• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nationalism started WWI...and WWII

joko104 said:
Claiming nationalism started WW1 and WW2 is a ludicrous claim.

Nationalism is what allowed Americans to unite despite deep divisions to win WW1 and WW2.
Click to expand...

You're confusing patriotism and nationalism
 
What about us going to war against the "evil" governments of those the caravan coming our way to flee horrific oppression. Why isn't the Democratic Party - the fighters against evil governments with no self or economic interests - calling for that? Doesn't the Democratic Party support going to war against "evil" as the Democrat above claims?
 
joko104 said:
What is incredibly ignorant historically is your claims. Without USA involvement, no side would won WW1. Instead, Europe would fought and fought until one side or the other exhausted - and then just redraw boundaries as they had been doing for 1,000 years. Germany would not have won. No one would have won. It would have been a stalemate leaning a bit one way or the other. The Russian revolution would have failed and NAZIism would not have rose.

There was no reason to not stay with China as an ally, ie the victorious PRC, as the clear victor and with over 1 million trooped on the Korean border at the end of their civil war intermixed with WW2. Korea had been called a "dagger pointed at the heart of China" for centuries and the suffering and death, rape, theft and murder by Japanese coming thru Korea had been going on for centuries.
Our making an alliance with Japan, thus still in Korea, assured the Korean war. There was no reason to declare we would not recognize the real China other than the globalist perspective of controlling the entire world.
Click to expand...

:lamo

Hate to break it to you bud, but that is laughably stupid. Claiming "no one would have won" simply doesn't have any evidence to back it up. Both sides were exhausted and morale was low overall, but that had been true for more than a year before the US even thought about entering the war. The fighting had continued regardless.

Hate to break it to you but "redrawing borders" required one side to emerge victorious. You have contradicted your own premise in the very next sentence.

You keep making these sweeping claims without the least bit of evidence whatsoever. There is no reason to believe either side would simply take a status quo antebellum; similarly, there is np reason to believe both sides would have continued indefinitely. Sooner or later one side would have broken.

And why exactly would the Russian Revolution have failed? A continued stalemate would not have butterflied away Lenin's trip East or any of the following events. If anything it would have weakened the White forces as they would not have aid and support from any other of the European powers.

Like I said before, conservatives didn't think it was our fight and weren't willing to support the KMT regardless. The fact that the PRC was still closely aligned with Stalin's USSR was a rather blindingly large reason why the US wasn't going to ally with them. The Sino-Soviet split occurred due to, in large part, the Chinese belief that Khruschev was "soft" on the capitalists.

Considering the fact that Japan didn't rule Korea directly until 1910, despite controlling them as a puppet for a few years before, it would be rather hard for them to "rampage through Korea for centuries". The invasions of 1592-1598 did not manage to secure control over the area in the first place.

No, what assured the Korean War was the establishment of a brutal dictatorship in North Korea. The reason why we didn't recognize the "real China" was because it was ruled by a brutal dictator who killed even more people than Stalin.
 
joko104 said:
So you wanted the USA to go to war against the PRC? Use atom bombs plus a million troops of our own - and many wanted to - but "the conservative isolationists" opposed it?

"Thank you conservative isolationists!" We'd still be fighting in China - meaning also Russia - otherwise unless WW3 had pretty much destroyed everything. At least you admit you love war and want wars everywhere against anyone liberal Democrats declare are "evil," meaning against their economic interests and profits.

Just think of all the TRILLIONS of dollars they could make off war with both Russia and China? With the UK and France plus Japan and Germany disarmed - Do you think we would have won against Russia and China on their own lands? Maybe if we built and dropped enough atom bombs on all their major cities killing half a billion would have done it.
Click to expand...

We already were at war with the PRC since they intervened to save the North Koreans. Conservative isolationists continuing a long standing tradition of appeasing brutal tyrannies and trying to betray US allies is nothing to be proud of.

You think we'd still be fighting China in Korea more than fifty years later? :lamo

That is truly one of the most laughable fairy tales I've heard on this board in a long time.

Ah, so now Hitler, Tojo, Stalin, the Kim family and Mao aren't evil dictators; they are "threats to liberal Democrats' profits". Do you ever read what you type? How can anyone believe such colossal stupidity?

Lol how exactly was England "disarmed"? Both they and France had a fairly sizable force of manpower available, as did Germany, which despite being bled dry had plenty of combat experience against the Red Army. Hell, that's assuming World War III would break out in the first place.....not real likely bud.
 
