"Most Americans don't seem to understand that WWII was an inter-imperial war"

[Antiwar]

Yes, but the weapons supplied to China weren’t “misused” which kinda makes that a meaningless hypothetical.

America supplies the world with weapons. Unsurprisingly, sometimes/places those weapons are used in ways that the US government disapproves of.

 

[Questerr]

Can you see any connection between supplying weapons and weapons being misused?

They weren’t supplying weapons. They were trading things like steel, oil, and other resources. The Japanese made their own weapons.

 

[Tigerace117]

America supplies the world with weapons. Unsurprisingly, sometimes/places those weapons are used in ways that the US government disapproves of.

The US wasn’t supplying Japan with weapons; the trade we were doing, and which we curtailed as a result of their actions even before Pearl Harbor, revolved around resources like oil.

 

[Antiwar]

The US wasn’t supplying Japan with weapons; the trade we were doing, and which we curtailed as a result of their actions even before Pearl Harbor, revolved around resources like oil.

When I say 'the world,' you say 'Japan.'

The world.

 

[Questerr]

When I say 'the world,' you say 'Japan.'

The world.

Japan was the party invading and launching militarist wars of aggression.

The US was supplying weapons to the people the Japanese were invading.

Should the US have not done that? Should they have just left those people hanging with no means to defend themselves from militarists?

 

[Tigerace117]

When I say 'the world,' you say 'Japan.'

The world.

Except, of course, for the fact that you literally made discussing World War Two, and specifically Japan’s actions within that time period.

 

[Questerr]

Except, of course, for the fact that you literally made discussing World War Two, and specifically Japan’s actions within that time period.

Antiwar doesn’t want to admit that he thinks countries should have just surrendered to Japan if that meant not supporting the US’s position during that time.

His entire worldview revolves around hating America. The USA opposed Japan so Japan must have been the good guys.

 

[Tigerace117]

Antiwar doesn’t want to admit that he thinks countries should have just surrendered to Japan if that meant not supporting the US’s position during that time.

His entire worldview revolves around hating America. The USA opposed Japan so Japan must have been the good guys.

He seems to be under the impression that defending oneself is just as militaristic as attacking others.

Which, of course, is nonsensical.

 

[Questerr]

He seems to be under the impression that defending oneself is just as militaristic as attacking others.

Which, of course, is nonsensical.

The anti-militarist position in Antiwar’s mind is to immediately surrender if you are attacked and rely on the “International Justice System” to arrest the perpetrators.

 

[Antiwar]

Except, of course, for the fact that you literally made discussing World War Two, and specifically Japan’s actions within that time period.

You seem to misunderstanding most of Opie and various discussions within the thread.

My thread title is a line from the video interview about. The video is about anarchism, communism, and imperialism. The historian wrote a book about a certain period and events. I'm pretty sure that he wrote it in the hope that it would affect the present and future, not the past.

Have you watched "The Coming War on China," yet?

 

[Tigerace117]

You seem to misunderstanding most of Opie and various discussions within the thread.

My thread title is a line from the video interview about. The video is about anarchism, communism, and imperialism. The historian wrote a book about a certain period and events. I'm pretty sure that he wrote it in the hope that it would affect the present and future, not the past.

Have you watched "The Coming War on China," yet?

Except for the fact that the author’s contentions are flat out inaccurate, and I pointed out why.

Much like “documentaries” which engage in propaganda for genocidal dictatorships.

 

[Antiwar]

He seems to be under the impression that defending oneself is just as militaristic as attacking others.

Which, of course, is nonsensical.

What mechanism have I said will have to suffice in an effective international justice system until better ways are used?

 

[multivita-man]

America supplies war weapons. Warring happens. I wonder if there's any connection.

I'm detecting a topic creep.

 

[Antiwar]

Except for the fact that the author’s contentions are flat out inaccurate, and I pointed out why.

Much like “documentaries” which engage in propaganda for genocidal dictatorships.

It's very likely that you're arguing from ignorance. @multivita-man was, then watched a small segment of the video.

 

[Antiwar]

I'm detecting a topic creep.

That never happens on political internet message boards!

 

[Tigerace117]

It's very likely that you're arguing from ignorance. @multivita-man was, then watched a small segment of the video.

Every segment you’ve quoted here has been either inaccurate or lacking in historical context.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Vietnam is a great case study. After defeating the Japanese there, we used their personnel to hold the country hostage until France could return.

Not really. It's much more complicated than that.

