Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 117

Thread: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

  1. #91
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    You government apologists need to understand that the burden of proof is always on the buyer, not the seller. Government is not a natural institution, its existence is supposedly based on certain claims that it has the responsibility to justify. Failure to provide accountability is a breach of this responsibility.

    I'm not here trying to dig up FDR's corpse and put him on trial for crimes against humanity; I am here expressing skepticism of government as an institution, in all its functions, including wars, particularly the so-called "good wars". And my debunking of the claim that the U.S. government had some sort of a moral imperative for its actions in the Pacific theater before and during WW2 have been sufficient.
    You have presented a position, here, therefore it is YOU who has the burden of proof to prove the position. So far, you have presented no substantiation.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    11-01-09 @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    829

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    An oil embargo is not an act of war, it is the right of any sovereign nation to trade with whomever they like.
    Nations don't have rights, only individuals do.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    [...]Then luckily for us FDR was an elected representative within a Constitutional democratic-republic.
    And Hirohito was supposedly descended from the sun goddess Amaterasu. Your "democracy" religion isn't any more rational than his "mandate of heaven".


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Oh and that might be the most ridiculous answer to an honest question that I've ever heard.
    That would mean you don't read much.


    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    You have presented a position, here, therefore it is YOU who has the burden of proof to prove the position. So far, you have presented no substantiation.
    I've had this sudden image in my head of Captain Courtesy owning a slave plantation and telling his slaves: "What do you mean you want to be free? We always had slavery 'round there parts! You're challenging the statue quo here, the burden of proof is on you! Aw, sorry, I'm not convinced - back to work - whip, whip, whip!"

    The burden of proof is not attributed based on mere chronology, but also on the violation of the natural state. Governments exist through a violation of individuals' natural rights, therefore the burden of proof is always on them.
    Last edited by Alex Libman; 06-13-09 at 07:32 PM.

  3. #93
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    Nations don't have rights, only individuals do.
    lol have you ever heard of sovereignty? The states within our nations even have rights and a limited form of sovereignty they used to have a lot.



    And Hirohito was supposedly descended from the sun goddess Amaterasu. Your "democracy" religion isn't any more rational than his "mandate of heaven".
    Um no people are real, gods are fake. How can you say an unelected king who calls himself a god is better than a citizen voted to represent their fellow citizens under a Constitution with a Bill of Rights? Do you even know what Shintoism is? It's disturbing I'll tell you that.

  4. #94
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    I've had this sudden image in my head of Captain Courtesy owning a slave plantation and telling his slaves: "What do you mean you want to be free? We always had slavery 'round there parts! You're challenging the statue quo here, the burden of proof is on you! Aw, sorry, I'm not convinced - back to work - whip, whip, whip!"
    And I have this image of Alex Libman writing a book and when asked to substantiate it, he says, "you challenged me?!! I don't need to substantiate, you do." Your position, you provide the evidence. You cant, then all you have is your opinion.

    The burden of proof is not attributed based on mere chronology, but also on the violation of the natural state. Governments exist through a violation of individuals' natural rights, therefore the burden of proof is always on them.
    You are not a government. You want to prove your position, you need to substantiate it. You have not, and all you have done is present your personal belief system as substantiation. It is not.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  5. #95
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    I would expect nothing less from an American or any other Western World head of state.

    I am waiting for the extremist wing of the Whacko Tacko right to accuse President Obama of apologizing for the holocaust. Ater they have accused him ( falsely of course ) of apologizing for evrything else which he did not.
    It didn't take long for this thread to spiral into Partisan Hackery did it?
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  6. #96
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    11-01-09 @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    829

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    lol have you ever heard of sovereignty? The states within our nations even have rights and a limited form of sovereignty they used to have a lot.
    And I've heard of slavery too, but that doesn't make it right.

