USA offshoot from "Blame it on Inflation?"

[Mr USA]

Spidey: Where did you get the inclination that my sole source of information was school textbooks? I'm well aware of what the US has and hasn't done. I also never said that we won in Vietnam. I was just reluctant to say we lost. These are two different things. I did say that we achieved our overarching goals though.

Duel: Please don't tell me to read more on WW2. I finished college long ago and have continued reading this, my favorite, topic ever since. I've read books by several different authors (mostly American), Keegan is one of the few non-US exceptions. I've also read a good compilation put together by several military analysts and professors (again mostly US but some foreign). Ambrose is a good source, he has done serious research from the archives of many nations and has interviewed thousands of people that were there. These people were German, British, American and other nationalities.

It was no big secret that the US was likely going to go war with Japan. There were feelings in the 20's that Japan, down the road, was likely to become an opponent of the US - because of this we felt we needed to strengthen our Pacific bases and beef-up our Pacific fleet. A few years before WW2 began Congress passed the Two Oceans Naval Act. An indication to Japan that we perceived them as a threat - and an agreement with ourselves that we wanted to be prepared when and if a conflict started.

"And if the whole world is against you, you're outvoted, not evil. That's called Mob Rule, Mr. USA." - how very coy of you. What is your point? Are you trying to sound witty or are you alluding that Germany was just misunderstood? When diverse nations such as Russia and those from the West can come together to fight a greater evil (Germany), that is saying something about world opinion about you. Getting a whole country to march to the beat of the same drum is difficult, but to get most of the world united against you, you have to be thought of as a serious global threat.

 

[Spiderman]

MrUsa: In your first post in this thread, you said

First off, we didn't lose Vietnam

and in your second, you ask me to explain why I thought we lost. You didn't flat-out say the US won, but I don't think you would have been arguing all that hard if you had agreed we lost in the first place.

Also, in your first post on the page (4), you mention that whoever you were replying to needs to hit "the textbooks a little harder". That also implies you are going by "school textbooks". All I was doing was pointing out that they are notorious for making mistakes, which you fully backed up in your next post saying one should look to different sources. That's it.

 

[Duel]

Supporting Germany? Me? Who's polish on both sides? No. I think not. There really is no universal "good vs. evil". Russia was not "good". We were not "good". Nor was germany the ultimate evil, just one very chilling aspect of it.

And, if you remember, we started by fighting Japan, and Germany was simply an ally of them. The world wasn't united against them. We, who were outside their immediate sphere of influence, didn't really care about them in any sense but that they were our enemies' friends.

And we were attempting to goad Japan into war or retreat from rescources. That's different from being aware of the possiblity.

I'm unpopular because I'm loud, opinionated, and tend to be tactless. I am not evil. I may have aspects that are, but I am not. Seperate Germany from the war crimes.

 

[Gerode]

This site should give all the knowledge anyone needs to know about WWII
http://www.allyourbase.net/pictures/index.php/favs/large/zerowingwwii.gif

Duel, I agree completely with your "Evil" statements in that post. That's how I should have explained it. And technically, the whole world wasn't against Germany - Japan, Italy, and probably neutral countries - but I'm not sure how long they would remain allies if Nazis won (the Japanese don't exactly exhibit Aryan features).

 

[Duel]

Somebody set this thread up the bomb?

 

[Mr USA]

Spidey - Please drop the lawyer speak and put down the Clinton Kool-Aid. Next thing we know you will start asking me to define what the meaning of 'is' is. My comment about hitting the textbooks harder was a figurative statement.

Duel - You are wasting my time with your nebulous points. They have no factual basis. Maybe another reason you are unpopular is because you make loose allegations and are frequently wrong. *sigh* We didn't start by fighting Japan. We began by fighting Germany (unofficially) in the Atlantic, well before December 7th, 1941. Germany was sinking our transports bound for Europe and eventually we started going after them with destroyers. Didn't I already say this? If Germany was simply our enemies' friends, why did we have a war doctrine titled 'Germany First'?

Stop with this babble about there being no good vs. evil. This is a conversation about history, not philosophy. By what grounds do you say this about WW2? Apparently, many historians believe it was a battle of good vs. evil. Take these two book titles for example - "The Good Fight: How World War II Was Won", by Stephen Ambrose and "Delivered from Evil: The Saga of World War II" by Robert Leckie. I think these distinguished men have more authority on the matter than a struggling student.

To those reading, I'm sorry if my points seem a bit poignant. But I get frustrated when brazen, self-described know-it-alls make offending statements that have no base in reality. Spidey, I don't think you fit under this category. Rather I think you just like being the devil's advocate.

 

[Baskil]

I was going to stay out of this, but oh well.

