asked and answered
-
And the guy who signed the order is a hero to liberals to this day
And Reagan, let's remember that.
-
Ok... Before that slavery and after that hyper imperialism. This is why I said for the most part. Plus ww2 had a lot of firsts for racial and gender equality.
The hyper imperialism kinda kicked off before ww2, it was kinda the reason we got involved in the first place.
-
We were pretty cool during ww2 for the most part.
Hey, let's play a game. Any time someone says something good, you guys shit all over it.
Wait, did you all start without me?
-
Nah. Lend lease was in full swing, and they were sanctioning the imperial Japanese. Hindsight is 20/20, there was a glimmer of hope at the time that the problem could be resolved with political pressure. Putting boots on the ground without trying anything else first is Bush doctrine level bullshit.
Lend lease was in full swing, and they were sanctioning the imperial Japanese.
Not really...... Sanctions against Japan and Lend and lease were approved the same year we entered the war.
there was a glimmer of hope at the time that the problem could be resolved with political pressure.
I mean, that's what both the Japanese and the Nazi were hoping for. That the rest of the world would settle for peace and allow them to keep their spoils.
Putting boots on the ground without trying anything else first is Bush doctrine level bullshit.
And when has appeasing fascist with political discourse ever worked? There's a difference between standing up to literal fascist invading allies, and Bush's "war on terror", trying to conflate the two is pathetic.
-
Lend lease was in full swing, and they were sanctioning the imperial Japanese.
Not really...... Sanctions against Japan and Lend and lease were approved the same year we entered the war.
there was a glimmer of hope at the time that the problem could be resolved with political pressure.
I mean, that's what both the Japanese and the Nazi were hoping for. That the rest of the world would settle for peace and allow them to keep their spoils.
Putting boots on the ground without trying anything else first is Bush doctrine level bullshit.
And when has appeasing fascist with political discourse ever worked? There's a difference between standing up to literal fascist invading allies, and Bush's "war on terror", trying to conflate the two is pathetic.
I mean, that’s what both the Japanese and the Nazi were hoping for. That the rest of the world would settle for peace and allow them to keep their spoils.
Oh, ok. That must be why the Japanese attacked the US, right? Because they were hoping for peace.
There’s a difference between standing up to literal fascist invading allies, and Bush’s “war on terror”,
Saddam Hussein was just as racist, nationalist, authoritarian, expansionist, and cruel as Benito Mussolini. So what exactly is the difference?
trying to conflate the two is pathetic.
Fuck you
when has appeasing fascist with political discourse ever worked?
You sound like a republican, circa 2003
-
At that point in history Canada would have followed the British crown wherever it went. If Britain had sided with Hitler Canada would have been an axis power.
No. The 1931 Statute of Westminster gave us full control over our foreign policy. The phrase "When Britain is at war, Canada is at war" was about the first world war, not the second.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I'll tell you when we were great. It's when I was a kid and didn't know how fucked shit was.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I asked my family what the last useful thing Congress accomplished that made life better for Americans.
The only 2 answers were the 2010 Affordable Care Act and the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act.
Two actions in 40+ years.
-
We were pretty cool during ww2 for the most part.
We dropped not just one but two of the most horrific weapon ever developed on a civilian population.
-
We were pretty cool during ww2 for the most part.
Didn't the US consider joining the axis but only joined the allies because they stood to make bank helping rebuild Europe?
And wasn't the only Nazi rally outside of Germany held in the US, in Madison Square Garden?
And didn't the US turn two cities in Japan into glass and ash?
-
Didn't the US consider joining the axis but only joined the allies because they stood to make bank helping rebuild Europe?
And wasn't the only Nazi rally outside of Germany held in the US, in Madison Square Garden?
And didn't the US turn two cities in Japan into glass and ash?
The US only joined the allies because of Japan's war declaration. They were mostly happy making bank with both sides before that.
The communications systems in german tanks were working with Graham Bell technology. Their electronics were big on american parts too. Part of the oil that fueled the invasion of Poland and France was from the US. A big part of US' elites were pro-Hitler (for them the guy was a godsend against communism). The safest places to hide during the American bombings in Germany were the IBM factories.
-
We dropped not just one but two of the most horrific weapon ever developed on a civilian population.
Well it's not like you can use drop "the bomb that was meant to be invented 700 years later" to a military base or two to scare your enemies.
