321–330 of 358 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's more than one sentence in that quote. Keep reading.
What are you objecting to? It is fun to kill bad guys. Why do you think FPS games are so popular?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I object to is the cowardly labeling of the internment camps as "FDR's" This is a propaganda technique. Read the article. That's who the orders came from.
I don't get comments like this. You honestly think I didn't read the article? You are referring to Executive Order 9066 which, incidentally, could not be enforced without subsequent passage of Public Law 503 by Congress. (note: The law was passed unanimously by both the Senate and the House) We're not talking about something that originated in the FDR White House. It was the result of a long (but fast) government pro…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get comments like this. You honestly think I didn't read the article? You are referring to Executive Order 9066 which, incidentally, could not be enforced without subsequent passage of Public Law 503 by Congress. (note: The law was passed unanimously by both the Senate and the House) We're not talking about something that originated in the FDR White House. It was the result of a long (but fast) government pro…
You seem to be on tilt about this "attributing Japanese Internment to FDR" thing. That's a controversy that really seems to have originated with you. I'd assume the rest of us are pretty well aware that the USG was broadly culpable for concentration camps.
Yes. "On tilt" Nice gentle phrase and a sensible comment.
As I noted above - I just realized that I was basically responding to click bait - so mea culpa.
But that doesn't mean my points weren't legitimate :^)
Finally, I wish someone, someday would start a discussion about our post-war relationship with Japan. I mentioned it in my original message. What happened was so cool. I'm not aware of anything like it in modern history. And it can take a bit of the "evil" sting out of the Japanese Internment history, if you want it to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be on tilt about this "attributing Japanese Internment to FDR" thing. That's a controversy that really seems to have originated with you. I'd assume the rest of us are pretty well aware that the USG was broadly culpable for concentration camps.
So, you're telling me I should calm down. (smile) Yes. "On tilt" Nice gentle phrase and a sensible comment. As I noted above - I just realized that I was basically responding to click bait - so mea culpa. But that doesn't mean my points weren't legitimate :^) Finally, I wish someone, someday would start a discussion about our post-war relationship with Japan. I mentioned it in my original message. What happened was s…
I agree with you that our relationship with Japan after the war is pretty fascinating --- I think you could say something similar about our relationship with Germany! My takeaway from that is that we Americans should have a lot more humility about our own role in the world, because countries can turn on a dime from one pole to the other.
But one obstacle you'll have to pursuing that conversation in this thread is that a lot of people will read it as an attempt to downplay the disgrace of American concentration camps. Since those camps were very recently cited by American politicians as a rational for registering Muslims, it's a hot-button issue.
"The very fact that no sabotage has taken place to date is a disturbing and confirming indication that such action will be taken." THAT is disturbing "logic".
It's anti-induction. Anti-induction holds that a thing having happened many times before, all else being equal, is evidence that it will happen again. Anti-induction holds that it having never happened before is evidence that it will happen. Just as induction having generally worked in the past indicates, by induction, that it Wil continue to work, anti-induction having generally not worked in the past "indicates", b…
>"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain’t got no manhood left anyway. So it’s a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it’s quite fun to fight them, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people." Are you defending the Taliban's treatment of women?
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13139453 and marked it off-topic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We are by no means perfect, but I think nations which are able to acknowledge and learn from the mistakes of their past have a leg up on those that try to pretend everything was great. The United States government has never acknowledged Native American genocide either.
They clearly have to some extent. That's why I mentioned the National Park Service trail. More would be better, for sure, but we don't deny it, nor prosecute people who say it happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niihau_incident
It's also interesting to note that J. Edgar Hoover was opposed to the interments, but FDR overruled him.
One of the many reasons to oppose war. Others include: + Control of the economy, price controls, rationing, shortages + Suspension of most (all?) of the Bill of Rights + Wholesale slaughter of civilian populations abroad (so much for "all men are created equal ... with unalienable rights") But perhaps the most nefarious is the idea that "we all pulled together and sacrificed to defeat the enemy." The government schoo…
We did not choose war willingly, the japanese govt made the choice for us when they attacked pearl harbor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're taking his brief argument far too literally. Of course there was more at play than honour alone. However reasons aside, I'd argue your comment is moot as there's never a good reason to start a war. Edit: wow I'm surprised by the downvotes. Are you (who ever you are) suggesting you do agree with starting wars? I'd be very interested to hear why you disagree with me.
I completely agree with starting wars if it stops the suffering of large numbers of civilians. As it stands, 15-20 million Chinese were killed by the Japanese in that war. How many would have died if the US had not gotten involved?
Plus the American involvement wasn't out of humanitarian reasons either. They only joined the war after getting attacked by Japan themselves. Which, which since I support retaliatory action if another party has already initiated war, would mean the US followed my stance on war in that regard.