The War, a documentary by acclaimed filmmaker Ken Burns, begins tonight on PBS. The film chronicles the experiences of World War II veterans from four “quintessentially American” towns: Luverne, Minnesota; Waterbury, Connecticut; Mobile, Alabama; and California state capital Sacramento.
** EVENING UPDATE: SCHWARZENEGGER UNITED NATIONS ADDRESS MONDAY MORNING AT 6 AM PACIFIC TIME IN LIVE WEBCAST. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger delivers his address to the United Nations special session on climate change — first revealed on NWN early this summer and discussed in an item earlier today — in a live webcast from New York early tomorrow morning here in the Pacific time zone.
I’m told that it may begin at 6 AM Pacific time, which is 9 AM Eastern time, but may also be closer to 6:30 AM.
** THE WAR. No, not the Iraq War, World War II. The 15-hour documentary by award-winning filmmaker Ken Burns starts tonight on PBS stations around the country.
There’s been a fair amount on World War II over the past decade, notably the landmarks Saving Private Ryan as a feature film and Band of Brothers as an HBO miniseries. But there is so much that is little-known in this less than historically minded society. And with veterans dying off now at the rate of roughly a thousand per day, it’s now or never for this sort of filmmaking, which focuses on the experiences of veterans from what are described as four “quintessentially American” cities: Luverne, Minnesota. Waterbury, Connecticut. Mobile, Alabama. And Sacramento, California. The reviewers who’ve seen it say it’s quite special.
It continues through Wednesday, then picks up again next Sunday through its conclusion the following Tuesday. Of course, I haven’t seen it. But one limitation that suggests itself through its focus on the ground-level experience of war is that it may miss much of the overall. There is always an overall strategic conception, and decisions taken when adversity emerges. In some cases, the conception, and the adjustments to adversity, result in success. In others, as we have seen, they do not.
** A TYPICALLY SLOW WEEKEND, OR AT LEAST, A TYPICALLY FAMILIAR WEEKEND, IN POLITICS. Despite their current stances, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney had problems with their past support for gun control in the aftermath of their appearances before the National Rifle Association. Shocking.
There’s a story that a health care reform deal is very close in California. Except for the differences on whether all Californians need to get health insurance, that is. Oh, and how to pay for it. Which have the differences between Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic legislative leaders right along.
And there’s a column by a career-long critic of former Governor-turned-Attorney General Jerry Brown, who writes for the Sacramento Bee after starting with the long defunct right-wing Sacramento Union, saying he’s a cynical opportunist for focusing on the climate change issue. Ah, actually, Brown has been on the issue for many, many years. Before any other politician in California, as it happens, as anyone who knows the state’s history should know.
And so on.
Meanwhile, the two California college football teams of high national ranking both won big yesterday. USC, the number one team in the country, beat Washington State in Los Angeles, 47-14, and Cal beat Arizona in Berkeley, 45-27. USC, of course, being LA’s own University of Southern California, and Cal being the University of California at Berkeley.
As expected. Except for the rain during the USC game. It’s the first time ever that it rained for a USC home game in September.
** SCHWARZENEGGER AT THE U.N. As first reported on NWN early this summer, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will address a special meeting of the United Nations tomorrow in New York. The topic? Climate change, of course. It kicks off a big week for the issue, with the UN meeting early in the week, to help set the table for a global summit later this year in Bali. And a meeting hosted later in the week by President George W. Bush, of selected emitters of greenhouse gases.
Also on tap is the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative, hosted in New York by the former president, coinciding with the UN General Assembly. Climate change will figure prominently there, as well.
Pressured by a host of factors, including Schwarzenegger, Bush’s administration at last acknowledges that the greenhouse effect is real and that it is causing climate change. They just want to take a voluntary approach toward dealing with it. Don’t expect that to stand up too well this week.
Your posts are welcome in the Forum.
Read 
| Comments (0) |
Oh, a video. A very LOOONG video.
Oh, a video. A very LOOONG video.
Indeed it is.
Are reporters and columnists under presssure to recycle stories?
The documentary sounds very interesting according to the video.
I have seen both the preview and have a copy of the companion book for The War, if it comes even close to either it will be very special.
The 49ers were pretty good. For three quarters.
The Raiders finally won a game.
I’m hopeful about it, although 15 hours is a huge chunk of my time. I suspect it won’t all work out for me.
Actually, that’s more than a suspicion.