-
Didn't the US consider joining the axis but only joined the allies because they stood to make bank helping rebuild Europe?
And wasn't the only Nazi rally outside of Germany held in the US, in Madison Square Garden?
And didn't the US turn two cities in Japan into glass and ash?
wrote last edited by [email protected]USA under Franklin Roosevelt was probably the only time the country was firmly at the highest peak of moral ground.
As for the rhetorical questions, you make it sound as though US fascists were in power to effect influence and policy change. They have been loud but never been influential enough. FDR have made sure of that.
And as for the nuclear bombs, what could have been the other option? Potential 500k-1 million American deaths on invading Japan? And let's not even think about how many more Japanese civilians could have died since they were brainwashed to fight to the death.
-
Didn't the US consider joining the axis but only joined the allies because they stood to make bank helping rebuild Europe?
And wasn't the only Nazi rally outside of Germany held in the US, in Madison Square Garden?
And didn't the US turn two cities in Japan into glass and ash?
I think there was some consideration towards joining or at least aligning with the central powers during WW1 but there was basically no interest with joining the Axis in WW2.
-
Ok... Before that slavery and after that hyper imperialism. This is why I said for the most part. Plus ww2 had a lot of firsts for racial and gender equality.
Monroe doctrine? War against Spain?
-
No. The 1931 Statute of Westminster gave us full control over our foreign policy. The phrase "When Britain is at war, Canada is at war" was about the first world war, not the second.
wrote last edited by [email protected]They were not legally required to follow Britain, but they absolutely followed Britain anyway. If Britain has sat out the war, Canada would have sat out the war. If Britain had joined the axis, Canada would have joined the axis.
Both King and Opposition Leader Robert James Manion stated their opposition to conscripting troops for overseas service in March 1939. Nonetheless, King had not changed his view of 1923 that Canada would participate in a war by the Empire whether or not the United States did.
It had been clear that Canada would elect to participate in the war before the invasion of Poland on 1 September 1939. Four days after the United Kingdom had declared war on 3 September 1939, Parliament was called in special session and both King and Manion stated their support for Canada following Britain, but did not declare war immediately, partly to show that Canada was joining out of her own initiative and was not obligated to go to war.
-
We dropped not just one but two of the most horrific weapon ever developed on a civilian population.
Most horrific weapons dropped on a civilian population so far.
Although given the state of Palestine, I can't say dropping lots of small bombs is any better.
-
I mean, that’s what both the Japanese and the Nazi were hoping for. That the rest of the world would settle for peace and allow them to keep their spoils.
Oh, ok. That must be why the Japanese attacked the US, right? Because they were hoping for peace.
There’s a difference between standing up to literal fascist invading allies, and Bush’s “war on terror”,
Saddam Hussein was just as racist, nationalist, authoritarian, expansionist, and cruel as Benito Mussolini. So what exactly is the difference?
trying to conflate the two is pathetic.
Fuck you
when has appeasing fascist with political discourse ever worked?
You sound like a republican, circa 2003
Oh, ok. That must be why the Japanese attacked the US, right? Because they were hoping for peace.
Literally yes. The Japanese were trying to wipe the entire Pacific fleet out with one punch, making it too costly for the Americans to enter the war. They were hoping that America would cut their losses and settle for a negotiated peace that allowed the Japanese to keep their Pacific holdings.
Saddam Hussein was just as racist, nationalist, authoritarian, expansionist, and cruel as Benito Mussolini. So what exactly is the difference?
Saddam Hussein was just as racist, nationalist, authoritarian, expansionist, and cruel as Benito Mussolini. So what exactly is the difference?
The devil is in the details..... Fascism may have some overlaps with the Baathis party, mostly with their authoritarianism. But it's pretty distinct from it considering Baathism revolves around pan Arabic unity and socialism.
You sound like a republican, circa 2003
Lol, and you sound like Neville Chamberlain circa 1930's.
-
This post did not contain any content.
This really confuse me because I use the same app but not on dark mode. I didn't understand why it was dark mode for half a post
-
Most horrific weapons dropped on a civilian population so far.
Although given the state of Palestine, I can't say dropping lots of small bombs is any better.
Well that is what was already happening to japan and particularly tokyo, less people died from the nukes than died from the napalm bombing of tokyo.
