[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

No I don't. I simply point out the hypocrisy in society that people find this historic event abhorrent but tolerate isis, which is as evil or more.
I can also point out equally evil acts committed by every society. Romans, medieval english, American indians, soviets, saddam, etc. This isn't extroadinary. What's extroadinary is we have the power to stop this happening now and we don't.

This.
Then and now.

[M3 Number 86]

This is why us Koreans fucking hate the Japanese.

Some of these things can be seen on Faces Of Death.

[///WORK-F36]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

This.
Then and now.

Seems stupid to risk American lives when the middle eastern countries who surround ISIS should be doing this themselves

[Z K]

Originally Posted by ///WORK-F36

Seems stupid to risk American lives when the middle eastern countries who surround ISIS should be doing this themselves

The problem is ISIS is so powerful that many of the surrounding areas don't have the means to challenge them.

ISIS is kinda off topic. ISIS doesn't conduct scientific medical experiments on live people for the sake of producing chemical and biological weapons. The crazy stuff that the Japanese and Nazis did in the past were beyond the kind of stuff you'd see today.

[///WORK-F36]

Originally Posted by Z K

The problem is ISIS is so powerful that many of the surrounding areas don't have the means to challenge them.

ISIS is kinda off topic. ISIS doesn't conduct scientific medical experiments on live people for the sake of producing chemical and biological weapons. The crazy stuff that the Japanese and Nazis did in the past were beyond the kind of stuff you'd see today.

ISIS has like maybe 25k people....the surrounding country's militaries have like 5 million troops active and reserve

[bbbbmw]

Let's not forget the Romans:

http://news.yahoo.com/could-stomach-...141951626.html

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by Z K

The problem is ISIS is so powerful that many of the surrounding areas don't have the means to challenge them.

ISIS is kinda off topic. ISIS doesn't conduct scientific medical experiments on live people for the sake of producing chemical and biological weapons. The crazy stuff that the Japanese and Nazis did in the past were beyond the kind of stuff you'd see today.

Troop strength was covered. Dropping a dozen bombs a day is our present response vs thousands a day in Gulf 1.

Isis kills for ideology. Their methods of killing are just as bad as ww2. Their reason is the same. They regard others not like them as inferior and worthless so killing them is not the same as killing their own. They burn alive, stone, behead, dismember, rape, enslave, torture, hang, drown, bury alive. I fail to see how they are less evil in their methods than the Japanese or Germans. At least they did this for knowledge and not just because you're not a raving jihadist.

[cays]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

No I don't. I simply point out the hypocrisy in society that people find this historic event abhorrent but tolerate isis, which is as evil or more.
I can also point out equally evil acts committed by every society. Romans, medieval english, American indians, soviets, saddam, etc. This isn't extroadinary. What's extroadinary is we have the power to stop this happening now and we don't.

Umm - we need to consider a correction here - I think you have it backwards. It was the white man that basically eradicated Native American society, culture, independence, stole their land et al. Just like the Rape of Nanking to Japanese, the systematic extermination of indigenous peoples worldwide by white colonial powers has largely become a mere footnote in history. This "whitewashed" (pun intended) Wikipedia look at it is so mild in its outlook I think it amounts to a half-truth at best but even so it's pretty damning.

At the time of first contact, the indigenous cultures were quite different from those of the proto-industrial and mostly Christian immigrants. Some of the Northeastern and Southwestern cultures in particular were matrilineal and operated on a more collective basis than the Europeans were familiar with. The majority of Indigenous American tribes maintained their hunting grounds and agricultural lands for use of the entire tribe. Europeans at that time had patriarchal cultures and had developed concepts of individual property rights with respect to land that were extremely different. The differences in cultures between the established Native Americans and immigrant Europeans, as well as shifting alliances among different nations in times of war, caused extensive political tension, ethnic violence, and social disruption. Even before the European settlement of what is now the United States, Native Americans suffered high fatalities from contact with European diseases spread throughout the Americas by the Spanish to which they had yet not acquired immunity. Smallpox epidemics are thought to have caused the greatest loss of life for indigenous populations, although estimates of the pre-Columbian population of what today constitutes the U.S. vary significantly, from 1 million to 18 million.[4][5]

After the thirteen colonies revolted against Great Britain and established the United States of America, President George Washington and Henry Knox conceived of the idea of "civilizing" Native Americans in preparation for assimilation as U.S. citizens.[6][7][8][9][10] Assimilation (whether voluntary, as with the Choctaw,[11][12] or forced) became a consistent policy through American administrations. During the 19th century, the ideology of manifest destiny became integral to the American nationalist movement. Expansion of European-American populations to the west after the American Revolution resulted in increasing pressure on Native American lands, warfare between the groups, and rising tensions. In 1830, the U.S. Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, authorizing the government to relocate Native Americans from their homelands within established states to lands west of the Mississippi River, accommodating European-American expansion. This resulted in the ethnic cleansing of many tribes, with the brutal, forced marches coming to be known as The Trail of Tears.

