ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags World War II history

Reply
Old 15th June 2020, 08:13 PM   #281
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,577
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
One can perhaps compare the Commonwealth of the Philippines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common...he_Philippines) with Manchukuo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchukuo).
No. Manchukuo was a puppet state under the direct and total control of Japan. It only existed as a poor disguise of Japanese imperialist expansionism and to hide the fact that Japan had no close allies.

Japan had no friends to play with so it made some imaginary ones.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

And no, Cuba is not a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, and it's definitely less so than Sweden. - dann
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2020, 10:21 PM   #282
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist.
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,577
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
It seems to me that, in July of 1941, Roosevelt could have invited ambassador Nomura to have a discussion in the Oval Office, with Secretary of State Cordell Hull, and explained to him that the American people were gravely concerned about reports (from multiple reliable sources) of Japanese atrocities in China. If these didn't stop, and if Japan didn't stop its invasion of China, he could have said, then, to their great regrets, the United States would have to sanction Japan by restricting oil exports, in order to apply serious pressure on Japan, without, however, going so far as trying to crush its economy and its military (there was no need to humiliate Japan by withdrawing all the oil used by its military). I see no reason why ambassador Nomura, and Japanese leaders, would not have understood such a pedagogic (and gradual) approach.

This paragraph is so astonishingly wrong that I cannot decide which bit of stupid to address first.

Had the Japanese been told in no uncertain terms that the US would cut off its oil supply, Japan would have seen itself as having no choice but to try to remove the American threat in the Pacific. Pearl Harbor would have been an attack with a rubber band finger gun compared to what Japan would actually do to American interests (and lives). The best way to be attacked by a tiger is to corner it, which is exactly what you are suggesting FDR should have done.

Japan's invasion of China was not some innocent testing of the waters. Japan truly and deeply believed that it had a claim to the Chinese coast and all of Korea.They didn't occupy the ring of fire because they thought it would be neat and snazzy. They did it because they were honestly convinced of their claims to those lands. They were so convinced that they had little problem murdering a whole bunch of people (including their own young men) to secure it.

And that leads to my last and probably most important point - racism. We talk about racism when the Germans convinced themselves that all of their problems were caused by Jews. We talk about it when we say the US should never have interred its own citizens of Japanese descent. However, we don't talk nearly enough about Japanese racism.

The Japanese were absolutely and unquestionably convinced that they were the genetic, intellectual and moral superiors of all the rest of Asia. They particularly hated the Koreans.

In fact, you can still find traces of this left. Almost all anthropologists agree that Japan was the most backwards of islands before Koreans began to settle in the south. Then, archeologists can literally watch the hallmarks of civilization slowly creep north. The only anthropologists/archeologists who disagree? Japanese ones. In Japan, the idea that small bands of nomads were turned into sedentary cities by copying Korea, with the help of Korean settlers.

Nobody in WWII really thought much about anybody else's point of view. Everybody was convinced that they were the best nation and all others could stick it in their ear. That was true of the Japanese, too. They were never going to release their claims on China, Korea, and other ring of fire nations. They certainly weren't going to do it because their ambassador to the US had been given a stern talking-to.

You are hanging on to your points with your bare hands because they support your conclusion that Belgium could have escaped the harshness of other countries' war. Don't start with a conclusion. Start with facts and build up to whatever conclusion they may support.

Also, your understanding about the "ease" of amending the US Constitution is so magnificently wrong that, as a doctor of laws, I cannot think about it without getting a headache.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 01:14 AM   #283
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,502
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
An interesting book on Hitler's peace offers has been posted by Saggy in post #119: https://www.amazon.com/What-World-Re.../dp/B00M5K8OEM.
Saggy is a holocaust denier. The author of Saggy's book that you quoted from is Friedrich Stieve. Friedrich Stieve authored books during WWII for the National Socialist government’s Ministry for Propaganda.
https://www.amazon.com/New-Germany-P.../dp/1684549752

You then said
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
"When you see a webpage explaining that Hitler killed six million Jews, you never know if its author really believes that, or if he/she is actually too scared to deviate from the "official" view.
Ironically, you are quoting the official view of the NSDAP's wartime Ministry of Propaganda.

According to your own credibility rating rules in your "ESP Test" thread, we can now dismiss all your posts in this thread, as having no credibility. It is that simple.

////////////////////

I further note that in the "ESP test" thread Michel H claimed everyone (including animals) on Earth read his thoughts. Yet when I posted his full name, he asked me to stop doing this to protect himself. This objectively indicated Michel H does not believe what he posts, which further erodes his credibility by his own defined rules.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 06:53 AM   #284
Michel H
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,041
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Japan could have shown restraint by not invading China and killing hundreds of thousands of its population, Germany could have shown restraint by not invading Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, France, the USSR, Greece and god knows where else, Italy could have shown restraint by not embarking on a battle royal with the Albanian fire brigade
Yes, I agree (mostly) with this text, Hitler could have showed some restraint by annexing only the Polish corridor in 1939, Japan could have limited its territorial ambitions to Manchukuo and Korea (and not violently invaded the rest of China), and Italy could not have invaded Albania.

