Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

**US Economic Warfare Provoked Pearl Harbor**

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 8:00:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Roosevelt and his subordinates knew they were putting Japan in an untenable position and that the Japanese government might well try to escape the stranglehold by going to war. Having broken the Japanese diplomatic code, the American leaders knew, among many other things, what Foreign Minister Teijiro Toyoda had communicated to Ambassador Kichisaburo Nomura on July 31: "Commercial and economic relations between Japan and third countries, led by England and the United States, are gradually becoming so horribly strained that we cannot endure it much longer. Consequently, our Empire, to save its very life, must take measures to secure the raw materials of the South Seas."
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 9:44:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Question: You think that the world would be a better place today if Roosevelt hadn't acted?
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 9:49:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Provoked" is a subjective word. Kind of like someone saying "he laughed at me when I stumbled, so that provoked my to punch him in his face."
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 9:51:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 9:49:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
"Provoked" is a subjective word. Kind of like someone saying "he laughed at me when I stumbled, so that provoked my to punch him in his face."

You should also note that provoke =\= justify, though it often is used interchangeably in everyday conversation.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
YYW
Posts: 36,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 9:53:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 9:49:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
"Provoked" is a subjective word. Kind of like someone saying "he laughed at me when I stumbled, so that provoked my to punch him in his face."

I think this is a pretty fitting post for this thread.
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 9:54:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 9:49:33 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
"Provoked" is a subjective word. Kind of like someone saying "he laughed at me when I stumbled, so that provoked my to punch him in his face."

In this case "The US were a bunch of meanies who wouldn't sell us resources which we were obviously going to use for warmongering and militaristic expansion, so that provoked us to bomb them."
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 9:54:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Libertarians are only harming themselves by making arguments like this. True or not, the public perception is that of a perfectly justified war and there's no way that will ever change. And really, I can't imagine anyone seriously arguing that world would be a better place had the Axis won. War is hell and it probably could've been avoided, but the die was cast and arguing that Roosevelt provoked the US entrance to the war, while probably partially true, is ultimately irrelevant to if the US was in the right in choosing to fight.

If you had the choice would you keep the US out of the war entirely? Keep in mind that without US material support before actually entering the Axis may very well have won.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 10:48:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

Yes, it does.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

No, they don't.

This sounds like libertarian shiz right here.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 10:49:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

This should actually be like a hanging curveball for any libertarians with a decent grasp of history, but we'll see.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 8:35:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 10:48:02 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

Yes, it does.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

No, they don't.

This sounds like libertarian shiz right here.

How do you figure? We can't do business with who we want and we can't stop doing business when we want? Why? We had every right and power to discontinue our trade with Japan. And you think this Ida Japanese justification for war?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 9:47:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/8/2013 8:35:32 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:48:02 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

Yes, it does.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

No, they don't.

This sounds like libertarian shiz right here.

How do you figure? We can't do business with who we want and we can't stop doing business when we want? Why? We had every right and power to discontinue our trade with Japan. And you think this Ida Japanese justification for war?

He doesn't figure, and until he does, there's no point in engaging with him.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 9:49:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 10:49:12 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

This should actually be like a hanging curveball for any libertarians with a decent grasp of history, but we'll see.

Agree. The idea is that Japan could have just stopped doing business with the US. Warfare is unjustifiable utilizing such "libertarian" logic, regardless of what this "libertarian" OP insinuates.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
ConservativeAmerican
Posts: 1,676
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 10:20:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
You guys do realize we didn't give a damn about morals before, during or after WWII (the government), we just favored the allies because we had more money and interests in UK than Germany, and we intentionally waited to step in to WWII for a couple years to let the Nazis and Soviets kill more of each other off, right? Well that wasn't the only reason, but one of the main ones. Were we justified in entering WWII on the asian front? Yes. If we would have realistically gave a damn about the holocaust would we have had a reason to enter WWII on the euro front? Yes, but the reality is we didn't or we would have taken in more refugees pre-war.
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 10:27:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/8/2013 10:20:46 AM, ConservativeAmerican wrote:
You guys do realize we didn't give a damn about morals before, during or after WWII (the government), we just favored the allies because we had more money and interests in UK than Germany, and we intentionally waited to step in to WWII for a couple years to let the Nazis and Soviets kill more of each other off, right? Well that wasn't the only reason, but one of the main ones. Were we justified in entering WWII on the asian front? Yes. If we would have realistically gave a damn about the holocaust would we have had a reason to enter WWII on the euro front? Yes, but the reality is we didn't or we would have taken in more refugees pre-war.

And you realize that no one knew about the holocaust tell about a year after the Americans entered the war? And your theory of letting then kill eachother off is slightly possible, but highly unlikely.
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 10:28:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/8/2013 9:49:11 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:49:12 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

This should actually be like a hanging curveball for any libertarians with a decent grasp of history, but we'll see.

Agree. The idea is that Japan could have just stopped doing business with the US. Warfare is unjustifiable utilizing such "libertarian" logic, regardless of what this "libertarian" OP insinuates.

Ludicrous is what it is really.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 10:46:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/8/2013 9:49:11 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:49:12 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

This should actually be like a hanging curveball for any libertarians with a decent grasp of history, but we'll see.

Agree. The idea is that Japan could have just stopped doing business with the US. Warfare is unjustifiable utilizing such "libertarian" logic, regardless of what this "libertarian" OP insinuates.

What I was actually meaning was that my arguments should be able to be shown as false under libertarian logic.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 10:52:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/8/2013 10:46:12 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/8/2013 9:49:11 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:49:12 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/7/2013 10:36:45 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't understand why libertarians or anarchists or free marketists would say such things, other than wanting to have an anti-US image (meaning anti government).

However there are two key libertarian principles that ought to be remembered.

1). No one has a right to not be angry. This applies to Japan. They can be angry all they want. That does not justify violence.

2). Any entity has a right to do business, or NOT DO BUSINESS with any other entity. The US has every right to stop doing business for any reason they please.

This should actually be like a hanging curveball for any libertarians with a decent grasp of history, but we'll see.

Agree. The idea is that Japan could have just stopped doing business with the US. Warfare is unjustifiable utilizing such "libertarian" logic, regardless of what this "libertarian" OP insinuates.

What I was actually meaning was that my arguments should be able to be shown as false under libertarian logic.

When it comes to foreign policy, libertarians don't use logic.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2013 10:53:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/8/2013 10:52:25 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 8/8/2013 10:46:12 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:

When it comes to foreign policy, libertarians don't use logic.

change to

"When it comes to foreign policy, [most self-proclaimed] libertarians don't use logic."
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2013 5:03:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is true to an extent... it's the extent which is the real debate. Having just written about 2 thousand words on evaluating the extent to which Japanese militarism caused the Pacific War I'm inclined to agree that the embargo had an effect, but there's a lot of other factors. You can't make a complete judgement on the matter without knowing a lot of Japanese, European and American history from 1868 forwards. I'll perhaps elaborate further at some later date.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2013 1:13:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why is it that you never bother to defend these little threads? They often develop amusing tongue-in-cheek discussions, but why even make them in the first place?
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."