>Sacramento Solon :
I have seen both the preview and have a copy of the companion book for The War, if it comes even close to either it will be very special.
Sep 23, 2007 03:47 PM
Some reiteration is inevitable.
>Capitol Boy :
Are reporters and columnists under presssure to recycle stories?
Sep 23, 2007 02:16 PM
Bill,
Understand how that would be a problem for you. I don’t have anything close to your schedule and I’ve just ordered the DVD so time won’t be a problem.
Things used to be more leisurely. Remember the miniseries?
I think the last big miniseries was Lonesome Dove. Back in 1989.
I do remember the miniseries…and also recall Lonesome Dove.
I do remember the miniseries…and also recall Lonesome Dove.
Not to change the subject, or anything, but here in Washington state there is considerable concern about the proposed California initiative to change the way electoral votes are won, substituting allocation by congressional district victories rather than the current winner-take-all system.
What is the feeling about the initiative getting enough signatures, about its chances if it does go to a vote, and what can be expected if there is a legal challenge to its constitutionality?
Not to change the subject, or anything, but here in Washington state there is considerable concern about the proposed California initiative to change the way electoral votes are won, substituting allocation by congressional district victories rather than the current winner-take-all system.
What is the feeling about the initiative getting enough signatures, about its chances if it does go to a vote, and what can be expected if there is a legal challenge to its constitutionality?
Sorry for the double post–I was trapped by Bill’s new security system
Which new security system is that?
… That initiative, by the way, one way or another, is a loser. I’ve already written about its unpromising position in the polls.
Bill Bradley :
Which new security system is that?
When I clicked “post,” I got a message saying you had activated a security feature, there would be a delay to control abusive posters, and that I should try to post again after a short time. Which I did, resulting in the double post.
That’s actually an original feature.
It is activated when you … double post.
Don’t keep clicking if it doesn’t post immediately.
Bill Bradley :
That’s actually an original feature.
It is activated when you … double post.
Don’t keep clicking if it doesn’t post immediately.
I don’t think I did, but it may have been the Mac double-click habit kicking in.
One wonders what sort of dishonest journalist claims that Mr. Brown is new to the ecology cause.
One wonders what sort of dishonest journalist claims that Mr. Brown is new to the ecology cause.
I’d be shocked if “War” weren’t well made on its own terms–K. Burns having established himself as the leading producer of this sort of thing– but I thought the NYT reviewer had an interesting critique. Namely, that this is among the worst possible moments for a global conflict to be portrayed as primarily an American affair. The last thing we need to do at this critical moment in history is to reinforce American insularity. America’s role in WW2 was secondary (at least in the primary European theatre) whereas we benefitted most from the war. Not to belittle the 500,000+ Yank deaths or the heroic contributions of many others (including two recently deceased uncles of mine) but compared to the sufferings of the French, Russians, Brits (or even the average German or Japanese citizen) WW2 was hardly a traumatic event for most Americans.
I’d be shocked if “War” weren’t well made on its own terms–K. Burns having established himself as the leading producer of this sort of thing– but I thought the NYT reviewer had an interesting critique. Namely, that this is among the worst possible moments for a global conflict to be portrayed as primarily an American affair. The last thing we need to do at this critical moment in history is to reinforce American insularity. America’s role in WW2 was secondary (at least in the primary European theatre) whereas we benefitted most from the war. Not to belittle the 500,000+ Yank deaths or the heroic contributions of many others (including two recently deceased uncles of mine) but compared to the sufferings of the French, Russians, Brits (or even the average German or Japanese citizen) WW2 was hardly a traumatic event for most Americans.
Part I on The War was excellent.
Good Christ!
You mean that as a joke, right?
>America’s role in WW2 was secondary (at least in the primary European theatre) whereas we benefitted most from the war.
I saw the last half of it and it looked quite good.
I’ve studied the war extensively but it had some good material in it that I wasn’t overly exposed to.
I hadn’t realized that the song “White Christmas” came out in the depths of the war in 1942. No wonder it became such a standard.
My family always loved it.
My relatives who fought in the war were all in the Pacific. And they all bitched for years about 80% of the resources going to the effort in Europe.
>Sacramento Solon :
Part I on The War was excellent.
Sep 23, 2007 10:26 PM
I do that sometimes, too.
>larry :
Bill Bradley :
That’s actually an original feature.
It is activated when you … double post.
Don’t keep clicking if it doesn’t post immediately.