Note, by the way, that we live a rather different situation nowadays: for example, it is not clear to me what kind of "restraint" Iran, victim of U.S. sanctions, could show, without humiliating itself. However, Israel could show restraint by renouncing its planned (illegal) annexation of the Jordan valley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexa..._Jordan_Valley).
Michel H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 07:36 AM   #285
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 30,941
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
Yes, I agree (mostly) with this text, Hitler could have showed some restraint by annexing only the Polish corridor in 1939, Japan could have limited its territorial ambitions to Manchukuo and Korea (and not violently invaded the rest of China), and Italy could not have invaded Albania.
I think it's telling that you see invading a foreign country a bit at a time rather than all at once as restraint, but defending oneself against aggression by economic sanctions designed specifically to remove the ability to wage war without impacting the health of the civilian population as lack of restraint. To describe this point of view as biased is a colossal understatement.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 08:41 AM   #286
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
It seems to me that, in July of 1941, Roosevelt could have invited ambassador Nomura to have a discussion in the Oval Office, with Secretary of State Cordell Hull, and explained to him that the American people were gravely concerned about reports (from multiple reliable sources) of Japanese atrocities in China. If these didn't stop, and if Japan didn't stop its invasion of China, he could have said, then, to their great regrets, the United States would have to sanction Japan by restricting oil exports, in order to apply serious pressure on Japan, without, however, going so far as trying to crush its economy and its military (there was no need to humiliate Japan by withdrawing all the oil used by its military). I see no reason why ambassador Nomura, and Japanese leaders, would not have understood such a pedagogic (and gradual) approach.
Good lord! Does Michel even realize that what he describes above was indeed the approach of the Roosevelt administration. It has been known for quite sometime that by May 1941 the Japanese government had decided to move south against the European Colonial Empires. Since Japan was allied to Hitler's Germany this was viewed as a threat to US interests. Hitler had since April 1941 been encouraging Japan to attack the USA, even offering to declare war on the USA if Japan did so, even if Japan did not attack Russia.

The USA was well aware of the possibility of Japan attacking the European Colonial Empires and it appears that the suspicions were entirely warranted. The oil embargo Michel complains about was not in response to Japan's war with China but to the Japanese occupation to all of French Indo-China which was viewed in Japan has a necessary step in preparation for Japan to attack the European Colonial Empires.

And once again Michel "forgets" that the oil embargo etc., was a peaceful, non-violent response to Japanese aggressive stupidity. Michel's characterization of it as some sort of horrible wicked response is actually fairly funny.

Michel also waxes eloquently about the horrors of humiliating Japan and how unbearable it was. The Japanese governments had since World War 1 humiliated China in a myriad number of ways, but Chinese humiliation doesn't count I guess. I could of course talk about the humiliation of the Koreans. (Ever wonder why the Korean Admiral Yi Sun Shin is basically Korea's national hero?)

Japan's fee fees had to be protected, other people's not so much, I guess. (Snark)
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 03:46 PM   #287
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 48,226
Originally Posted by Garrison View Post
And who was the instigator of every crisis in Europe in the 1930s? Hitler's Germany. Who was wedded to the belief that war was both necessary and desirable? Adolf Hitler. Who did I suspect you have a poster of on your bedroom wall...
And over the last few pages Michael H is whitewashng Hitler's "Honorary Aryan " buddies in Japan as well.
I thought that Michael H was just somebody nieve and ignorant of History who had fallen for the Neo Nazi nonsense, but now I am pretty much convinced. he is one.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 06:04 PM   #288
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,502
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
An interesting book on Hitler's peace offers has been posted by Saggy in post #119: https://www.amazon.com/What-World-Re.../dp/B00M5K8OEM.

"- The full text of Hitler’s “Appeal for Peace and Sanity” speech, made before the Reichstag on July 19, 1940, following the fall of France. In that speech, Hitler once again offered unconditional peace to Britain. This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain. Although nearly half the British cabinet wanted to take up his offer, Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace"
Hitler's one hour speech where he justifies Germany's invasion of Poland, Norway, and thanks Stalin, and states he supported Mussolini's peace mediation offer was never dropped as leaflets over England. The speech was broadcast by radio in German to German allies. Hitler described the allied leaders essentially as stooges for International Jewish and Freemasonic interests.

Michel H simply is simply using wartime German Ministry of Propaganda disinformation supplied to him by Saggy, a holocaust denier. It is holocaust denial propaganda.