As American expansion reached into the West, settler and miner migrants came into increasing conflict with the Great Basin, Great Plains, and other Western tribes. These were complex nomadic cultures based on (introduced) horse culture and seasonal bison hunting. They carried out resistance against United States incursion in the decades after the completion of the Civil War and the Transcontinental Railroad in a series of Indian Wars, which were frequent up until the 1890s but continued into the 20th century. Over time, the United States forced a series of treaties and land cessions by the tribes and established reservations for them in many western states. U.S. agents encouraged Native Americans to adopt European-style farming and similar pursuits, but European-American agricultural technology of the time was inadequate for often dry reservation lands, leading to mass starvation.

[Fundguy1]

No I don't have it wrong. That's the politically correct version. The Indians are just as guilty as the white man. They also killed, murdered, slaughtered, skinned, scalped, raped, kidnapped as well. Many of the first settlements were killed by Indians without provocation. Just because I said indians, I did not mean that they were the bad guys or at fault any more than the white man was at fault against them. It was a deliberate plant put there to see if anyone would ignorantly reply as you did. The reality was both sides were monstrous to each other. The old version had cowboys as good guys and whites as bad guys. The new version, equally wrong but politically correct because it blames white Christians, us that the Indians were peaceful people who we killed and stole their land from out of greed. The reality is in the middle. Both were just and wrong in their actions. This is in contrast to isis or nazis where one side is clearly at fault. That said, I was correct in naming them as a culture that committed barbarous acts like I listed the others. Cutting out hearts from live captives, staking people to the ground to be baked alive in the sun or eaten by ants, etc. All the same shit. Thank you for pointing out the hypocrisy, narrow mindedness, and one sidedness again of the liberal left and current education system which due to political correctness founded on a false imposed guilt blames white men for all the world's wrongs so it can push an agenda.

And yes I was a history minor but could have graduated with it as a major specifically covering the periods of American settlement, Germany 1873-1945, and the age of Charlemagne. Your account has had all the Indian atrocities omitted or removed making them the martyr instead of just the loosing culture.

[Mywifes335]

Watch Donnie Yens Ip Man 2 and Wrath of Vajra. It's fiction and only depicts a fraction of the Japanese mentality toward other East Asians.

Anyone who denies this ethnocentric racism is gone, go f*** yourself because you're ignorant.

I know first hand. My cousin is a Taiwan heritage American married to a sweet Japanese girl and works for a big Japanese corporation. He'll never get social security, never get citizenship, never get recognized as anything but his wife's husband in the municipal records.

ISIS is fucked up but the "wartime" Japanese were fucked up AND perverse....enjoying the torture they put their neighbors through.

[Fundguy1]

I think the Japanese and isis feel the same way. They feel like they are punishing the other. The Japanese for past conflicts and perceived prejudice. Isis for people not believing n their beliefs. In the end, both relish in the pain they inflict.

This is different from the American Indian. They reacted because if culture clash, preservation, protection, honor, custom, etc. They weren't vindictive typically or doing these things for sport or to impose themselves. However, their methods of killing etc were just as brutal as anyone else's which was the point I was making.

[Fundguy1]

And again, as for a correction being made, no, there's no correction except to point out the one side dress and thought that you offered. They were listed because they killed as brutally as the others. Not because their motivation was evil. Their motivation was different. The historical piece you showed was a joke by the way. The real reason the Indians died out wasn't America making war on them, them dying from the trail of tears, or small pox. Those all contributed. The real main reason was we destroyed their food supply when we killed off the massive buffalo herds they depended upon in a few short years. This was the greatest factor in their demise but it isn't even listed.

[cays]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

No I don't have it wrong. That's the politically correct version. The Indians are just as guilty as the white man. They also killed, murdered, slaughtered, skinned, scalped, raped, kidnapped as well. Many of the first settlements were killed by Indians without provocation. Just because I said indians, I did not mean that they were the bad guys or at fault any more than the white man was at fault against them. It was a deliberate plant put there to see if anyone would ignorantly reply as you did. The reality was both sides were monstrous to each other. The old version had cowboys as good guys and whites as bad guys. The new version, equally wrong but politically correct because it blames white Christians, us that the Indians were peaceful people who we killed and stole their land from out of greed. The reality is in the middle. Both were just and wrong in their actions. This is in contrast to isis or nazis where one side is clearly at fault. That said, I was correct in naming them as a culture that committed barbarous acts like I listed the others. Cutting out hearts from live captives, staking people to the ground to be baked alive in the sun or eaten by ants, etc. All the same shit. Thank you for pointing out the hypocrisy, narrow mindedness, and one sidedness again of the liberal left and current education system which due to political correctness founded on a false imposed guilt blames white men for all the world's wrongs so it can push an agenda.

And yes I was a history minor but could have graduated with it as a major specifically covering the periods of American settlement, Germany 1873-1945, and the age of Charlemagne. Your account has had all the Indian atrocities omitted or removed making them the martyr instead of just the loosing culture.

Fundbaby you are a JOKE! Anyone who spells "extroadinary" and uses "loosing" instead of "losing" strikes me as more likely a ditch digger by trade as opposed to a history minor/major. What part-time CC education was that again? You flatter yourself with your self-proclaimed encyclopedic knowledge of history. I'm sure that King Leopold of Belgium - a man who was responsible for the murder of 10M native Congolese in a few years out of a population of 18M is your hero, Mr. Historian.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by cays

Fundbaby you are a JOKE! Anyone who spells "extroadinary" and uses "loosing" instead of "losing" strikes me as more likely a ditch digger by trade as opposed to a history minor/major. What part-time CC education was that again? You flatter yourself with your self-proclaimed encyclopedic knowledge of history.

Um it's called using a smartphone, having fat fingers, and not checking what I typed to see if spellchecker etc messed it up. That comment was a joke as it didn't dispute my points. All you did was point out that I didn't spend 5 minutes reviewing my spelling and syntax. If you had a clue you would have possibly offered a contradictory viewpoint but I guess you can't. You loose. Oh and it was ivy league from a very liberal school with over 200 credit hours of courses completed, 120 necessary to graduate. I majored in economics but could have chosen to have had degrees in philosophy, history, or art history, and I started majoring in aerospace engineering.

[EstorilM]

Read about this a few times. Anytime someone brings up something that is fucked up, I just tell them to google "Unit 731"

[cays]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

It was a deliberate plant put there to see if anyone would ignorantly reply as you did.

Rigggghhhht. Sorry, you have neither the guile or the intelligence to apply conscious thought in that manner. Nice try though.

[Fundguy1]

Some others to add to the list of hideous
Pol pot
Crusaders
Huns
Idi Amin
Drug cartels
Greeks, especially Spartans
Spanish inquisition
Witch hunters in Europe and US
Etc etc etc.
My point, they are all just as bad. Now it's isis, and drug cartels, etc. But we do nothing. So if they're condoned or at least tolerated or ignored, it's hypocritical to condemn the ww2 Japanese.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by cays

Rigggghhhht. Sorry, you have neither the guile or the intelligence to apply conscious thought in that manner. Nice try though.

Lol. Sorry you think so small. I enjoy throwing chum in the water to see what liberal pc fish bite so I can smack them wit a mallet. Often it's missed or overlooked. This time it wasn't.

[Kong Sheng Han]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Some others to add to the list of hideous
Pol pot
Crusaders
Huns
Idi Amin
Drug cartels
Greeks, especially Spartans
Spanish inquisition
Witch hunters in Europe and US
Etc etc etc.
My point, they are all just as bad. Now it's isis, and drug cartels, etc. But we do nothing. So if they're condoned or at least tolerated or ignored, it's hypocritical to condemn the ww2 Japanese.

So people? Yeah, people suck. This is why advanced forms of alien life haven't visited us. We're too barbaric.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by Kong Sheng Han

So people? Yeah, people suck. This is why advanced forms of alien life haven't visited us. We're too barbaric.

Cool.

[Fundguy1]

And Cays, the sign of loosing an argument is attacking the author, not his points, or at least only the author. You've done this twice, validating my rebuttals. (That's another poke though admittedly not as tactful as the inclusion of American Indians)

[cays]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

And Cays, the sign of loosing an argument is attacking the author, not his points, or at least only the author. You've done this twice, validating my rebuttals. (That's another poke though admittedly not as tactful as the inclusion of American Indians)

Sorry, any blowhard who continues to flatter himself like you do gets no respect from me. Your view and interpretation of historical events is no better than mine. We beg to differ. But this is the internet Mr. Ivy League *cough* *cough*.