I don’t think I did, but it may have been the Mac double-click habit kicking in.
Sep 23, 2007 09:25 PM
I thought Russia won the war.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is all time movie star for Russia. Many men want to be him. Many women want him. He does not say on climate what President think to say.
That’s the old Soviet propaganda line.
>Len :
I thought Russia won the war.
Sep 24, 2007 12:15 AM
You mean that as a joke, right?
——
Well, no.
Of course, the USA ramped up industrial and military production in an unprecedented manner, provided vital military support for Britain while it was under siege, sent millions of people into battle, etc.
But compared to the “roles” of France, Britain and Russia (occupation, bombardment leading to the wholesale destruction of cities, deaths of tens of millions of soldiers and civilians, dealing the critical blow to Hitler) America’s own role was secondary, at least when viewed from a broad perspective. We benefitted from our isolation and late entry and cleaned up afterwards. I’m belittling neither the contributions of neither brave American soldiers nor those of helpful civilians, only noting the cataclysmic nature of the war for other societies.
With all due respect, Chris, you have just provided an invaluable example of the PC mentality in action.
And its bankruptcy as a mode of political and historical analysis.
It is quite true that the US suffered less than the other countries.
It is also quite irrelevant to the question at hand.
Absent the intervention of the US, Germany wins in Europe.
Absent the intervention of the US, Japan wins in the Pacific.
That’s the old Soviet propaganda line.
>Len :
I thought Russia won the war.
Wait a second! The USA mopped up in the West where Germany was soft, and the USA certainly won the PEACE, but the Soviets did more to weaken Hitler than the USA, Brits and French combined.
That’s not propaganda, that’s a look at the numbers involved(soldiers, planes, tanks involved; casualties, etc).
And don’t go all anti-Commie on me. I have a relative who was disappeared by Stalin and don’t need any lectures on him.
That’s the old Soviet propaganda line.
>Len :
I thought Russia won the war.
Wait a second! The USA mopped up in the West where Germany was soft, and the USA certainly won the PEACE, but the Soviets did more to weaken Hitler than the USA, Brits and French combined.
That’s not propaganda, that’s a look at the numbers involved(soldiers, planes, tanks involved; casualties, etc).
And don’t go all anti-Commie on me. I have a relative who was disappeared by Stalin and don’t need any lectures on him.
Chris, you are just all wrong on this.
Without the US, the USSR would have lost to the Nazis.
Roosevelt recast the butcher Stalin as “Uncle Joe” to explain why so much aid was going to the Soviet Union.
The Soviets had nowhere near the industrial base needed to defeat the Nazis. Who, as a dictatorship, outclassed them otherwise in every respect.
And while the Soviets were valiant — which is the positive spin on their sending millions into a meat-grinder against the Nazis — they were not moving anywhere until D-Day.
“Absent the intervention of the US, Germany wins in Europe.”
Of course, victory has a thousand fathers. Doesn’t the same thing doesn’t hold true for the Soviets?? That sounds like any number of pissant groups claiming that their GOTV efforts “won” the narrow election.
Had Hitler not stupidly invaded Russia and instead focused on holding the West, it’s not at all clear that the Allies would have prevailed when they did. Just like Napoleon; absent the invasion of Russia, would there have been a Waterloo?
Now you are being ridiculous.
History unfolded as it did.
Let’s leave the discredited revisionism to the discredited revisionists.
Incidentally, Germany was ALWAYS going to invade Russia.
That is what Western European dictatorships do that seek continental hegemony, facing — as they usually do — what looks like a relatively weak and backward East Euro giant.
“Without the US, the USSR would have lost to the Nazis.”
It’s not entirely clear that the USA et al would have beaten Germany anytime soon without the incredible attrition of German war-making ability that resulted from the Eastern invasion. Or, if one doesn’t buy that, we can at least categorically state that the remarkable and unprecedented Soviet sacrifices (which helped hasten a severe worsening of cohesion within German Command) greatly reduced the challenges the Allies would face at Normandy and afterwards. That’s not revisionistic, much less ridiculous, rather it’s just giving credit where credit is due.
True. And you may have gathered that I have a great appreciation for Russia, at least for an American. For a variety of reasons.
But that’s not what you were saying initially …
My beautiful wife of eleven years is Ukrainian, so my appreciation (if not actual knowledge) of that part of the world may even exceed yours …Peace
Incidentally, NWN passed 40,000 comments sometime in the last week.