    All governments exist through violence - that is the defining characteristic of what is and isn't government. Take that away and what you have is a church, a charity, a club, a homeowners' association, a corporation, a private defense agency, an arbitration authority, an online forum, etc, etc, etc. Those entities may be called sovereign through the explicit and direct consent of the sovereign individuals who establish them, but governments exist without this consent.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Um no people are real, gods are fake.
    People are real individually, but when addressed as an abstraction (i.e. "we the people") it becomes a mystical construct.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    How can you say an unelected king who calls himself a god is better than a citizen voted to represent their fellow citizens under a Constitution with a Bill of Rights?
    I didn't say that an unelected government is better than an elected one (though it can be), I've said that both are irrational and based on violence.

    Democracy is a useful tool that governments use to give the public an illusion of control, while the actual impact of the electorate is no bigger than the impact of public opinion on any successful monarchy. Governments always influence most people far more than those people can ever influence their governments.

    I didn't sign the Constitution / the Bill of Rights. (But unlike most Americans I've at least read them, and I have a good understanding of the intent of its authors, which has since been hijacked.)


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Do you even know what Shintoism is? It's disturbing I'll tell you that.
    Why, does it have a loophole as big as "interstate commerce"?


    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    And I have this image of Alex Libman writing a book and when asked to substantiate it, he says, "you challenged me?!! I don't need to substantiate, you do." Your position, you provide the evidence. You cant, then all you have is your opinion.
    Speaking in the context of that "image" - I'm not forcing you to read / follow my book, and I am here on this forum substantiating it. You are free to disagree.

    The government, on the other hand, is forcing me to follow its unnatural laws and give up half the fruits of my labor for its benefit. There is no burden of proof on anyone making any claim (i.e. freedom of speech), but there is a burden of proof on the aggressor.


    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    You are not a government. You want to prove your position, you need to substantiate it. You have not, and all you have done is present your personal belief system as substantiation. It is not.
    I am not a government? I can govern my affairs just fine.
    Last edited by Alex Libman; 06-13-09 at 08:04 PM.

  7. #97
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    Speaking in the context of that "image" - I'm not forcing you to read / follow my book, and I am here on this forum substantiating it. You are free to disagree.
    As I have said, all you are offering is opinions, not facts. You want to have your beliefs, that's fine, but if you want to present them as facts, you'd better substantiate them.

    And no one is forcing you to post your book. If you do not want criticism, don't post it.

    The government, on the other hand, is forcing me to follow its unnatural laws and give up half the fruits of my labor for its benefit. There is no burden of proof on anyone making any claim (i.e. freedom of speech), but there is a burden of proof on the aggressor.
    The government is not forcing you to do anything. Refuse. Just like everything in life, you have choices. Just remember, all choices have consequences...some you may like and some you may not. You are not being forced in any way. You do what you do to avoid consequences.

    The burden of proof is on you to substantiate your position. Using semantics to get out of it doesn't fly.

    I am not a government? I can govern my affairs just fine.
    If that's the case then why are you complaining?
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  8. #98
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex Libman View Post
    Let me remind the reader upfront that I am not here to defend the Axis Powers, but merely to debunk the black-and-white vision of history that the victorious governments are promoting. All governments are evil to some degree.
    You don't have to link to the Axis everyone knows what they are. And don't fool yourself that's exactly what you are doing you are saying that we provoked Japan which implies that it was our fault not theirs.



    Yeah, but all the cool kids were doing it, including the United States. It doesn't justify the embargo and all the other provocations (see above).
    The Asia Pacific is mostly democratic today, by the time of the embargo imperialism had given way to Wilsonianism through the creation of the League of Nation and a strong anti-colony sentiment which was growing not only in the colonies but within the empires and the U.S. republic as well. Americans hated going to war with/for Colonial Imperialists which is what kept us out of both WW1 and WW2 for so long, historically we much prefer going to war against them and let's face it who was worse at the time the British and French Empires or the Japanese and Germans? Even the Chinese now Taiwanese nationalists were far better than the Japanese imperialists.