You can hear the entire speech translated into English for the first time, here
https://archive.org/details/HitlersV...tyJuly19th1940
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 07:24 PM   #289
Michel H
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,041
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Hitler's one hour speech where he justifies Germany's invasion of Poland, Norway, and thanks Stalin, and states he supported Mussolini's peace mediation offer was never dropped as leaflets over England. The speech was broadcast by radio in German to German allies. Hitler described the allied leaders essentially as stooges for International Jewish and Freemasonic interests.

Michel H simply is simply using wartime German Ministry of Propaganda disinformation supplied to him by Saggy, a holocaust denier. It is holocaust denial propaganda.


You can hear the entire speech translated into English for the first time, here
https://archive.org/details/HitlersV...tyJuly19th1940
Quote:
Hitler's one hour speech where he justifies Germany's invasion of Poland, Norway, and thanks Stalin, and states he supported Mussolini's peace mediation offer was never dropped as leaflets over England.
I wonder how you can know this; you are not supplying any proof for your claim.

An excerpt of Adolf Hitler's July 19, 1940 speech:
Quote:
My Last Appeal to Great Britain

A GREAT EMPIRE WILL BE DESTROYED

By ADOLF HITLER, Chancellor of Germany

Speech made to the Reichstag, July 19, 1940
...
It never has been my intention to wage wars, but rather to build up a State with a new social order and the finest possible standard of culture. Every year that this war drags on is keeping me away from this work.

Only a few days ago Mr. Churchill reiterated his declaration that he wants war ...
In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Great Britain as much as elsewhere. I consider myself in a position to make this appeal, since I am not the vanquished, begging favors, but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I can see no reason why this war must go on. I am grieved to think of the sacrifices it will claim.

I should like to avert them.
As for my own people, I know that millions of German men, young and old alike, are burning with the desire to settle accounts with the enemy who for the second time has declared war upon us for no reason whatever. But I also know that at home there are many women and mothers who, ready as they are to sacrifice all they have in life, yet are bound to it by their heartstrings.

Possibly Mr. Churchill again will brush aside this statement of mine by saying that it is merely born of fear and of doubt in our final victory. In that case I shall have relieved my conscience in regard to the things to come.
(http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1940/1940-07-19b.html)
Michel H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 11:34 PM   #290
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,502
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
I wonder how you can know this; you are not supplying any proof for your claim.
1) I have linked you to the actual translation of Hitler's full speech.

2) It is you who claimed and quoted "
This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain. Although nearly half the British cabinet wanted to take up his offer, Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace"

Show me your evidence this entire speech from Adolf Hitler was translated into English and tens of thousands dropped by German aircraft over England. Was it 25 pages long? Was it 30 pages long?

What date was it dropped?. Which half of the cabinet members wanted to accept a German speech as a peace offer? Name them.


You simply copied a BS claim of another holocaust denier. I checked archives.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2020, 11:40 PM   #291
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,531
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
I wonder how you can know this; you are not supplying any proof for your claim.

An excerpt of Adolf Hitler's July 19, 1940 speech:

(http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/policy/1940/1940-07-19b.html)
Well. If he really wanted peace, he could always have offered to go back to the prewar borders of Germany. Those of the beginning of 1938 would sound reasonable, I think. Of course for a real peace it would have to mean reparation for all the damages and suffering caused by Germany to their neighbouring countries. Freeing all the people in concentration camps should also be on the table. A tribunal to find out if any crimes against humanity were committed by that time would be reasonable as well.

If he really had the best for the German people in mind, that would be the thing to do.By the time of that speech German had lost about 75.000 men killed in battle. I don't think there were very many German civilian casualties by this time, but I'll give you 5000, just to make a round number (although I would guess the amount of German civilians killed by this time to be more in the order of a 1000, if that (not from other countries! Het nazis were killing civilians left and right, especially in Poland!).

So. By the time of that speech, Germany had lost about 80.000 of its citizens. By the end of the war these would be joined by something of 4,5 million others, excluding about half a million civilians. And there there were the missing, and the wounded of course.

It would be worth it, wouldn't it? just from the perspective of Germany itself.
If........ if he really wanted peace and had the best for Germany at heart.


At the very least it would have saved my grandfather the experience of being picked up and send as a slave labour to Germany, while my grandmother was just about expecting the birth of my father. Or my grandmother getting evicted from their house and getting told by a Nazi soldier, she was forbidden to feed my father, because he was just a 'sickly Dutch baby'.
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"

Last edited by erwinl; 16th June 2020 at 11:42 PM.
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 01:11 AM   #292
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,502
I assume everyone is now laughing at Michel H's holocaust denial propaganda claim.

I posted below an actual propaganda leaflet that the Germans dropped on Dunkirk. It is one page, simple and aimed at troops still in France.