Tigerace117 said:
We already were at war with the PRC since they intervened to save the North Koreans. Conservative isolationists continuing a long standing tradition of appeasing brutal tyrannies and trying to betray US allies is nothing to be proud of.

You think we'd still be fighting China in Korea more than fifty years later? :lamo

That is truly one of the most laughable fairy tales I've heard on this board in a long time.

Ah, so now Hitler, Tojo, Stalin, the Kim family and Mao aren't evil dictators; they are "threats to liberal Democrats' profits". Do you ever read what you type? How can anyone believe such colossal stupidity?

Lol how exactly was England "disarmed"? Both they and France had a fairly sizable force of manpower available, as did Germany, which despite being bled dry had plenty of combat experience against the Red Army. Hell, that's assuming World War III would break out in the first place.....not real likely bud.
Click to expand...

No, we did not go to war with China. We fought in a proxy war between North and South Korea. You messages as lacking in knowledge this debate isn't a debate at all.

Anywhere on earth you don't want to bomb and go to war against? You have now added that as a Democrat you wanted to go to war against Mao and now want to go to war against N. Korea.

The only thing you have proven is you love war and are frustrated there were not and are not enough wars. That is the standard Democratic Party's position.
 
joko104 said:
No, we did not go to war with China. We fought in a proxy war between North and South Korea. You messages as lacking in knowledge this debate isn't a debate at all.

Anywhere on earth you don't want to bomb and go to war against? You have now added that as a Democrat you wanted to go to war against Mao and now want to go to war against N. Korea.

The only thing you have proven is you love war and are frustrated there were not and are not enough wars. That is the standard Democratic Party's position.
Click to expand...

The Chinese sent three million men in total to save the North Koreans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Volunteer_Army

They launched numerous offensives and lost thousands of men fighting alongside the North Koreans. We were at war with them in just about every way. I get that you have to be ignorant to be a Trump cultist, but even a two second google search could have turned up that information and kept you from humiliating yourself again.

Yeah, those mean old Democrats, wanting to stand up for US allies against horrific despots like Mao and Stalin. :roll: Again, do you read anything you post?

What you have proven is that Trump cultists are ignorant fools who would happily throw US allies under the bus and are utterly unwilling to stand up to even history's worst thugs and dictators.
 
joko104 said:
Without nationalism societies and countries would not exist. We all would still be hunter-gathers living in skin tents and caves hunting with rock tipped spears.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but despite your speculation, highly unlikely.

Recent archeological anthropologists, with far more experience and better analytical tools are suggesting the first organized civilizations were created for cultural exchange and nonviolent easier gene exchange, to prevent inbreeding. Centers of religion, sex partner pool expansion, music and art were driving forces creating early civilizations. Nationalism, a johnny come lately extension of tribalism doesn't arrive until much later, as self identities grow, and are threatened by others. Development of advanced civilizations did not require the violence of nationalism, until such ties became necessary for maintenance of cultural status quo, self preservation against those who would usurp existing powers.w
 
Nationalism started WWI...and WWII
Click to expand...

i often wonder if WWII could have been prevented by avoiding WWI. i like to fantasize that this is the case. however, i have to admit that it's possible that humans would have found some other reason to shoot at each other. WWII was necessary, but it's difficult to argue that it would have been necessary without WWI. both wars were utterly awful, and all the traveling around to kill each other also helped the 1918 flu epidemic to kill even more people, including my grandfather's sister. my family is still sad about this.

i oppose war in almost every case. i'll continue to do that by default. we'd be a whole lot better off sharing education and resources while preparing to deflect space rocks together, IMO. maybe someday.
 
Helix said:
i often wonder if WWII could have been prevented by avoiding WWI. i like to fantasize that this is the case. however, i have to admit that it's possible that humans would have found some other reason to shoot at each other. WWII was necessary, but it's difficult to argue that it would have been necessary without WWI. both wars were utterly awful, and all the traveling around to kill each other also helped the 1918 flu epidemic to kill even more people, including my grandfather's sister. my family is still sad about this.

i oppose war in almost every case. i'll continue to do that by default. we'd be a whole lot better off sharing education and resources while preparing to deflect space rocks together, IMO. maybe someday.
Click to expand...

WW1 and moreso WW2 are never before and never again events in human history. Starting with the US Civil War, which caused radical improvements in warfare, the rapid increase in military technology was off the charts. Within half a century, warships were twice the length of football field in heavy steel armor, warfare took to the air and the ability to mass kill people anywhere in the world grew at an extreme rate. 20 years after WW1, the entire massive industrialization of every industrial power was dedicated to making ever better killing machines - each month better than the month before. The primary purpose of every major society was around the ability to kill as many others as possible - while not being killed yourselves.