    The claim that East Asia has done better under American influence rather than Japanese is ridiculous -
    Tell that to a Korean or a Phillipino, we were defending ourselves, Germany and Japan were both expanding quickly.

    communism has killed countless millions of people in that region since WW2!
    And we fought them too and for the most part kicked ass and took names. Do you know what the Japanese were doing to the people they attacked? It is Japan's fault not that of the U.S. that Communism took over. The sheer brutality of the Japanese drove many Chinese towards the Communists and away from the nationalists like Shang Kai Shek who would go on to form Taiwan a U.S. backed ally and a free, prosperous, but unrecognized government in exile.

    Decades were wasted on destructive economic policies, and that has had a negative effect on the quality of life and life expectancy of billions more! Japan's more "hands-on" imperialism would have prevented that.
    lol no it wouldn't have, the Soviets and the Chinese would have eventually won anyways at the expense of millions of more lives. We were isolationist at the time, we used soft power to try and influence them to do the right thing and withdrawal and instead they attacked us. It was entirely the fault of the Japanese.

    The transition of East Asian countries to "liberal democracy" is an on-going process. It hasn't occurred after their "liberation" by the United States, but if/when their economic and cultural system have reached a point where it would be beneficial. That hasn't happened yet for the vast majority of the people in that region. Even Singapore, one of the freest economies in the world, remains very closed politically. No matter whether Japan on the United States is the regional hegemon, all statist political systems eventually lead to the same pragmatic outcome.
    No they do not. Tyrannies can last a long long time and there has never been two more tyrannical regimes than the Fascists. They did away with even a farce of democracy and told people that there only reason for living was to serve the state. The only reason why there are more democratic countries today than ever before in history is because of what the United States has done. Whenever we occupy a country we install a democracy.



    "Liberal democracy" is just another means of social control that has proven itself to be most efficient when ruling sophisticated post-industrialized societies - plebs are allowed to keep a fraction of the fruits of their labor and are brainwashed to think they are free, which produces a greater total profit for the ruling class than a shorter leash would allow. It's not a moral positive in of itself.
    Liberal democracy is the only civilized system of governance, if all have equal rights then there is no glass ceiling to this so called "ruling class". What are you some sort of Communist? Furthermore; even places like Israel and Turkey are to most extents and purposes liberal democracies. Even sectarian states can be liberal democracies like Lebanon and Iraq. It doesn't have to be all that sophisticated.



    The argument that government interventionism was the primary cause of the "Great Depression" (as well as the current recession) is not limited to "paleocons" - all economists without a pro-government bias agree on that issue.
    No they sure as hell do not it was actually lack of government regulation and the Robber Barons, only revisionist historians with an agenda agree with that. The New Deal saved the economy, it was the lack of anti-trust laws that almost destroyed it. I already gave you the statistics for FDR's terms in office.


    FDR came in at the bottom of the depression, and saw average compound annual GDP growth of 8.5% for the duration of his administration, driven in part by on-going trends in mechanization and population growth that he had nothing to do with.
    Prove it. Mechanization would have decreased the need for labor not increased it and unemployment fell every year FDR was in office.

    GDP is especially misleading because it includes government spending, which obviously increased under FDR, as did the national debt. Government spending and government employment do not constitute an objective value.
    A) The U.S. has been in debt almost continuously since 1776.

    B) After WW2 the U.S. was in control of like 70% of the worlds wealth.


    Once again, you are making a collectivist argument. In a market economy, which the United States was and still is to a degree, the government does not develop, drill, refine or anything - individuals do.
    not when it's in another country. That is done through the government, under the Constitution the Congress regulates trade between the states and international trade.

    Certain individuals, regardless of their nationality (including Latin America), wanted to sell oil to Japan. Uncle Sam (along with the British Empire and the Dutch Empire) prevented that - through an act of aggression.
    Oh really which ones had their own built refineries at that time? Who had the technology to pump it? You have no idea what you're talking about.