In contrast, Michel H is claiming and quoting that German bombers flew over the UK dropping tens of thousands of copies of Hitler's one hour internal propaganda speech to the Reichstag before the blitz started, although no such thing ever happened at all.

Michel based his claim on a comment posted by a holocaust denier who simply made it up and concluded his BS post with "Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace"
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dunkirk propaganda leaflet.jpg (82.2 KB, 9 views)
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 02:26 AM   #293
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 20,579
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
I assume everyone is now laughing at Michel H's holocaust denial propaganda claim.

I posted below an actual propaganda leaflet that the Germans dropped on Dunkirk. It is one page, simple and aimed at troops still in France.


In contrast, Michel H is claiming and quoting that German bombers flew over the UK dropping tens of thousands of copies of Hitler's one hour internal propaganda speech to the Reichstag before the blitz started, although no such thing ever happened at all.

Michel based his claim on a comment posted by a holocaust denier who simply made it up and concluded his BS post with "Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace"
Laughing at him? No, not really. Quite a few of us are very well aware of his various...challenges.

Pity might be a more accurate descriptor.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 02:56 AM   #294
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 30,941
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
In contrast, Michel H is claiming and quoting that German bombers flew over the UK dropping tens of thousands of copies of Hitler's one hour internal propaganda speech to the Reichstag before the blitz started, although no such thing ever happened at all.
Maybe not, but it's well documented that Hitler broadcast the whole thing telepathically to every UK citizen in real time. Unfortunately, since he was thinking in German as well as speaking it, most of the people simply didn't understand it. However, on a subsequent multiple choice test where they were asked whether Hitler was asking them to (a) Continue fighting, (b) Come round to the Reichstag for dinner, (c) Surrender or (d) Take lessons in Argentinian Tango, 29% of the population selected (c), proving beyond possible doubt that telepathy is a thing.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 05:17 AM   #295
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 20,579
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Maybe not, but it's well documented that Hitler broadcast the whole thing telepathically to every UK citizen in real time. Unfortunately, since he was thinking in German as well as speaking it, most of the people simply didn't understand it. However, on a subsequent multiple choice test where they were asked whether Hitler was asking them to (a) Continue fighting, (b) Come round to the Reichstag for dinner, (c) Surrender or (d) Take lessons in Argentinian Tango, 29% of the population selected (c), proving beyond possible doubt that telepathy is a thing.

Dave
That irony will only work on those unaware of the other threads.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 10:35 AM   #296
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,589
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
And once again Michel "forgets" that the oil embargo etc., was a peaceful, non-violent response to Japanese aggressive stupidity. Michel's characterization of it as some sort of horrible wicked response is actually fairly funny.
Well, I'd say there's a bigger WTH about this. And I'm gonna be long-winded, as usual, so bear with me.

The embargo actually didn't come out of nowhere. It actually WAS as part of a series of diplomatic talks that went on from 1937 to literally the day before Pearl Harbour. As in literally, President Roosevelt telegraphed to Tokyo a personal message to the Emperor of Japan on December 6. But all through 1941, starting on March 8, there were intensive talks with Japan to try to solve the situation peacefully. Japan stalled and lied, as evidenced by it going on and occupying South Indochina mere DAYS after reassuring the USA that oh noes, they're totally not looking to conquer anything, and are all about self-defense and (I kid you not) preventing the war in Europe from spreading to Asia.

It also did not escallate from zero to embargo over night. It went from terminating the 1911 commercial treaty with Japan in 1939, to the Export Control Act in 1940, to freezing Japanese assets in the USA on July 26, 1941, to finally the oil embargo on August 1, 1941. That's more than two years of talks, and each step of the escalation being only taken after Japan clearly didn't give a crap about the previous sanctions, and wasn't taking the talks as anything but a joke. Japan continued to LIE about it all the way through, and wouldn't accept anything short of 'the USA must immediately stop all aid to China, and give us everything we want.' (Not only oil, I might add, but also nickel and a few other resources.) Basically nothing short of the USA helping build up the Japanese military was acceptable.

So here's the WTH part: so our friend Michel expects talks to go... HOW? If any escalation beyond empty talks and giving them all they want anyway is not an option, then WTH is even the point of having talks?
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 17th June 2020 at 10:37 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 10:50 AM   #297
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,589
In fact, here's an idea: if the USA is supposed to have absolutely no control over its foreign policy and exports, and essentially the only acceptable option is to give Japan everything it wants, from materials to stopping your relations with who they want you to... then WTH is the functional difference between that and being a puppet state of Japan?
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 10:51 AM   #298
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 5,052
To renew and expand upon another question I've posed, and which you've ignored, Michel, please explain why it was unreasonable for the US and Britain to have insisted on unconditional surrender when, as I mentioned, Churchill and FDR1 were well aware that Germany and Japan were capable of developing nuclear weapons, especially when Germany was clearly much farther along than the Allies in the development of cruise missiles and heavy rockets.2
_______________
1A slight correction to my previous post on this subject. Although Einstein and Szilárd wrote their letter before Germany attacked Poland, FDR didn't actually receive it until October of 1939. However, he immediately recognized the danger, and ordered the military to begin studying the issue.

2I should note here that Spock's comment about putting nuclear weapons on V-2s in the classic ST:TOS episode "The City on the Edge of Forever" is incorrect. The V-2 had a payload of 1000 kg; a first-generation atomic bomb weighed about four times that. So the Germans would have had to have built a much larger rocket to carry a nuke, but obviously they would have been much better positioned to have done so than the Allies were.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya

Last edited by SpitfireIX; 17th June 2020 at 10:53 AM.
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 12:14 PM   #299
Pope130
Illuminator
 
Pope130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,382
Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
---snip---
2I should note here that Spock's comment about putting nuclear weapons on V-2s in the classic ST:TOS episode "The City on the Edge of Forever" is incorrect. The V-2 had a payload of 1000 kg; a first-generation atomic bomb weighed about four times that. So the Germans would have had to have built a much larger rocket to carry a nuke, but obviously they would have been much better positioned to have done so than the Allies were.


They were certainly working on much larger lift vehicles (at least on paper). A single stage A-10, with a Fat Man style implosion device would have been able to reach London for Central Europe.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg v2chart3.jpg (42.8 KB, 0 views)
Pope130 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 03:28 PM   #300
Michel H
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,041
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
2) It is you who claimed and quoted "This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain. Although nearly half the British cabinet wanted to take up his offer, Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace"
Actually, I didn't claim that
Quote:
This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain.
.
I just mentioned the book "What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers 1933–1940" by Friedrich Stieve, and I said it was interesting, but not necessarily accurate and reliable.

However, it is true that copies of Hitler's July 19, 1940 Reichstag speech were dropped from German aircraft over Britain:
Quote:
A couple of months after the bus incident I was visiting Ramsey, a small village about four miles from Harwich, and found a German leaflet in the Hedgerow, which in all probability had been dropped by a bomber returning from an air raid on London. The leaflet, is double A3 size and has close type on all four sides. ... The heading and brief note on some of the more salient points are:
A LAST APPEAL TO REASON BY ADOLF HITLER
SPEECH BEFORE THE REICHSTAG, 19 JULY 1940
The leaflet emphasised Hitler’s regret that, in spite or all his determined and honest efforts, he had not succeeded in achieving the friendship with England which he believed would have been a blessing for both people.

Two thirds of the last page deals with the proposed future four year plan for Germany and ending with Hitler’s final statement:

"In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense, in Great Britain as much as elsewhere. I consider myself in a position to make this appeal since I am not the vanquished begging favours, but the victor speaking in the name of reason. I can see no reason why this war must go on.

Possibly Mr Churchill will again brush aside this statement of mine by saying that it is merely of fear and doubt in our final victory. In that case, I shall have relieved my conscience in regards to the things to come.”
(link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peo...a4081510.shtml)

This webpage has a picture of the actual leaflet.
Michel H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 05:30 PM   #301
Major Major
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 355
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
Actually, I didn't claim that
.
I just mentioned the book "What the World Rejected: Hitler’s Peace Offers 1933–1940" by Friedrich Stieve, and I said it was interesting, but not necessarily accurate and reliable.

However, it is true that copies of Hitler's July 19, 1940 Reichstag speech were dropped from German aircraft over Britain:

(link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peo...a4081510.shtml)

This webpage has a picture of the actual leaflet.
And here is the reply:

Originally Posted by Sefton Delmer
Within an hour of Hitler having spoken I was on the air with my reply. And without a moment’s hesitation I turned his peace offer down. My colleagues at the B.B.C. had approved of what I meant to say. That was enough authority for me.

“ HERR HITLER,” I said in my smoothest and most deferential , German, “you have on occasion in the past consulted me as to the mood of the British public. So permit me to render your excellency this little service once again tonight. Let me tell you what we here in Britain think of this appeal of yours to what you are pleased to call our reason and common sense. Herr Führer and Reichskanzler, we hurl it right back at you, right in your evil smelling teeth . . .” It was not diplomatic language or very elegant. But I reckoned a little earthy vulgarity in answer to the Führer’s cant would be just the thing to shock my German listeners out of their complacency. Especially as I then followed it up with some orthodox moralising about British reason permitting no compromise with murder and aggression. I even ventured to make a prophecy. I told Hitler that though things might look quite bright for him at the moment, the tide would inevitably turn, and he, like the Kaiser before him would find that he had been `conquering himself to death’. It was a phrase I well remembered from my first-war school days in Berlin and it soon became a stock slogan of the second-war B.B.C.
https://www.psywar.org/delmer/1005/1002
Major Major is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th June 2020, 09:18 PM   #302
Matthew Ellard
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,502
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
Actually, I didn't claim that
1) The actual original book was written by Friedrich Stieve who wrote for the wartime NAZI Ministry of Propaganda. You were informed that this book existed by , Saggy, a forum holocaust denier. Friedrich Stieve also wrote "New Germany" for the NAZI Ministry of propaganda, to recruit non-German Aryans to the Hitler Youth. Stievie died in 1966 and did not write the 2015 Amazon summary nor added the chapters to the modern reprint.

