Are you Americans crazy enough to put Donald Trump in office?

[nolhtairt 0]

billvon

>They would become a glass parking lot if they did.

I doubt that. Consider the following:

Trump's meeting with Kim goes badly. There's the customary round of abusive tweets from Trump and a spate of unhinged state media statements from North Korea. Nothing new.

A week later a nuclear explosion occurs a few miles from Lihue, Hawaii. 5000 people are killed and a large area of Kauai is covered with radioactive fallout.

Will we "glass parking lot" Iran for that?

If Iran wasn't responsible, then no. Now Japan, on the other hand, attacked Pearl Harbor to pull us into WWII. Look how that worked out for them. They were willing to kill us to the last man.

[billvon 2,400]

>If Iran wasn't responsible, then no.

How do you know Iran wasn't responsible in the above scenario?

[nolhtairt 0]

billvon

>If Iran wasn't responsible, then no.

How do you know Iran wasn't responsible in the above scenario?

Read my words carefully. I said "IF"

[billvon 2,400]

>Read my words carefully. I said "IF"

Yep. And that "if" means that Iran can use their nuclear weapons against us without us turning them into a glass parking lot, as long as they cover their tracks. And they know that. Inciting a war between the US and North Korea using their nuclear weapons would greatly benefit Iran. (And Trump just gave them the green light to resume work on those weapons.)

[nolhtairt 0]

billvon

>Read my words carefully. I said "IF"

Yep. And that "if" means that Iran can use their nuclear weapons against us without us turning them into a glass parking lot, as long as they cover their tracks. And they know that. Inciting a war between the US and North Korea using their nuclear weapons would greatly benefit Iran. (And Trump just gave them the green light to resume work on those weapons.)

And I'm sure Israel will have some kind of contingency plan for that. They've been known to carry out pre-emptive strikes in the region.

That said, regarding the recent flare ups, "If it rains on Israel, it will POUR on Iran."

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

That said, regarding the recent flare ups, "If it rains on Israel, it will POUR on Iran."

Oh that's cool then - dead Israelis aren't a problem as long as there will be loads more dead Iranians. Yay for a foreign policy based solely on retaliation!

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[nolhtairt 0]

jakee

Quote

That said, regarding the recent flare ups, "If it rains on Israel, it will POUR on Iran."

Oh that's cool then - dead Israelis aren't a problem as long as there will be loads more dead Iranians. Yay for a foreign policy based solely on retaliation!

Yes, that apparently is how the real world works. Make the other dumb bastards quit or die.

[jakee 1,255]

nolhtairt

***

Quote

That said, regarding the recent flare ups, "If it rains on Israel, it will POUR on Iran."

Oh that's cool then - dead Israelis aren't a problem as long as there will be loads more dead Iranians. Yay for a foreign policy based solely on retaliation!

Yes, that apparently is how the real world works.

And yet under the terrible, unfair, so bad Obama nuclear deal Iran wasn't attacking Israel.

Trump scraps the deal and immediately someone (you think Iran) attacks Israel.

What's the real world telling you now?

Quote

Make the other dumb bastards quit or die.

You're not going to kill them all (and assuming you're not a genocidal psycopath that's a good thing, because the majority of people you'd kill would be normal innocent people getting on with life the same as you) so the question you need to ask yourself is, what would it take to make you quit? 'Cos you're a tough guy, right? You wouldn't just kowtow to some Johnny Foreigner because they made your life a little harder, right? How bad would it need to get before you gave up?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Bob_Church 7]

"Well, sort of. Their objective was to wipe out the Pacific fleet and the aircraft carriers stationed at Pearl. Fortunately for us their Intel was off and the carriers were out to sea when they hit us.

Strangely enough, WWII ended the US policy of international isolation and created what is being lamented and bad-mouthed by the same countries that sucked us in.


funny old world, ain't it?
"

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

[gowlerk 1,913]

Quote

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

You may have something there. Japanese culture is one of the most racist in the world. But they did not have a "final solution". That was a special thing only the Nazi's under Hitler had.