    This was U.S. found, U.S. drilled, U.S. pumped, and U.S. refined oil.


    Japan was engaged in imperialism, which it claimed was welcome by its subject nations.
    It wasn't.

    No government's claim to power is ever unanimous - tens of millions of anarchists don't accept the rule of the United States, for example.
    Good for them let them go live on a commune, because the majority of us support the Constitution and the Republic.

    Japan was a more popular empire than its European and American competitors were.
    No they were not at all. They were brutal, the Imperial Japanese are remembered like the Nazi's are in Europe by the peoples of Asia. The Phillipinos loved us, the Chinese nationalists AND Communists loved us. Ever hear of the flying Tigers? Korea anyone?

    That doesn't make it a "good empire", there is no such thing, but the arguments for American interventionism on moral grounds are without basis.
    But you are wrong about opinion in the Asia Pacific. You honestly don't have the slightest clue about international relations. Most of the Asia Pacific still likes the U.S. more than the Japanese.
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 06-13-09 at 09:17 PM.

  9. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    And in regard to Israel, you're just not thinking critically. Semantics are used to trick you to believe that the creation of Israel wasn't a massive military invasion, but in fact it was. Doubleplusgood.
    No it was not, after the fall of the Ottoman Empire the territory of Palestine which is Israel, the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights, and Jordan came under the authority of the British Empire, and under that authority they gave 90% back to the Arabs and 10% to the Jews who had a sizable population size and a large immigration rate there too. But even 90% of the Mandate of Palestine was to much for them.


    All governments exist through violence. Did Japan have any less business in Indochina than the United States had outside its 13 original colonies, as far as Hawaii or the Philippines?
    No it had less business, as we payed for Hawaii and today Hawaii is free and prosperous and we didn't slaughter them, in the Philippines we were in a war against the Spanish to release Cuba from their empire as well as the Philippines, took the Philippines and had to fight an insurgency to help protect the fledgling Constitutional Republic that we had created, an insurgency not unlike the one in Iraq.


    The Madagascar Plan, as nutty as it may sound now, makes about as much sense as any other mass deportation or "pogrom" of Jews, which happened constantly throughout the European history. Oppression of non-conforming outsiders is a trait common to all civilizations, and it's subjective to say that Germany's treatment of the Jews was substantially worse than the crimes of any overseas colonial power, the chronological circumstances being the only major difference.
    Hitlers concept of life unworthy of life Lebensunwertes Leben existed long before the war had even begun, to suggest that his intentions were not to slaughter the Jews is simply historically inaccurate.

    That and other "evict the Jews" proposals had wide support, and it seems that the Germans were actually planning to go through with it - until the United States, the British Empire, and France entered the conflict after Germany's (re)invasion of Poland.
    lol the U.S. didn't enter the war until 2 years later. Furthermore; if you have ever heard of the sequel to Mein Kampf you would know that war with the U.K., the U.S., and France were always on the agenda, it seems to me that you think further appeasement of Hitler was the right cause of action even though he had already violated the Czech deal and had invaded Poland with the Communists through the secret protocol of the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.

    It takes a lot of doing to transport millions of civilians that far through enemy-controlled waters, and Germany had other priorities. What would have happened if America had chosen a policy of non-interventionism is anybody's guess, but it's hard to imagine a scenario that wouldn't have led to fewer casualties, Jewish and otherwise.
    The U.K. would have fallen or been forced to capitulate the Soviets would have taken Berlin and then set their cites to the west and in all probability the Manhattan Project couldn't have happened without a total war driven industrial complex leaving the U.S. sitting ducks.



    What is the relevance of this ad hominem attack?
    It's a white nationalist citation without citation in the article.