Instead, you specifically posted and quoted a holocaust denier's summary of the book and claimed it was an excerpt from the book in your post as your evidence. Here is your quote and a link to your post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=240

Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
"An excerpt from this book:

This edition benefits from four new sections which did not appear in the original publication. These are:- The full text of Hitler’s “Appeal for Peace and Sanity” speech, made before the Reichstag on July 19, 1940, following the fall of France. In that speech, Hitler once again offered unconditional peace to Britain. This speech was printed in English and dropped by the tens of thousands from German aircraft over Britain. Although nearly half the British cabinet wanted to take up his offer, Churchill’s warmongering put an end to this final offer of peace
So, firstly, you lied and it was not an excerpt from the book.

Secondly, you quoted and promoted the holocaust denial claim half of Churchill's war cabinet (appointed May 1940) wanted to take up an offer of peace, based .on a hour and longer speech Hitler made to the Reichstag in July 1940 yet you cannot name one cabinet member who wanted to do this. This is because it is complete crap from you and holocaust deniers.

Thirdly, the pamphlet dropped is not Hitler's speech to the Reichstag, is it? It is a reduced propaganda re-write by the NAZI ministry of propaganda.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2020, 03:16 PM   #303
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,349
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
The embargo was almost an invitation to Japan to invade the Dutch East Indies
Or they could discontinue their military plans and operations in China....
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2020, 03:20 PM   #304
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,349
Good news. Belgians are starting to accept the noxious legacy of the murderous swine Leopold II and demanding his statues and other memorials be removed.
I suggest O'Brien and Casement as replacements...
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2020, 08:27 PM   #305
Pacal
Graduate Poster
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,065
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
Good news. Belgians are starting to accept the noxious legacy of the murderous swine Leopold II and demanding his statues and other memorials be removed.
I suggest O'Brien and Casement as replacements...
I suggest Edmond Morel.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 08:37 AM   #306
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,349
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
Yes, I agree, monarchy is not a democratic system.
Good. Time to abolish it.

Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
However, it is widely believed
By whom?

Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
that the Belgian monarchy is a stabilizing factor in a deeply divided country.
Then your country needs to be fixed. Abolish Belgium...
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 08:50 AM   #307
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,349
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
I suggest Edmond Morel.
Why not all three? Melt down Leopold and his horse, there should be plenty of bronze...
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 09:03 AM   #308
malbui
Beauf
 
malbui's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,528
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
Then your country needs to be fixed. Abolish Belgium...
Given Belgium's recent difficulties in forming a steady government, I've been suggesting for a while that the country should be split between France and the Netherlands. We get the French-speaking areas, Brussels, and control of the breweries and chocolate factories while they get the Flemish districts. The German-speaking part is free to do whatever they want. Sorted.
__________________
"But Master! Does not the fire need water too? Does not the mountain need the storm? Does not your scrotum need kicking?"
malbui is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 09:07 AM   #309
malbui
Beauf
 
malbui's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,528
In case anybody is wondering, I'm so aghast at Michel H's take on history and his whitewashing of the crimes of the Nazi state - in my part of France German tourists still aren't welcome because of memories of the Occupation - that I really can't face challenging them. So I'm choosing flippancy instead.
__________________
"But Master! Does not the fire need water too? Does not the mountain need the storm? Does not your scrotum need kicking?"
malbui is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 10:00 AM   #310
Michel H
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,041
Originally Posted by malbui View Post
In case anybody is wondering, I'm so aghast at Michel H's take on history and his whitewashing of the crimes of the Nazi state - in my part of France German tourists still aren't welcome because of memories of the Occupation - that I really can't face challenging them. So I'm choosing flippancy instead.
See these posts:
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
Hitler ... was a racist man, and made a big mistake when he invaded the Soviet Union in 1941.
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
Germany and Japan did many wrong things during the 1930s and 1940s. Their racism, and brutal racist expansionism was unacceptable.
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
... But this does not mean the Axis countries were innocent at all, major and well documented crimes were committed by Germany and Japan.
Michel H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 10:14 AM   #311
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,735
Originally Posted by malbui View Post
Given Belgium's recent difficulties in forming a steady government, I've been suggesting for a while that the country should be split between France and the Netherlands. We get the French-speaking areas, Brussels, and control of the breweries and chocolate factories while they get the Flemish districts. The German-speaking part is free to do whatever they want. Sorted.
Yeah, thanks, sort us with ever more extreme right whackjobs, no thanks, we've got too much of those in the Netherlands as it is.
Maybe create a DC style district for the EU out of Vlaanderen?
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 02:07 PM   #312
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 48,226
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
Good news. Belgians are starting to accept the noxious legacy of the murderous swine Leopold II and demanding his statues and other memorials be removed.
I suggest O'Brien and Casement as replacements...
Judgement day for "Leopold The Damned".