After the Japanese were defeated, the Vietnamese adopted a 'declaration of independence' modeled on ours, and asked us to support their not having France return. We did the opposite of what our 'values' say. And maybe a couple million people were killed simply because we pointlessly abused power. We were worse than Putin.

In early 1945 OSS agents parachuted into the jungles of what later become known to us as North Vietnam. Their mission was to make contact with the revolutionary leader there leading the resistance against the Japanese occupying the country. They brought a US medic with them as this revolutionary leader was very ill with malaria and dysentery. The name of this revolutionary leader was Ho Chi Minh. Who would recover from those deadly illnesses and go on to later lead one of the most violent communist insurgencies the world would ever see. The initial US intelligence assessment of Ho Chi Minh was that he was more nationalist than communist and therefore an acceptable partner - so the US provided him with weapons and training teams to help teach his Viet Minh guerrillas how to fight.

Ho Chi Minh was a great admirer of US ideology and it's anti-colonial history and that admiration was reflected in his writing of Vietnam's Declaration of Independence. Which was largely modeled on our own. In fact the first line in it is a direct quote from ours; "All men are created equal; they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.". It's likely that this was partly sincere and partly a play for US help in decolonization, based on Franklin Delano Roosevelt's anti-colonial rhetoric. Unfortunately FDR died before the war ended.

 

[Questerr]

What mechanism have I said will have to suffice in an effective international justice system until better ways are used?

So to be clear, you agree that the US should have defended itself from attack by Japan with its military, given that no effective international justice system existed at the time, yes?

 

[Antiwar]

Every segment you’ve quoted here has been either inaccurate or lacking in historical context.

Have you watched any of it? Because it seems you haven't; that you're relying on my snippets instead of getting at least a partial context of the video. One would have to watch the whole video to get good context.

 

[Antiwar]

In early 1945 OSS agents parachuted into the jungles of what later become known to us as North Vietnam. Their mission was to make contact with the revolutionary leader there leading the resistance against the Japanese occupying the country. They brought a US medic with them as this revolutionary leader was very ill with malaria and dysentery. The name of this revolutionary leader was Ho Chi Minh. Who would recover from those deadly illnesses and go on to later lead one of the most violent communist insurgencies the world would ever see. The initial US intelligence assessment of Ho Chi Minh was that he was more nationalist than communist and therefore an acceptable partner - so the US provided him with weapons and training teams to help teach his Viet Minh guerrillas how to fight.

Ho Chi Minh was a great admirer of US ideology and it's anti-colonial history and that admiration was reflected in his writing of Vietnam's Declaration of Independence. Which was largely modeled on our own. In fact the first line in it is a direct quote from ours; "All men are created equal; they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights; among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.". It's likely that this was partly sincere and partly a play for US help in decolonization, based on Franklin Delano Roosevelt's anti-colonial rhetoric. Unfortunately FDR died before the war ended.

I'm glad you included 'rhetoric' near the end because I was concerned that you believe the US government is anti-colonial.

 

[Questerr]

I'm glad you included 'rhetoric' near the end because I was concerned that you believe the US government is anti-colonial.

The US was the only power in the region that was actively divesting itself of its colonies, so it was.

 

[Antiwar]

#121 should refer to #38.

 

[Questerr]

#121 should refer to #38.

Doesn’t change the fact that the US was the only power in the region that had passed laws to give its colonies independence and was actively working on building up those colonies’ domestic institutions for that purpose.

 

[Questerr]

#121 should refer to #38.

Does the fact that the US was (and still is in many ways) white supremacist make them the bad guy and mean they should have done nothing when Japanese-Supremacist Japan was launching militarist invasions and committing atrocities?

 

[Atomic Kid]

I'm glad you included 'rhetoric' near the end because I was concerned that you believe the US government is anti-colonial.

You do know that the primary definition of "rhetoric" is;
1: the art of speaking or writing effectively: such as
a: the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times
b: the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2a: skill in the effective use of speech

The history of the US government leading up to WWII was anticolonial. FDR was a firm anti-colonialist and pursued this ideology to the best of his abilities. Indochina was an ideal candidate for Roosevelt’s proposed trusteeship system. But it could never be effectively planned for with the instability of the war. FDR's proclivity for personalizing foreign policy with limited coordination with the State Department didn't help because once he passed there was no real formulated formal State Dept. policy on the issue. But even if he had more effectively articulated his plans the international coalition needed to implement them would almost certainly have never materialized. The very incident which caused the opportunity for the dissolution of empires was also the root of their continuance. The return of the French to Indochina was a regrettable misstep in the history of the liberation of Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. But such is the complexity of wartime politics.