    The source I've referenced (indirectly) to explain Hitler's reasoning was chosen for its ideological similarity to him. There may be perfectly valid reasons why individuals of Jewish heritage were perceived as being disproportionally likely to be involved in communism, just as there are perfectly valid reasons why individuals of Japanese heritage were perceived to be disproportionally likely to be involved in "anti-American activities" during WW2. Neither of the two is justified.
    ya like the methemphetamines Hitler was taking. Furthermore; the Jews never attacked Germany the Japanese attacked the U.S. and we never did anything like what the Germans did. Not even the British with the Boers did what the Germans did.



    So was Hitler so are you probably if you go back far enough who gives a ****? Do Jews somehow act differently than other human beings?

    and he was the very model of a "first generation atheist". Unsubstantiated sensationalist claims aside, there's no evidence that Stalin was anything but a Georgian / Ossetian (who are traditionally Christians), and a "first generation atheist" also. But none of this is relevant to the point I was making.
    I meant they were born Christian.


    Hitler believed that there was a dangerous movement within the Jewish community,
    No he didn't that is just what he used for his will to power, claim there's an outside foreign entity out to get you and use it to gain more power to stop this imaginary foe.

    which has both religious and ethnic aspects. He believed that while there may be some "good Jews", all Jews are presumed guilty unless proven useful. Hitler believed that the ends justify the means. Once again, none of this is very different from the Japanese-American internment, except of course the relative populations and economic circumstances.
    You have no idea what you're talking about, Hitler believed in life unworthy of life, he believed in a pure Aryan, castration, genocide in order to realize his dreams of a eugenic made utopia under which all other races would be made slave races to the Aryan. This stuff even goes into the occult. He used his cult of personality to attempt to create a racially pure thousand year Reich Quite frankly sir I don't think that you have ever even read Mein Kampf.

    The U.S. on the stark contrast was founded on a guiding principle which we have often not lived up to but have always ended up fighting for either through war at the expenditure of American blood and treasure or in the war for civil rights and desegration, and that is that all men are created equal.



    Yes, a few small islands aside, U.S. did not add much territory prior to it, but that doesn't change the fact that FDR was looking for an excuse to enter WW2. America's interest was for influence, not land.
    A) Yes we supported the open door policy rather than the closed door policy of Japan to allow fair competition.

    B) Yes because of the Monroe doctrine it was hypocritical, but Japan wasn't setting up democratic Constitutional Republics in South East Asia they were setting up colonies, the U.S. on the other hand pushed for modernization and democratization in Latin America.

    First of all, nothing is ever "conclusive" when dealing with governments, because the dependent also handles all of the evidence. And your "they won't bend over all the way for us so we had to nuke them" mentality is simply irrational. Americans were free to leave Japan alone any time they wanted, before Pearl Harbor or after.
    Wire intercepts can be conclusive they were not willing to surrender. The militarists even refused to surrender after the first bomb was dropped and then they staged a coup against the Emperor.

    Yes, the Japanese saw themselves as fighting a desperate war of self-defense with no way out.
    No they thought by attacking the Pacific fleet and destroying it they could fight the U.S. into a stalemate and a negotiated peace. We on the other hand demanded unconditional surrender. They thought wrong.

    I've already explained how America provoked that action.
    We did not provoke that action. It is the sovereign right of any nation state to trade with whomever it likes, that is neither an act of war nor an act of an aggression. We did not blockade Japan we cut off trade relations with them.

    Everything is relative, especially in war. Japan, the only Axis power in the Pacific, in 1941 had 1/10th the GDP of USA + UK + France + USSR. And that that doesn't include the remainder of China, the Netherlands, Indonesia, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and so on.
    Um they had a huge GDP it was almost as high as France. But they figured the ocean would protect them, they underestimated the U.S..