I think quite a few people in the Congo said NOW YOU KNOW WHAT IT FEELS LIKE when Germany conqured Belgium in 1914......
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 04:45 PM   #313
Major Major
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 355
*Listen to the yell of Leopold's ghost
Burning in Hell for his hand-maimed host.
Hear how the demons chuckle and yell
Cutting his hands off, down in Hell."

Vachel Lindsay, "Congo"
Major Major is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2020, 05:51 PM   #314
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,778
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Judgement day for "Leopold The Damned".

I think quite a few people in the Congo said NOW YOU KNOW WHAT IT FEELS LIKE when Germany conqured Belgium in 1914......
Meanwhile in Australia. . .

King Leopold Ranges renamed by WA Government amid global Black Lives Matter protests
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th June 2020, 08:54 AM   #315
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,877
Originally Posted by Michel H View Post
See these posts:
If that was the sum total of your posts, you'd have a point.

Unfortunately the general premise of your position is that the U.S. essentially brought war upon themselves and the Germans were so threatened by international Jewery and burdened by WWI reparations that they had no choice other than to invade and conquer their neighbors.

That's where you fall flat on your ass.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th June 2020, 06:58 PM   #316
Michel H
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,041
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
Unfortunately the general premise of your position is that the U.S. essentially brought war upon themselves and the Germans were so threatened by international Jewery and burdened by WWI reparations that they had no choice other than to invade and conquer their neighbors.
Quote:
Unfortunately the general premise of your position is that the U.S. essentially brought war upon themselves
I believe the U.S. hit Japan too hard by imposing the oil embargo (and a similar embargo on other raw materials, plus closing the Panama canal to Japanese ships). It would have been better to raise the price of oil exports by 20% using an export tax, and to give the proceeds of such a tax to freedom fighters in China (while urging dialogue and negotiations).
Quote:
Unfortunately the general premise of your position is that ... the Germans were so threatened by international Jewery and burdened by WWI reparations that they had no choice other than to invade and conquer their neighbors.
Sorry, I never wrote such a thing. I believe, though, that the UK and France shouldn't have declared war on (and attacked) Germany in September 1939. This raised the general level of anger and violence, they (UK and France) lost the first part of the war, and several countries were occupied as a result of this decision (we also know what happened later).
They could (for example) have limited themselves to accepting a large number of Polish refugees (including Jewish ones) on their soils, in order to provide some assistance to Poland.
Michel H is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th June 2020, 09:50 PM   #317
Lukraak_Sisser
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,735
Alternatively, they should have attacked the moment the Germans were in Poland, as there was no defense.
That would have forced the German armies to turn around and the soviets would have kept marching, which would have eliminated the vile stain of the Nazis many years earlier, without the civilian casualties in countries other than Germany itself.


Because in your fantasy land poor innocent Hitler may have only attacked other countries in retaliation, but in reality he would have attacked anyway, but with a better equipped army.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th June 2020, 10:28 PM   #318
Little 10 Toes
Master Poster
 
Little 10 Toes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,168
Again, you miss the counterpoint to your argument. Instead of assigning blame to the US, UK, and to France, how about addressing what the original instigators did.

What you are doing is blaming the victim. "Well, if he didn't have money hanging out of his pocket, he wouldn't have been robbed." "She deserved what happened to her, did you see how she dressed?" "If they only knew better, they could have avoided the whole mess." "They shouldn't have resisted arrest."

How about addressing Germany's actions? How about addressing Japan's actions? How about addressing Italy's actions? How about having some common decency and acknowledge the death of civilians based on their nationality/country of origin?

Quote:
I believe the U.S. hit Japan too hard by imposing the oil embargo (and a similar embargo on other raw materials, plus closing the Panama canal to Japanese ships). It would have been better to raise the price of oil exports by 20% using an export tax, and to give the proceeds of such a tax to freedom fighters in China (while urging dialogue and negotiations).
Bet you didn't know that there were already embargoes.

