[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: VE Day

[Kathryn]

Geoff:
I think before you get too hot under the collar, we need to take on
board the fact that the perception of VE Day was very different to
people in Europe compared to those in the US.

<snip>
 
So, by the time of VE Day, 8th May 1945, the only European country
able to send troops to fight in the Far East was Great Britain.
Therefore, for those who lived in mainland Europe, VE day *was* the
end of the war as far as they were concerned. They were finally free
but had to set to work to rebuild their countries. There was so much
to do that the war in the Pacific as probably not uppermost in their
thoughts. So they celebrated the end of the war for them.

K

First off I get the impression you think I'm coming at this from a
non-European perspective (forgive me if I'm reading that wrong) but as I'm
British and live in Britain I think that's highly unlikely. I was asking the
question to the Americans because i already know what the coverage was like
here in the UK and also because the Americans were heavily involved in the
Far East *like the UK* was (the Australians etc were as well I know but i
actually thought they wouldn't be making as much of a deal about VE Day,
obviously I was wrong). I wasn't talking about the celebrations at the time
because thye were perfectly understandable and I wasn't complaining that we
were making a big deal out of VE Day, but more that it was being referred to
as 'the end of the war' which it wasn't. There were a lot of British (and
other nationalities) in prison camps in the Far East and a lot of UK troops
fighting over there (and Merchant Navy convoys risking their lives too) and
while I think the celebrations were perfectly justified (and actually far
too low key in this country considering Tony Blair apparently had better
things to do - thus making it impossible for the Queen to attend either) it
was the way the events were being explained/interpreted that irritated me.
Surveys often show that students/school children don't know much about World
War II anyway (a recent survey showed that a large number of respondants
thought Churchill was an insurance salesman) and I think the media has a
responsibility to make sure that they get their facts right.

And while I'm complaining - I don't get the mindset that decided on a date
in July for the celebrations. We have VE Day in May and VJ Day in August so
we'll pick a date in the middle which isn't an anniversary of everything and
call it a compromise?! I'm not ranting on the subject like I was about the
above thing I'm just - confsed and dumbfounded. My mind obviously doesn't
work the same way as the people who decided that because it makes no sense
to me at all. If you want to celebrate the anniversary of the end of the war
then why don't we use a really radical idea and hold the celebrations on (or
around, a weekday wouldn't be very practical) the actual anniversary than
just picking an arbitrary date?

K

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]