    The so-called "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" was no less legitimate than the British, Dutch, French, Soviet, or the American empires they were competing with.
    Actually it was far less legitimate, I have read scholarly papers off of JSTOR about it. They took over these countries by force and were brutal to non-Japanese, especially the Chinese and set up slave labor, slavery by then was long abandoned by the U.S., U.K., Dutch, and French.
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 06-13-09 at 08:59 PM.

  10. #100
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    11-01-09 @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    829

    Re: Obama slams Holocaust deniers at concentration camp

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    As I have said, all you are offering is opinions, not facts. You want to have your beliefs, that's fine, but if you want to present them as facts, you'd better substantiate them.
    I have, but your pro-government bias is causing you to fail to recognize them as facts. Think harder.


    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    And no one is forcing you to post your book. If you do not want criticism, don't post it.
    I do want criticism, which is why I post.


    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    The government is not forcing you to do anything. Refuse. Just like everything in life, you have choices. Just remember, all choices have consequences...some you may like and some you may not. You are not being forced in any way. You do what you do to avoid consequences. [...]
    Um, that argument can be used to justify pretty much anything - "plantation owners weren't forcing their slaves to do anything, but refusal to work had consequences"...



    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    You don't have to link to the Axis everyone knows what they are.
    Adding a pointless Wikipedia link is not a grammatical mistake that's worth pointing out. Sometimes I just do it to encourage people to do their research, especially if I already had that URL open in another tab, as I did in this case to double-check my recollection that Thailand didn't join Japan until 1942. It's 2 seconds for me and could save 10+ seconds to someone else, so - why not?


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    And don't fool yourself that's exactly what you are doing you are saying that we provoked Japan which implies that it was our fault not theirs.
    It's each government's fault for initiating aggression, both against its own "citizens" and against others.

    I'm just providing an objective view of history, and objectivity tends to lower the perceived merits of the victors in whose favor popular knowledge of history has been altered, as well as the perceived villainy of the losers. America isn't white. Germany and Japan aren't black. All governments are a shade of gray, and in reality those shades are not as far apart as you'd like to believe.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    The Asia Pacific is mostly democratic today [...]
    Only Japan and South Korea rank as a "full democracy" in that region, and the latter only since 1992. Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Taiwan, and Mongolia rank as "flawed democracy". Singapore ranks as "hybrid regime". Hong Kong is an "in-direct democracy". Mainland China, Vietnam, North Korea, Myanmar / Burma, and Brunei are "authoritarian". In terms of population, the authoritarian countries in that region dominate.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Americans hated going to war with/for Colonial Imperialists which is what kept us out of both WW1 and WW2 for so long, historically we much prefer going to war against them [...]
    I'm not blaming the American people, I'm blaming the government.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    [...] and let's face it who was worse at the time the British and French Empires or the Japanese and Germans?
    Most people in East Asia preferred the Japanese for some subjective racial / cultural reasons, but that has been lost to history for the most part, especially after those nations got their de facto independence.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Even the Chinese now Taiwanese nationalists were far better than the Japanese imperialists.
    Many Taiwanese will disagree, even to the present day, in spite of decades of "education" to the contrary. Japan acquired Taiwan in 1895, before the United States acquired Hawaii, and its claims to it were no more or no less legitimate. Japan was less popular in Korea, but as colonial powers go pretty popular nonetheless.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Tell that to a Korean or a Phillipino, we were defending ourselves, Germany and Japan were both expanding quickly.
    Militarism and imperialism were commonplace on every continent of the world without America feeling the need to get involved - except to expand its influence. It didn't interfere militarily in Britain's colonization of India or the various European nations who were scrambling for Africa, which were all much more brutal. America interferes only for its own national interest. In fact, some of modern day's worst dictatorships (ex. Saudi Arabia) are backed by the American government. American propaganda calling its expansionism "liberation" isn't any more rational than the identical propaganda by Germany or Japan.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    And we fought them too and for the most part kicked ass and took names. Do you know what the Japanese were doing to the people they attacked?
    Once again, history is written by the victors. There is no objective way to say whether Japanese were any more or any less gentle than their European competitors in colonization. Communists have killed a lot more, and have caused far greater economic damage to humanity as a whole, in great part thanks to America's intervention in WW2.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    It is Japan's fault not that of the U.S. that Communism took over. The sheer brutality of the Japanese drove many Chinese towards the Communists and away from the nationalists like Shang Kai Shek who would go on to form Taiwan a U.S. backed ally and a free, prosperous, but unrecognized government in exile.
    No, the Japanese were fighting the communists, while Americans were saving Stalin's butt in that war.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    lol no it wouldn't have, the Soviets and the Chinese would have eventually won anyways at the expense of millions of more lives. [...]
    No, I'm fairly certain that the Soviets and the Chinese would have lost the war in just a few weeks and with much fewer casualties without American involvement. That's what WW2 should have been all about - dysfunctional governments losing territory to the more functional ones, as has always been the case throughout history. Remember the Mexican-American War?