Quote:
A series of events led to the attack on Pearl Harbor. War between Japan and the United States had been a possibility that each nation's military forces planned for in the 1920s, though real tension did not begin until the 1931 invasion of Manchuria by Japan. Over the next decade, Japan expanded slowly into China, leading to the Second Sino-Japanese war in 1937. In 1940 Japan invaded French Indochina in an effort to embargo all imports into China, including war supplies purchased from the U.S. This move prompted the United States to embargo all oil exports, leading the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) to estimate it had less than two years of bunker oil remaining and to support the existing plans to seize oil resources in the Dutch East Indies. Planning had been underway for some time on an attack on the "Southern Resource Area" to add it to the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere Japan envisioned in the Pacific.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events...n_Pearl_Harbor
Hilite added.

So Japan invaded China in 1931. There was the Sino-Japanese war in 1937. Japan invaded French Indochina in 1940. See a pattern here? And they were already planning to invade the Dutch East Indies. The embargo didn't even start .
Did you know that there was an embargo in place in 1938?

Quote:
Beginning in 1938, the U.S. adopted a succession of increasingly restrictive trade restrictions with Japan. This included terminating its 1911 commercial treaty with Japan in 1939, further tightened by the Export Control Act of 1940. These efforts failed to deter Japan from continuing its war in China, or from signing the Tripartite Pact in 1940 with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, officially forming the Axis Powers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events...n_Pearl_Harbor
Ever hear of the ABCD Line?
Quote:
The ABCD line (ABCDライン, Ēbīshīdī rain) was a Japanese name for a series of embargoes against Japan by foreign nations, including America, Britain, China, and the Dutch. It was also known as the ABCD encirclement (ABCD包囲陣, Ēbīshīdī hōijin). In 1940, in an effort to discourage Japanese militarism, these nations and others stopped selling iron ore, steel and oil to Japan, denying it the raw materials needed to continue its activities in China and French Indochina. In Japan, the government and nationalists viewed these embargoes as acts of aggression; imported oil made up about 80% of domestic consumption, without which Japan's economy, let alone its military, would grind to a halt. The Japanese media, influenced by military propagandists,[1] began to refer to the embargoes as the "ABCD ("American-British-Chinese-Dutch") encirclement" or "ABCD line".

Faced with the possibility of economic collapse and forced withdrawal from its recent conquests, the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters began planning for a war with the Western powers in April 1941. This culminated in the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in December 1941.
So the Japanese invaded, and instead of giving back the land in response to embargoes (which you think is the right thing to do), they attacked the United States.

Bet you didn't know there were negotiations.
Quote:
The Hull note, officially the Outline of Proposed Basis for Agreement Between the United States and Japan, was the final proposal delivered to the Empire of Japan by the United States of America before the attack on Pearl Harbor and the Japanese declaration of war. The note was delivered on November 26, 1941, and is named for Secretary of State Cordell Hull. It was the culmination of a series of events leading to the attack on Pearl Harbor. It was considered by the Japanese as an ultimatum for Japan to withdraw from China and other occupied territories, and was perceived by the Japanese Government at the time and many historians around the world as a casus belli.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_note
Little 10 Toes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2020, 05:51 AM   #319
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 5,052
How about answering my question, Michel?

Originally Posted by SpitfireIX View Post
To renew and expand upon another question I've posed, and which you've ignored, Michel, please explain why it was unreasonable for the US and Britain to have insisted on unconditional surrender when, as I mentioned, Churchill and FDR1 were well aware that Germany and Japan were capable of developing nuclear weapons, especially when Germany was clearly much farther along than the Allies in the development of cruise missiles and heavy rockets.2
_______________
1A slight correction to my previous post on this subject. Although Einstein and Szilárd wrote their letter before Germany attacked Poland, FDR didn't actually receive it until October of 1939. However, he immediately recognized the danger, and ordered the military to begin studying the issue.

2I should note here that Spock's comment about putting nuclear weapons on V-2s in the classic ST:TOS episode "The City on the Edge of Forever" is incorrect. The V-2 had a payload of 1000 kg; a first-generation atomic bomb weighed about four times that. So the Germans would have had to have built a much larger rocket to carry a nuke, but obviously they would have been much better positioned to have done so than the Allies were.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2020, 06:01 AM   #320
SpitfireIX
Philosopher
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 5,052
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Alternatively, they should have attacked the moment the Germans were in Poland, as there was no defense.
That would have forced the German armies to turn around and the soviets would have kept marching, which would have eliminated the vile stain of the Nazis many years earlier, without the civilian casualties in countries other than Germany itself.

France and Britain weren't really capable of launching a major offensive into Germany in 1939, for a variety of reasons. They should have tried to do more than they did, though. Also, whether such a hypothetical offensive would have led the Soviets to violate the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is debatable.
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:48 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.