 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
The embargo on Japan was a response to their entirely unjustified war of aggression in China, while Lend-Lease was to help defend Britain against equally unjustified German aggression.
|
GT, It appears that you and I agree that we had all but declared war on the Axis prior to Pearl Harbor. Even though history records that Japan sneak-attacked, and Germany declared war, we, not they, were the aggressors. We deliberately intervened on the side of the UK and China.
But, to my point. Why did we do it? SD says it was because of our self-interest? I asked, naturally, what interest?
Why did we aggressively intervene - other than to "save democracy?"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
Damn, this thread exploded...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
or when you post truth and the guilty try to change the subject...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
|
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin
Japan and Germany were two major powers both with major designs on expansion, and thus obvious enemies.
Sitting around doing nothing was certainly not going to help its interests in the future.
If the US was so interested in saving democracy, why did it do nothing to overthrow countless other despotic regimes, both before and after the war? And why did it assist in overthrowing democratically elected governments, simply because they were not America friendly? |
SD, Other than the names of the leaders, what you attribute to Japan and Germany in 1939 could be also said of England in the 1600-1900 timeframe: a major power set on expansion.
Japan and Germany both made the argument in the last century that they too had a right to an Empire to rival that of England's, and to some extent, WWII was about England's attempt to resist both German (Poland was an English client-state) and Japanese expansion (Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai). At the outbreak of WWII, England was the largest empire on Earth. The threat the Germans posed was not to America, but to England. Your argument views the world with a false assumption - that America had the empire under threat. It was England's empire that was threatened, not an American empire.
I still do not understand why we had any interest in intervening in the Sino-Japanese conflict. Nor do I understand what American interests were involved in Europe. It appears we intervened in the East to help China and in the West to help England. But, where were our interests? Why the f*ck did we intervene? Did Churchill simply employ his American ancestry to influence Roosevelt? Did the anti-Nazi Jack Kenndy change the course of history with his Harvard thesis?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
Poland was an English client-state |
Well, actually it was more of a German client state in many ways, until Germany foolishly started threatening it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Frogger
Yup. I especially loved the bit where you said:
quote:
If people here would get off the internet and listen to the radio they might know stuff. The following quote should end any debate about the character of America.
***
President Bush on Saturday closed out the final hours of his 32-day escape from Washington by designating September as a month of service to honor victims of Sept. 11.
"That spirit of courage and selflessness has shown the world why our nation is the greatest force for good in history," Bush said from his Texas ranch in his weekly radio address |
I was practically rolling on the ground laughing. I've heard of your reputation as a whiny ***** who announced he was "leaving forever" due to excessive moderation and then didn't, but I haven't seen you post enough to decide whether you've an astute sense of satire or simply lack the ability to detect it at all... |
I can assure you I am not astute.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
SD, Other than the names of the leaders, what you attribute to Japan and Germany in 1939 could be also said of England in the 1600-1900 timeframe: a major power set on expansion.
Japan and Germany both made the argument in the last century that they too had a right to an Empire to rival that of England's, and to some extent, WWII was about England's attempt to resist both German (Poland was an English client-state) and Japanese expansion (Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai). At the outbreak of WWII, England was the largest empire on Earth. The threat the Germans posed was not to America, but to England. Your argument views the world with a false assumption - that America had the empire under threat. It was England's empire that was threatened, not an American empire.
I still do not understand why we had any interest in intervening in the Sino-Japanese conflict. Nor do I understand what American interests were involved in Europe. It appears we intervened in the East to help China and in the West to help England. But, where were our interests? Why the f*ck did we intervene? Did Churchill simply employ his American ancestry to influence Roosevelt? Did the anti-Nazi Jack Kenndy change the course of history with his Harvard thesis? |
Germany and Japan were led by evil regimes. Its that simple. Italy was too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
The Japanese military kidnapped and recruited thousands of women, many from Korea, and forced them to be prostitutes for the army. Most of the women were expected to service twenty to thirty men per day.
The Nanjing massacre. Killing competitions that were done to boost morale. Beheading of children. Live burials. Japanese scientists tested gas gangrene and other microbes on Chinese prisoners.
Eight American POWs were experimented on by Japanese doctors. They removed part of one's lung, another's liver, tested cures of epilepsy on a third. All died.
I can't even begin to get into the Nazi's etermination policys.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
|
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
Ned, don't make stupid points. You're only making jimmytrick look good. |
Sava, If the argument is that Germany, Japan and Italy were an "Axis of Evil," and this legitimized our intervention, then why was it OK then and not OK now?
I merely want to illustrate, by forcing the point, that our intervention was ideological, pure and simple. These Axis folks were evil in the late 1930's, just as are the current axis of evil.
Be consistent America haters.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
KrazyHorse
|
 |
Macedonia
May 2001
time: 00:22
|
|
Umm...the only "America sucks" threads I see come from 14 year-old American whiners. Most of the stuff posted "attacking" the US is far more specific.
I wouldn't have minded if this had been a thread about why the American constitution is a great document, or why the American capitalist system will save the world, or about how the US helped...I don't know, Country X when it was starving.
Istead, we see stuff about the US being the "greatest force for good in history". That's not arrogant, much?
There seems to be this constant feeling among the bigger Ami patriots here that any specific attack against something the US has done = part of a well-planned plot to destabilize the US, and the only way to counter it is: "USA! USA! USA!". There's no plot. If we were that organised we'd be out fomenting actual revolt, not posting **** here. In general, people post when they're pissed off about something specific, not when it's "bash the US time". There are those, as I've said, who do have an inherent, irrational dislike for the US. At least they try to cover up their motives and post subjects it's possible to discuss in some meaningful way (remember Comrade Tribbie? Even he managed to do this for the most part) instead of actually starting "America Suxorz! I'm tired of all you Americans saying good things about the US"...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
|
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
Frogger, It may come as a surprise to you, but most Americans are proud of their country and really do believe it is a force for good in the world. True, we make mistakes. Vietnam was a beauty. However, this country truly believes it can make a difference - for the better.
Even so, there remains a strong isolationist tendency in the US. Surprisingly, most isolationists are Republicans.
Whether we are the best country that ever existed, that is a separate debate. We are still young and growing. History will judge us.
But as I said, most Americans are proud of their country.
We however are concerned that many other countries do not share the same rosy view of America. You may not think that we actually listen to the criticism, but we do. Sometimes it makes us mad. But at other times, we find some merit in negative views, particularly if they are digested and analyzed for us by wise old heads like Kissinger or Powell. Even Bill Clinton is someone we listen to on this topic.
So, I agree. If there is something specific that we have done that is annoying, stupid or just plain wrong, you can be sure that someone here will start a thread. The debate is always interesting.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-09-2002 13:02
yeah it did... it exploded like ***_____ after looking at naked Kylie Minogue pics...
I fear the wrath of Ming.... I might be able to PM you some links later...
|