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    [...] Tyrannies can last a long long time and there has never been two more tyrannical regimes than the Fascists.
    Tyrannies are bad for the economy. What's the point of having a tyranny if it's not profitable? Fascists took a pragmatic approach to the areas they've conquered, as has the United States. And there have been far more tyrannical invaders throughout history, like the Vikings. Or the Belgians in Congo.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    They did away with even a farce of democracy and told people that there only reason for living was to serve the state. The only reason why there are more democratic countries today than ever before in history is because of what the United States has done. Whenever we occupy a country we install a democracy.
    All democracy is a farce.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Liberal democracy is the only civilized system of governance, if all have equal rights then there is no glass ceiling to this so called "ruling class".
    Your religious propaganda is entirely void of any rational basis. Democracy is mob rule - all dictatorships are democracies because all dictators have the popular opinion on their side. The only civilized system of governance is individual liberty.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    What are you some sort of Communist?
    No, communists believe in democracy. I'm a libertarian (or more specifically an Anarcho-Capitalist).


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    No they sure as hell do not it was actually lack of government regulation and the Robber Barons, only revisionist historians with an agenda agree with that. The New Deal saved the economy, it was the lack of anti-trust laws that almost destroyed it. I already gave you the statistics for FDR's terms in office.
    I see that logic and science will not work on you. Keep chanting your religious slogans - everyone is really impressed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Prove it. [...]
    I could spend hours trying to teach you free market economics, thus derailing this thread for a dozen pages, or I could just remind you that the government exists through violence and that the burden of proof thus always falls on its apologists. I think I'll do the latter, and if you have any intellectual curiosity of your own you'll be able to figure out the economics for yourself.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    A) The U.S. has been in debt almost continuously since 1776.
    Yes, but never by that much, before or since. The amount of government spending has increased under FDR, thus the inflated GDP numbers. Government spending, whether taxed or borrowed, does not represent objective value, only voluntary spending in the free market does.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    B) After WW2 the U.S. was in control of like 70% of the worlds wealth.
    No, half that at most, and 27.3% by 1950. That was a peak of America's relative economic dominance, which began when its GDP surpassed Britain after WW1, and China is due to overtake us again by mid-century or sooner.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    not when it's in another country. That is done through the government, under the Constitution the Congress regulates trade between the states and international trade.
    More irrational religious chanting...


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Oh really which ones had their own built refineries at that time? Who had the technology to pump it? You have no idea what you're talking about.
    Yes, no one in the world but Uncle Sam has the "divine right" to drill for oil.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Good for them let them go live on a commune, because the majority of us support the Constitution and the Republic.
    No, the commune is what you're promoting. I want out.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    But you are wrong about opinion in the Asia Pacific. You honestly don't have the slightest clue about international relations. Most of the Asia Pacific still likes the U.S. more than the Japanese.
    Um, that's debatable, and only because we won the war, and influenced their governments ever since. If Japanese had won, they'd have liked Japan more.

Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •