thedrifter
06-21-07, 07:37 AM
New name opens old wounds on Iwo Jima
Thursday, June 21, 2007
BY MARK MUELLER AND WAYNE WOOLLEY
Star-Ledger Staff
For any Marine who set foot on its black, volcanic beaches, the Pacific island's very name conjures images of horror.
Iwo Jima.
Eight square miles of barren rock, it was the setting for one of World War II's most epic battles, a place where Japanese artillery rained down ceaselessly from the high ground and where Japanese soldiers cut down Americans from caves and crevices on the low ground.
Over five grueling weeks in February and March of 1945, some 6,800 Marines died. Another 19,000 were wounded. Of the 22,000 Japanese soldiers dug in, just 1,000 survived.
"It was a hell of a battle," said Pete McGrew, 84, a Lakewood, Ohio, resident who took shrapnel in the back 10 hours into the fight. "The name Iwo Jima means a hell of a lot to me."
Officially, however, Iwo Jima no longer exists. The Japanese government, acting on the concerns of the island's original inhabitants and their descendants, has restored Iwo Jima to its pre-war name, Iwo To.
The move, approved Monday, comes as a surprise to veterans of the conflict. To some, it's also something of an affront.
"I frankly don't like it," said retired Maj. Gen. Fred Haynes, 86, president of the Combat Veterans of Iwo Jima, a group that visits the island each year for a solemn reunion. "I hope it's not an attempt on their part to change history."
In 1945, Haynes was a 24-year-old captain on Iwo Jima. A group from his combat team raised the American flag on Mount Suribachi, the island's highest point, and were captured in a photo that has become perhaps the most famous image of World War II.
"It's their island now," said Haynes, now living in Manhattan and writing a book about the battle. "I suppose they can call it Timbuktu if they want to, but it's always going to be Iwo Jima to us."
That reaction was widespread among the dwindling number of Iwo Jima survivors in New Jersey and across the country.
"Change the name? Definitely not," said John Maziekien, 83, a Marlboro resident and Iwo Jima survivor who called the island's name part of the Marine Corps legacy. "We lost a lot of men on that island. Some guys might not care about the name change, but a lot of guys will care."
One of them is John Gunther, 81, a retired Newark police lieutenant living in Verona. Though the United States returned Iwo Jima to Japan in 1968, Gunther contends the Japanese shouldn't have the authority to rename it.
"We never should have given them back the island," Gunther said. "We lost too many guys there. Too costly."
Part of a remote island chain some 700 miles southeast of mainland Japan, Iwo Jima was so named by mistake, according to official accounts. Iwo Jima and Iwo To share the same symbol in Japanese, though they are pronounced differently.
When the Japanese military evacuated the 1,000 or so residents to prepare for the attack, a general dubbed the island Iwo Jima. Those displaced from the island, along with their descendants and allies, continued to refer to it as Iwo To.
A campaign to restore the name gained traction after the release of "Letters from Iwo Jima" and "Flags of Our Fathers," the Clint Eastwood films chronicling the fight. On Monday, the central government granted the former residents' request.
By September, new Japanese maps will bear the name Iwo To.
"I guess the name Iwo Jima sort of sticks in their throats a bit," said Walt Oelerich, 81, an Iwo Jima veteran from Farmingdale, N.Y. "They can change the name, but it is what it is."
Robert Thibodeaux, 82, was 20 when he went to Iwo Jima. He made it through the 36-day battle without a scratch, but he said he lost too many friends to count.
"It doesn't make much difference, I guess, what they call it," said Thibodeaux, of Niles, Ind. "There's a little part of that island that will always be America."
Ellie
Thursday, June 21, 2007
BY MARK MUELLER AND WAYNE WOOLLEY
Star-Ledger Staff
For any Marine who set foot on its black, volcanic beaches, the Pacific island's very name conjures images of horror.
Iwo Jima.
Eight square miles of barren rock, it was the setting for one of World War II's most epic battles, a place where Japanese artillery rained down ceaselessly from the high ground and where Japanese soldiers cut down Americans from caves and crevices on the low ground.
Over five grueling weeks in February and March of 1945, some 6,800 Marines died. Another 19,000 were wounded. Of the 22,000 Japanese soldiers dug in, just 1,000 survived.
"It was a hell of a battle," said Pete McGrew, 84, a Lakewood, Ohio, resident who took shrapnel in the back 10 hours into the fight. "The name Iwo Jima means a hell of a lot to me."
Officially, however, Iwo Jima no longer exists. The Japanese government, acting on the concerns of the island's original inhabitants and their descendants, has restored Iwo Jima to its pre-war name, Iwo To.
The move, approved Monday, comes as a surprise to veterans of the conflict. To some, it's also something of an affront.
"I frankly don't like it," said retired Maj. Gen. Fred Haynes, 86, president of the Combat Veterans of Iwo Jima, a group that visits the island each year for a solemn reunion. "I hope it's not an attempt on their part to change history."
In 1945, Haynes was a 24-year-old captain on Iwo Jima. A group from his combat team raised the American flag on Mount Suribachi, the island's highest point, and were captured in a photo that has become perhaps the most famous image of World War II.
"It's their island now," said Haynes, now living in Manhattan and writing a book about the battle. "I suppose they can call it Timbuktu if they want to, but it's always going to be Iwo Jima to us."
That reaction was widespread among the dwindling number of Iwo Jima survivors in New Jersey and across the country.
"Change the name? Definitely not," said John Maziekien, 83, a Marlboro resident and Iwo Jima survivor who called the island's name part of the Marine Corps legacy. "We lost a lot of men on that island. Some guys might not care about the name change, but a lot of guys will care."
One of them is John Gunther, 81, a retired Newark police lieutenant living in Verona. Though the United States returned Iwo Jima to Japan in 1968, Gunther contends the Japanese shouldn't have the authority to rename it.
"We never should have given them back the island," Gunther said. "We lost too many guys there. Too costly."
Part of a remote island chain some 700 miles southeast of mainland Japan, Iwo Jima was so named by mistake, according to official accounts. Iwo Jima and Iwo To share the same symbol in Japanese, though they are pronounced differently.
When the Japanese military evacuated the 1,000 or so residents to prepare for the attack, a general dubbed the island Iwo Jima. Those displaced from the island, along with their descendants and allies, continued to refer to it as Iwo To.
A campaign to restore the name gained traction after the release of "Letters from Iwo Jima" and "Flags of Our Fathers," the Clint Eastwood films chronicling the fight. On Monday, the central government granted the former residents' request.
By September, new Japanese maps will bear the name Iwo To.
"I guess the name Iwo Jima sort of sticks in their throats a bit," said Walt Oelerich, 81, an Iwo Jima veteran from Farmingdale, N.Y. "They can change the name, but it is what it is."
Robert Thibodeaux, 82, was 20 when he went to Iwo Jima. He made it through the 36-day battle without a scratch, but he said he lost too many friends to count.
"It doesn't make much difference, I guess, what they call it," said Thibodeaux, of Niles, Ind. "There's a little part of that island that will always be America."
Ellie