Originally posted by Mr USA
Stop with this babble about there being no good vs. evil. This is a conversation about history, not philosophy. By what grounds do you say this about WW2? Apparently, many historians believe it was a battle of good vs. evil. Take these two book titles for example - "The Good Fight: How World War II Was Won", by Stephen Ambrose and "Delivered from Evil: The Saga of World War II" by Robert Leckie. I think these distinguished men have more authority on the matter than a struggling, wet-behind-the-ears student.

Actually, Duel does have a point here. The reason your historians say that it was a battle of good vs. evil is because of what side their nationalities lay. Of course Steven Ambrose is going to say it was good vs evil, he was 9 years old when the war was going on. He probably saw men he looked up to go and fight, so of course he's going to have strong patriotic feelings. In addition to that, you have to also think about who his target audience is in his books. They are Americans who already think that way (that is was Good vs. Evil). So of course he's going to present that case. It sells books.

There is no such thing as the right side of a war. There is no such thing as evil, only shades of grey.

Oh, and flippantly discrediting someone is a great way to turn people against you, btw.

 

[Spiderman]

MrUSA: No offense, but if you "spoke" (wrote) clearly what you mean instead of speaking "figuratively", that would cut down on misunderstandings.

You could have easily said "just do research" and left it at that.

And I think the terms "good" and "evil" as used in your book title examples are the "author's" opinion, not necessarily recognized "world-wide". In other words, just because the book title has it labeled so doesn't make it true. It may have convinced you, but I don't think those are good examples.

Personally, I do think it was a fight against "good and eveil (at least vs Germany). And I do like to ask questions to make I know what someone's talking about and maybe to make sure they know what they're talking about

 

[Duel]

Alright, I'm backing off of the good versus evil point, because that's a matter of personal opinion, and I doubt I could ever convince you or vice versa, I just wanted to put it out there.

However, if our war was against Germany, and they were sinking our ships, why was it that Japan was the one we blamed for the cause? Why was "the day that will live forever in infamy" when Japan bombed us, as opposed to Germany sinking the ships we lent to england?

 

[Spiderman]

Was the US actively U-Boat hunting then, or just posting destroyers as escorts? I'm thinking it was the former, otherwise why wouldn't the US have declared war anyway?

 

[Mr USA]

When you read about what happened during those years, you get (or at least should get) the impression that we were fighting evil. There are many cases for the Germans and the Japanese where their government/military establishment sanctioned very unwholesome acts. The Nazi death camps, the murder of massive amounts of Slavic civilians, the Rape of Nanking and Japan's 'Total War' concept are a few examples. I will concede that the titles of these books can be thought of as an author's opinion. I know there are many ways to tell the same story, but how many books, articles or documentaries have you seen that portrayed the US or Britain as being on the wrong side of that conflict? Also, all historical books on this subject tell the same story, they differ slightly in accounts of what happened or the depth that they cover. If you watch contemporary documentaries, you will see interviews of soldiers and civilians of the Axis countries that admit it was unwholesome. You can take fault with Russia since they had a pact with Germany to divide Eastern Europe and under Stalin's regime millions of his own people died. They were seen as the lesser of the evils at the time - you know the phrase "An enemy of my enemy is a friend of mine". But Stalin is still on the same level of maniacal lunacy as Hitler.

Japan is and was not held solely responsible for WW2. The Nuremberg Trials should speak to this. Many Germans were found guilty for crimes against humanity and executed or jailed indefinitely. There was no such case for Japan - even though Japan had a large death camp in Manchuria that was similar to German's. America's entrance into the war was progressive. We saw the looming storm on the horizon and tried to stay neutral and isolationist. Early in the war, the American public didn't want to get involved. The president pledged to keep us out. Inevitably, we saw things deteriorate and slowly became involved. However, the more things happened, the more the public became energized (the sinking of the luxury liner w/ US citizens, Germany's unrestricted submarine warfare, etc). It took the bombing of one of our bases to be the last straw. The bombing happened on 12/7/41, we declared war on Japan on 12/8/41 and Germany/Italy declared war on us 12/11/41. It all happened pretty fast.

 

[Baskil]

Originally posted by Mr USA
When you read about what happened during those years, you get (or at least should get) the impression that we were fighting evil.

Of course, written by the victors.

There are many cases for the Germans and the Japanese where their government/military establishment sanctioned very unwholesome acts. The Nazi death camps, the murder of massive amounts of Slavic civilians, the Rape of Nanking and Japan's 'Total War' concept are a few examples.

I guess this brings up the question, what is evil? Evil is, by my estimation, what the majority feels is evil. Or, at least that's what most people think. The true definition of evil is undefinable, because what exactly is the boundary between right and wrong? If we can define that boundary, is anyone truly good?

I will concede that the titles of these books can be thought of as an author's opinion. I know there are many ways to tell the same story, but how many books, articles or documentaries have you seen that portrayed the US or Britain as being on the wrong side of that conflict?

I can assure you, that even with the first ammendment, and the somewhat free speech in britian, you would never see a documentary about the Allies being on the wrong side of the war. The reason is simple. It would be considered hate speech. Not to mention that no distribution company in their right mind would ever sign a book deal for one, nor any production company fund a documentary about it. Because it just wouldn't sell. On the whole, controversial things don't sell that well.

Also, all historical books on this subject tell the same story, they differ slightly in accounts of what happened or the depth that they cover. If you watch contemporary documentaries, you will see interviews of soldiers and civilians of the Axis countries that admit it was unwholesome.

Of course they are going to say it was unwholesome. I mean, how would they ever be acclimated back into society if they didn't conform to what the victors felt?

You can take fault with Russia since they had a pact with Germany to divide Eastern Europe and under Stalin's regime millions of his own people died. They were seen as the lesser of the evils at the time - you know the phrase "An enemy of my enemy is a friend of mine". But Stalin is still on the same level of maniacal lunacy as Hitler.

Stalin is way above Hitler. From what I remember, Hitler did not pull the trigger on anyone but himself.

Japan is and was not held solely responsible for WW2. The Nuremberg Trials should speak to this. Many Germans were found guilty for crimes against humanity and executed or jailed indefinitely. There was no such case for Japan - even though Japan had a large death camp in Manchuria that was similar to German's.

Well, I don't want to speak for the millions of Americans at that time, but Europe took more of a stage because they were kindred. The majority of Americans didn't care what happened in the Pacific, as long as we weren't going to be attacked by anyone.

 

[Spiderman]

Baskil:

On the whole, controversial things don't sell that well

Some do... (speaking in general, not about WWII now)

 

[Mr USA]

Thank you for joining our discussion, but your comments are rooted in philosophy. They are not based on historical fact. I have no interest in engaging in dialog with someone who makes assertions based purely on an uninformed opinion. If you are well informed about WW2, please make points that are historically based and I'll respond.

 

[Duel]

1. We are not good. Look into Japanese internment during WW II. Not as powerful as the concentration camps, but it's something to consider.

2. You've resorted to personal insults. This is the third time you've dismissed someone without knowing their educational beckground because their views do not align with yours. I have avoided making personal comments, as I don't know you. I'd appreciate it if you would have the same courtesy. Feel free to disagree, but try to base your arguments in fact. If you need to resort to personal attacks, please feel free to go to another website.

 

[Apollo]

Ditto Duel. When you're talking about good and evil, you're already rooted deeply in philosophy. Don't dismiss someone just because they don't agree with you or don't debate using the same methods you do. Baskil makes good points, and should be considered rather than brushed off.

 

[Baskil]

Originally posted by Mr USA
Thank you for joining our discussion, but your comments are rooted in philosophy. They are not based on historical fact. I have no interest in engaging in dialog with someone who makes assertions based purely on an uninformed opinion. If you are well informed about WW2, please make points that are historically based and I'll respond.

Excuse me while I lol. What makes your opinion so informed? And what's to say that I'm not informed? Trust me, I'm not some know-it-all punk high school kid. I kept the historical facts out of the discussion party because you did. Sure, you make it seem like you were, but in essence your posts here are: "USA good and virtuous, you wrong" (not to mention just as eloquent). I brought up the philisophical side of the conflict because it seems that while you have been well read about American history, you haven't read between the lines. I just think your blind patriotism is keeping you from seeing the truth about our country's past.

I'd be willing to bet cash that you think Wounded Knee was a fair fight.

 

[Duel]

I'm sorry if I appeared dismissive of others' views. LEt me assure you that that was not my intention. I assume that Mr. USA is a well-educated person, particularly on this subject, I wouldn't bother arguing with him if I thought he was dumb or uninformed. I am only trying to find out wh he assumes the USA was "good" in WW II. I do not believe they were, and would like to find out why he does.

My point was that he was dismissing people's arguments because he claimed that they were not well-educated, without knowing their background, which is equivalent to saying "Because they believe _____, they're stupid."

*added later
As a side note, we did not declare war on germany, they declared war on us. Why do you think we avoided declaring war on them?

 

[Apollo]

Um... Duel? Nobody said anything negative to you. You don't have to defend yourself.

 

[Duel]

No?
*goes back and re-reads Apollo's earlier post*

Oh! I get it now!

Nevermind then. Sorry