Despite there being winners and losers, the rich were winners even in Germany and Japan. Their largest war industries before and during the war remained their largest industries after the war - thru today. Atom bombs brought the history of the human race of thousands of years of incredibly murderous wars of expansion and empire building by mass murder and terror on literally an industrial scale finally to an end. However, the money making off of wars has never ended. Rather, only the scale of potential lose of the major powers is gone. Now only backwards poor countries can be crushed by technologies most of which they can not even combat against - such as by aircraft, drones, missiles and precision bombs.
 
joko104 said:
WW1 and moreso WW2 are never before and never again events in human history. Starting with the US Civil War, which caused radical improvements in warfare, the rapid increase in military technology was off the charts. Within half a century, warships were twice the length of football field in heavy steel armor, warfare took to the air and the ability to mass kill people anywhere in the world grew at an extreme rate. 20 years after WW1, the entire massive industrialization of every industrial power was dedicated to making ever better killing machines - each month better than the month before. The primary purpose of every major society was around the ability to kill as many others as possible - while not being killed yourselves.

Despite there being winners and losers, the rich were winners even in Germany and Japan. Their largest war industries before and during the war remained their largest industries after the war - thru today. Atom bombs brought the history of the human race of thousands of years of incredibly murderous wars of expansion and empire building by mass murder and terror on literally an industrial scale finally to an end. However, the money making off of wars has never ended. Rather, only the scale of potential lose of the major powers is gone. Now only backwards poor countries can be crushed by technologies most of which they can not even combat against - such as by aircraft, drones, missiles and precision bombs.
Click to expand...

i suppose that the real question is where do we go from here? do we keep repeating the cycle, or can the technological explosion be used for something better? my guess is probably both. i hope that we have more moon landings, internets, and eradicated diseases than wars.
 
JacksinPA said:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...sident-trump-nationalism-old-demons/38481587/

At WWI ceremony, world warned ‘old demons’ rising

Paris-

As Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and dozens of other heads of state and government listened in silence, French President Emmanuel Macron used the occasion, as its host, to sound a powerful and sobering warning about the fragility of peace and the dangers of nationalism and of nations that put themselves first, above the collective good.

“The old demons are rising again, ready to complete their task of chaos and of death,” Macron said.

“Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism. Nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism,” he said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really wonder if Trump understands the implications of declaring himself to be a nationalist. How many tens of millions dies in those 2 wars & those that followed it, like Vietnam?
Click to expand...
The kind of nationalism Macron was warning about, e.g. All French had all Germans who had all Italians is nationalism Trump is talking about. Europe's history for centuries has featured, tribes against tribes with temporary allegiances. Our nation is only a few hundreds years old and far more of a mixing pot than Europe has ever been.
 
Roadvirus said:
Give in to Globalism....Be part of The Collective...
Click to expand...

With respect, there is something between Trump's America uber alles nationalism and cooperation with other nations. His arrogance and ignorance are embarrassing.
 
Denying the history of WW l and established facts to defend 45's, Steven Miller, Steve Bannon and Steve King, et al, agenda of racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitic, anti-migrant, anti-immigrant, anti-Globalism(anti-Jew) ,white nationalism is really a bridge too far. The world knows as do those Americans what POTUS and his devotees are.
 
Helix said:
i suppose that the real question is where do we go from here? do we keep repeating the cycle, or can the technological explosion be used for something better? my guess is probably both. i hope that we have more moon landings, internets, and eradicated diseases than wars.
Click to expand...

Maybe nationism is obsolete given the global problems humanity faces. With natural resources growing scarcer and human population growing beyond sustainable levels, the future of humanity may have to force us to come together and unite as a common species.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Maybe nationism is obsolete given the global problems humanity faces. With natural resources growing scarcer and human population growing beyond sustainable levels, the future of humanity may have to force us to come together and unite as a common species.
Click to expand...

yeah, i don't disagree. it won't be easy, but it will probably be necessary.
 
JacksinPA said:
....
I really wonder if Trump understands the implications of declaring himself to be a nationalist. ....
Click to expand...



The answer is no.

Period.

Trump doesn't have the capacity to understand it. He doesn't have a glimmer of appreciation of the history which would help him understand it. He has lived 72 years without being inconvenienced by historical perspective and it's too late for him to start now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom