Shrimp in the summer (June), and anchovies in early spring to fall.

Your timing has to be impeccable and you need an entire year to plan this one dish.

Meanwhile, you, industrialized person, take for granted that you can get fish sauce any time you like and can pour it over kimchi.

In fantasy this could add flavor to your fantasy make up, if your character can only get this dish once a year. It can add political unrest (What do you mean the salt harvest was poor and we're left with the shitty metallic salt), because your characters in an agricultural society will be subject to weather changes, which you get when reading historical fiction and so on. Three seasons of poor harvest, daaaamnn... the people might overthrow their government. There might be new religions that pop up, there might be uprisings because the King and Queen are eating feasts every day while the peasants are eating things that are empty calories.

What I'm saying is that you can't be too entrenched into industrial mindset if you're not writing an industrial setting.

That orange is seasonal and only comes about in a connected system that has winter and a warmer climate.

Maybe there are key foods for your climate that are highly treasured or sought after. Mandarins once were. Cacao. Think a bit about those things and how it might interact with the larger world. When does your plant mature and when can it be harvested? is it different from different climates? There's wars that have been fought over food. (Tea, famously, at least a few times).

A staple crop failing is going to have devastating consequences.

And yet, often in fantasy, I often see people going, ya know what I can eat in the dead of winter, strawberries. Do we have greenhouses? No. Did we have freezers? No. But you know what my character is eating? A strawberry. Yeah, think about that. Strawberries don't preserve well. So plan out the timing of your dishes a bit (to the climate and subsistence system) and it can give a bit of background worldbuilding to your dishes and food.

I do have to say that the small mentions from Rings of Power on what's in season or not and why kinda made me feel like the world and the traveling was more "real" with the Harfoot. There's small references to fall v. spring crops.