The main lesson of WW2 atrocities is that people are capable of denying the humanity of others. And then using that lack of humanity to justify killing them. Almost always to take what they have for themselves.

This was what happened in the USA with the "Trail of Tears", and westward expansion. There are no successful cultures who did not kill to become successful.

[jakee 1,255]

Iago

Quote

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Of course not, that would be racist. It's OK provided it's an historical reference to a white European ethnicity.

Oh you poor oppressed western, white male. It's such a hard world for people like us, isn't it?

No, it's more that it's easier for most of us to identify with people who became Nazis than it is with Japanese. We understand the Nazis, while Japanese culture as a whole is quite alien.

Besides, the Japanese didn't meticulously plan the slaughter of their own people (as far as I'm aware), their atrocities happened during conquest and occupation of foreign territories. That means the slur of "imperialist" is quite sufficient to describe them, the same as it would cover British atrocities in southern Africa or India, Belgians in the Congo, the French in North Africa, Australians against the Aboriginals or Americans against native tribes during the wetsward expansion.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Bob_Church 7]

Iago

******"Well, sort of. Their objective was to wipe out the Pacific fleet and the aircraft carriers stationed at Pearl. Fortunately for us their Intel was off and the carriers were out to sea when they hit us.

Strangely enough, WWII ended the US policy of international isolation and created what is being lamented and bad-mouthed by the same countries that sucked us in.


funny old world, ain't it?


What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Of course not, that would be racist. It's OK provided it's an historical reference to a white European ethnicity.

But since you mention it, how about we come up with a few? I'm thinking 'stomach stabber' or 'zero chucker' would be a good start in reference to the kind numbing brainwashing of the country.

We used to get a lot of US bashing rhetoric around August 6 with the "why was the US in such a hurry to end the war" stuff. "Couldn't we have just waited awhile" Then we started getting a lot of Korean and Chinese students. Try telling someone who's great aunt was being raped 24/7 on a pleasure boat that there's no rush to end it, or tell the Chinese students with great grandparents or other relatives that had been dying daily from japanese experiments wiping out entire villages by infecting them with different diseases.
Once it became little people with different colored skin and names we couldn't pronounce the slaughter of civilians just didn't count for much.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Bob_Church

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Nips, Slopes, slants (those two refer to their eyes), Japs.

Most have fallen into disuse because of their blatant racial overtones.

There's also the issue that, to a large degree, the Japanese people were following their 'leader'. They thought they were following the Emperor and to a degree were, but it was largely the military who was in charge. As a culture, they have a history of blindly following their leaders. They believed that the Emperor was God incarnate.

OTOH, the Nazi party was a group of people who took charge, seized power and led the world down a deadly and destructive path.

The equivalent insult to "Nazi" for a Japanese national would be something along the lines of "Emperor Lover", "Military Lackey" or something like that.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Bob_Church 7]

wolfriverjoe

***

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Nips, Slopes, slants (those two refer to their eyes), Japs.

Most have fallen into disuse because of their blatant racial overtones.

There's also the issue that, to a large degree, the Japanese people were following their 'leader'. They thought they were following the Emperor and to a degree were, but it was largely the military who was in charge. As a culture, they have a history of blindly following their leaders. They believed that the Emperor was God incarnate.

OTOH, the Nazi party was a group of people who took charge, seized power and led the world down a deadly and destructive path.

The equivalent insult to "Nazi" for a Japanese national would be something along the lines of "Emperor Lover", "Military Lackey" or something like that.

The downright inhumane way Japanese captors treated people doesn't back up the "only following orders" thing. Look at how prisoners were treated while building the railroad across Burma. This went way beyond policy or orders. And their constant refusal to even accept responsibility didn't help.

[billvon 2,400]

>What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we
>have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Nip would be the most common slur. George Kennedy (US general) once famously said "nips are just vermin to be exterminated." Also yellow as a conflation between skin color and cowardice.

But overall, Nazi has had more staying power as an insult because of the genocide and the association with Hitler. (And because since it refers to a now-mostly-extinct political party, and not a race, it's still quite usable.)

Back around 2005 I was in a Best Buy looking at the latest flat screen TV's (mainly plasma back then) and the movie "Pearl Harbor" was playing. About five of us were watching it. One older guy said "wow, it's strange to be watching this. My father was there." His friend said "it's even stranger to be watching it on a Japanese TV." He had a point there.

[Bob_Church 7]

Iago

******

Quote

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Of course not, that would be racist. It's OK provided it's an historical reference to a white European ethnicity.

Oh you poor oppressed western, white male. It's such a hard world for people like us, isn't it?

No, it's more that it's easier for most of us to identify with people who became Nazis than it is with Japanese. We understand the Nazis, while Japanese culture as a whole is quite alien.

Besides, the Japanese didn't meticulously plan the slaughter of their own people (as far as I'm aware), their atrocities happened during conquest and occupation of foreign territories. That means the slur of "imperialist" is quite sufficient to describe them, the same as it would cover British atrocities in southern Africa or India, Belgians in the Congo, the French in North Africa, Australians against the Aboriginals or Americans against native tribes during the wetsward expansion.

Now that you mention it, the Japanese did plan the slaughter of their own people through conscription. There was a saying in the Japanese military that the grunts were only worth X because that was what it would cost to replace them with another conscript (I forget the amount, but it was not much) most of whom were peasant farmers.

And giving school children on Okinawa two hand grenades each with orders to pull the pins and run into groups of Allied troops while holding them.

[Bob_Church 7]

I think the Nazi thing gets complicated by the emerging facts, well, emerging acknowledgment, that while the Nazis brought German precision to killing Jews it didn't come anywhere near to starting it. The pograms started as early as the end of WW1 and a LOT of Europeans were already trying to wipe out all Jews long before Hitler came to power. One survivor of it all said that the nastiest people she encountered were Romanians. I think there's a valid question of "Did Hitler come up with the idea of the Holocaust or did he jump on the bandwagon because it was already such a popular idea?"

OK, sorry, I'll stop now. I promise.

[billvon 2,400]

>I think there's a valid question of "Did Hitler come up with the idea of the Holocaust or
>did he jump on the bandwagon because it was already such a popular idea?"

There was probably an element of that to it; solving the "Jew problem" was popular and he used that to his advantage. (And eugenics, of course, was something that was being practiced in the US at the time.) And given how crippled Germany had been due to the reparations after the Great War, the Germans needed someone else to blame for their many problems. The "final solution" fit that requirement neatly.

The analogy today would be a popular ruler who capitalizes on anti-Muslim sentiment and starts exterminating Muslims. Because of the threat they pose to world peace and harmony and blah blah. It would probably even get some support.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Bob_Church

The downright inhumane way Japanese captors treated people doesn't back up the "only following orders" thing. Look at how prisoners were treated while building the railroad across Burma. This went way beyond policy or orders. And their constant refusal to even accept responsibility didn't help.

Iago

Now that you mention it, the Japanese did plan the slaughter of their own people through conscription. There was a saying in the Japanese military that the grunts were only worth X because that was what it would cost to replace them with another conscript (I forget the amount, but it was not much) most of whom were peasant farmers.

Much of that is cultural. The Japanese don't, or at least didn't place the same value on individual life that we in the "west" do.
The Emperor was God, everything and everyone belonged to him to do with as he wished.

As an example, Japanese fighter planes didn't have armor for the pilot or self sealing fuel tanks. Pilots were expendable. The idea that an experienced pilot took a while to develop and was worth making an effort to keep around didn't occur to them. It cost them quite a lot towards the end of the war. By the end, the Kamikaze pilots could barely fly the planes. Most of them only had a few hours flying time.

As another, individual soldiers were expected to 'die courageously and honorably' rather than surrender and submit to capture.
There were very few Japanese POWs taken.
As a result of that attitude, US POWs were considered 'dishonored' and subject to a lot of abuse and mistreatment. Not trying to justify it, but their culture was (and is) in many ways very alien to us.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[jakee 1,255]

Iago

Now that you mention it, the Japanese did plan the slaughter of their own people through conscription. There was a saying in the Japanese military that the grunts were only worth X because that was what it would cost to replace them with another conscript (I forget the amount, but it was not much) most of whom were peasant farmers.

Ever read a book on WW1 tactics?

However expendable the Japanese command thought their soldiers were in WW2, every single nation involved in WW1 did it worse and that was only 30 years earlier.

Just like if a current administration planned a military campaign with projected loss rates similar to anything the allies did in WW2, there would be uproar, outrage and quite probably widespread mutiny.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Much of that is cultural. The Japanese don't, or at least didn't place the same value on individual life that we in the "west" do.
The Emperor was God, everything and everyone belonged to him to do with as he wished.

As an example, Japanese fighter planes didn't have armor for the pilot or self sealing fuel tanks. Pilots were expendable.

In WW1 (again) when they became available and viable, German pilots were given parachutes so they'd have a chance at surviving being shot down, while British and American pilots were prohibited from using them on the basis that it would encourage them to escape a fight. They were instead left the choice of burning to death or freefalling til impact.

Does that say something about the relative cultural values of Germany, Britain and the USA, or is it only those 'other' cultures we can judge on the same basis?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Bob_Church 7]

"As another, individual soldiers were expected to 'die courageously and honorably' rather than surrender and submit to capture. "

Ok, wait, I said I'd stop and I am but this is photography related. Honest.

Cliff McCarthy took a lot of photos around Japan just after the war and one of them shows a huge shed with one man submarines.
Here it is

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ohiouniversitylibraries/4669326875

by the way, do you notice something about this car?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ohiouniversitylibraries/4669328297/in/gallery-huffstutterrobertl-72157624851437820/

edit: I'd first written one man suicide subs but I don't know for sure from the photo if those are Kaiten or not. I know a lot of them were dual purpose but I removed suicide just in case.

[jcd11235 0]

nolhtairt

Yes, that apparently is how the real world works. Make the other dumb bastards quit or die.

Except that strategy doesn't seem to be working. Doubling down on an ineffective strategy isn't wise.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[kallend 1,623]

Iago

******

Quote

What I've never understood is how calling someone a Nazi is one of the worst slurs we have (that part makes sense) but there isn't a Japan version.

Of course not, that would be racist. It's OK provided it's an historical reference to a white European ethnicity.

Oh you poor oppressed western, white male. It's such a hard world for people like us, isn't it?

No, it's more that it's easier for most of us to identify with people who became Nazis than it is with Japanese. We understand the Nazis, while Japanese culture as a whole is quite alien.

Besides, the Japanese didn't meticulously plan the slaughter of their own people (as far as I'm aware), their atrocities happened during conquest and occupation of foreign territories. That means the slur of "imperialist" is quite sufficient to describe them, the same as it would cover British atrocities in southern Africa or India, Belgians in the Congo, the French in North Africa, Australians against the Aboriginals or Americans against native tribes during the wetsward expansion.

Now that you mention it, the Japanese did plan the slaughter of their own people through conscription. There was a saying in the Japanese military that the grunts were only worth X because that was what it would cost to replace them with another conscript (I forget the amount, but it was not much) most of whom were peasant farmers.

Somme (1916), Verdun (1916), Ypres (several), Passchendaele (1917) ...

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DJL 232]

Quote

You may have something there. Japanese culture is one of the most racist in the world. But they did not have a "final solution". That was a special thing only the Nazi's under Hitler had.

That's not accurate. The Japanese atrocities in WWII eclipsed those of Germany: https://dose.com/articles/the-asian-holocaust-killed-twice-as-many-people-as-the-nazis-did/

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher