The Instigator
WorldWar2Debator
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Kc1999
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Any World War 2 topic

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Kc1999
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 732 times Debate No: 49273
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

WorldWar2Debator

Pro

I would like to summon a challenger, of whom must have basic Worls War 2 knowledge, to offer a topic in comments. I shall accept via comments. First round must be explaining of topic.
Kc1999

Con

TOPIC ONE: The Franco-Thai War of 1941 was justified


Definitions:

Justified: having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason.


CRASH COURSE IN 1880s Thai History:

Thailand was under huge pressure at the height of imperialism; King Chulalongkorn, the 5th King of the Chakri Dynastry, was forced to conceded one third of Thai lands in the face of western imperialism, but most notably, the almost completely ethnically Thai lands of Laos and some of Cambodia, in which Thailand gained from a costly war with Vietnam. However, this was done in the bests interest of the Thai people; during this period, Thailand almost jumped from feudalism to industrial capitalism, with modern irrigation and railways first being introduced in the early 1900s.


THE ORIGINS OF THE FRANCO-THAI WAR:

The modernisation of Thai politics was to come much later; in 1932, 27 years after the death of King Chulalongkorn, Thailand (like many other countries) felt the full effects of the "Great Depression". The Thai Currency was incredibly weak (with newspaper costing less than $1, when compared with today's rate of $2), and the nation was experiencing huge economic downturns; it was time for (1,2,3) REVOLUTION! (Well not really, but still) Since the reign of King Rama the V (King Chulalongkorn), Thailand has been sending students to France and other countries to obtain some foreign education; with no surprise, these students were the origins of the so-called 1932 Revolution. Phibulsongkram, whose life has had much significance in Thailand's history and shall do so in this debate as well, engaged in several debates against Marxism. He did not see it as particularly persuasive, but soon became a staunch Anti-Communist in the following years. Soon, several students, now army officers, lauched a Coup D'Etat against the king. Creating a party called the "Khana Ratsadorn", or the "People's Council", the students (aka Army Officers) drafted a new constitution, which effectively turned Thailand into a Constitutional Monarchy (although the role of the monarch under this system was unclear). It did not take long for the syptoms of elitist revolution to follow; Ho Chi Minh alledgedly published a pamphlet, written in English, Thai and Chinese, condemning these "fake" revolutonaries. Democracy in Thailand was clearly unstable; it took only one year for a Coup to take place. There were 3 more rebellions and insurgency (most notably, the Bowdaret Rebellion, where monarchists attempted to reinstall an absolute monarchy) before 1939.

THE WAR:

After the last rebellion (although it was a purge) attempted against the government of Marshall Pibulsongkram, a stable government was finally created. However, this government was in no way democratic, and in no way liberty loving. But yet this was the government that led Thailand through World War II. At the start of World War II, Thailand initially declared it's neutrality. This was initially a impossible task; Thailand was surrounded by Western Imperialism, and was in Japan's "Greater Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere". However, it was not until 1940, when tensions between both countries (France and Thailand) came to a boiling point. In 1940, the news of the Blitzkrieg and the Fall of France initially incited some waves of nationalist sentiments in Thailand; the Thai government was said to have been "fascistic", and initially wanted to reclaim it's lost lands. After the victorious Japanese invasion of French Indochina in 1940, Thailand concluded that this WAS the perfect time to strike back, and reclaim it's lost lands; now they needed an excuse.They did not have to wait long; in 1940, a Thai man was shot and killed for being in French Indochina without a permit. This incited anger and a wave of nationalist protests, soon leading to outright small scale fighting. Soon, the fighting erupted into a series of skirmishes and a full-scale war broke out. France had an impossible task ahead of them; the citizens of these so called "lost lands" were vulnerable to rebellion, as they were met with Thai leaflets, which called for the reunification of these lands with the Thai Fatherland. Thai forces were highly trained and advanced (on land) with considerable ease.The Renualt FT-17 tanks were easily wiped out by the much more modern Thai tankettes (although when faced with FFL Artillery, the tanks were met with some serious opposition) The Royal Thai Air Force had complete air superiority; the Admiral-Govenor of French Indochina even stated that "It was as if [The Royal Thai Air Force] planes were flown by veteran pilots." The French, however, had a slight advantage at sea, and was able to launch a successful raid on Koh Chang, sinking one Thai ship. However, the Japanese, who always had an eye for ways to peacefully appeal to the Thai government, came in and organized an armistice in which:

1. Battambang, Pailin, Siem Reap, Oddachar Meanchay, and Preah Vihear became Thai territory (initially part of French Cambodia)
2. Xiangbouli and a part of Champasak Province became Thai territory (initially part of Laos)


My Point: This war was a just war, waged on just terms.

I have introduced the topic. It is now pro's turn to present his argument.

Thank You
Debate Round No. 1
WorldWar2Debator

Pro

Thank you for introducing our topic. I as Con will say that the Franco-Thai war was forced.

By 1942, Japan had control over Indo-China, and they had problems keeping the Vietnamese in line. France had already surrendered to Germany, so they could not say no if Hitler request they turn over their ports and bases to Japan.

Like I said, Japan were having trouble keeping the Vietnamese in line, and this shall be my main argument. I will point out that Thailand were forced into the war by Japan's needs to stop the small Free French army in Vietnam, and the not so small Vietnamese army out as well.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Thai_War
Kc1999

Con

REBUTTALS:

I would like to clear up the misconceptions that the opponent might have first. The opponent starts with talking about Vietnam and Cambodia, and why the war was forced. However, the opponent seems to be confused of two things:

1. The Franco-Thai War was waged before the Japanese Invasion of Thailand

The Franco-Thai War's first engagement, a brief skirmish Thai and French planes, was in October of 1940. The last engagements of the war and the armistice was signed in March 1941; the Japanese did not invade Thailand until December the 8th, 1941, months after the signing of the armistice. Thailand had complete control over her actions before the Japanese invasion, and the war was waged on the will of the Thai people and the Thai motherland. Therefore, the opponent's points go cold when he starts talking about the future (1942)

2. The Franco-Thai War wasn't a part of World War II

Like I said in my introduction, Thailand was still independent and neutral in March 1941 when the war ended; for a battle, or a conflict, to become a part of the war, both of the participants have to be from opposing side; Thailand was neutral. Also, this war had no overall significant impact on the future developments of the war (but not neccesarily the future of Thailand). I would like to also disagree when the opponent states that "Frnace had already surrndered to Germany, so they could not say no if Hitler request they turn over their ports and bases to Japan" as the French were still resisting the Japanese during it's invasion of Indochina.

The Franco-Thai war was waged on just terms because:

1. The Land was thoroughly Thai

Areas seized from Thailand during the 1880s were highly populated with Tai-speaking or outright Tai-people. Laos, for example, has a language similar to that of Thailand, and their people were largely Thai; even today, the bond between the two nations are clear. The Laotians use a classical version of the Thai script, while the Thais use a more modernized nation; but both nations, considered brothers by some, share the same linguistics and culture. It is therefore absolutely neccesary to reclaim these lands from the French, who had ought to eradicate the Thai language in that area and replace them with the French language and culture.

2. The People were oppressed in those areas in which Thailand lost

The people were forced to pay taxes and submit to French rule and law, highly different from the traditional Thai values they were brought up with. They were not allowed to participate in the government of their own country; the two monarchs of the countries, whose right to rule was divine, had their powers abolished and became a figurehead of the declining Buddhist traditions. They were met with oppressive taxes from the French authorities; the only good the French did was they developed the infastructure of both nations, but they are still highly obsolete today.

3. The French Started It

According to Direk Jayanama in his book "Thailand in World War II", Thai and French soldiers were skrimishing since September 1940. As stated in the introdution, a Thai man was killed in French-Indochina, which spurred nationalist sentiments. A French plane flew into Thai territory, which incited more nationalist anger; however, the breaking point was when a French raiding party raided a Thai village. The French started it, and the patriotic soldiers of the Thai motherland must retaliate, for the good of the Thai people.


The war was a just war, and was legitimately waged.

Debate Round No. 2
WorldWar2Debator

Pro

WorldWar2Debator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
WorldWar2Debator

Pro

WorldWar2Debator forfeited this round.
Kc1999

Con

VOTE PRO

THANKS
KC1999
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
I like World War II stuff. I'm going to bring up a challenging topic now: the Franco-Thai War was justified
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by XLAV 3 years ago
XLAV
WorldWar2DebatorKc1999Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited so conduct goes to Con. Con had better arguments so points go to him.
Vote Placed by zmikecuber 3 years ago
zmikecuber
WorldWar2DebatorKc1999Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by SPENCERJOYAGE14 3 years ago
SPENCERJOYAGE14
WorldWar2DebatorKc1999Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:24 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con for finishing the debate even with Pro's forfeits. Arguments to Con for he rebutted Pro's arguments and they were left unanswered. Pro get's most reliable sources because Wikipedia is extremely reliable.