chicot Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 You don't think Iraq is backwards? It is now. It has not always been so and I certainly wouldn't label everyone in the country "morons".
Adam Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 Bottom line- GWB and his chickenhawk buddies little experiment in democratizing a stone age, backwards country at the barrel of a gun has only created more Islamic terrorists. But hey, at least these crazy Muslims dont hold grudges......... We don't need to democratize anyone. If they want a democratic government, that can form one themselves. Not every non-democratic government is evil or a threat. It is not a choice between be a democracy or be terrorists.
Nanker Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 I hate when people try to compare saving the free world from Nazis and Fascists to nation building for a bunch of backwards morons. The Japanese weren't fascist, neither were they Nazis. Actually Mussolini invented the term fascist (derivative of fasces - the ancient Roman symbol of SPQR an axe bundled in sticks to symbolically represent the cutting power of their civilization - as expressed in their Legions - and a shaft made unbreakable by the unity of the Roman people. But you know that, and I digress. You make no mention of Jack Kennedy's wars in the Bay of Kennedys and in Viet Nam where we lost over 14 times more American lives than we have in iRaq to make the world safe from dominos. Oh, and another thing. "You shouldn't hate," R Rich. But, if you must - try hating the islamo fundamentalists who hate you with a fervor that makes your little brand of insignificant contempt for America's leaders seem like the frothing monkey spittle that it actually is.
John Adams Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 The Japanese weren't fascist, neither were they Nazis. Actually Mussolini invented the term fascist (derivative of fasces - the ancient Roman symbol of SPQR an axe bundled in sticks to symbolically represent the cutting power of their civilization - as expressed in their Legions - and a shaft made unbreakable by the unity of the Roman people. But you know that, and I digress. An interesting historical note but irrelevant. If you're going to be strike out and be wrong, you might as well swing for the fences. Both Japan and Germany were the very definition of fascist states in WWII. There's really no argument that they were not, even if they labeled themselves otherwise at that time.
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 The Japanese weren't fascist, neither were they Nazis. Actually Mussolini invented the term fascist (derivative of fasces - the ancient Roman symbol of SPQR an axe bundled in sticks to symbolically represent the cutting power of their civilization - as expressed in their Legions - and a shaft made unbreakable by the unity of the Roman people. But you know that, and I digress. You make no mention of Jack Kennedy's wars in the Bay of Kennedys and in Viet Nam where we lost over 14 times more American lives than we have in iRaq to make the world safe from dominos. Oh, and another thing. "You shouldn't hate," R Rich. But, if you must - try hating the islamo fundamentalists who hate you with a fervor that makes your little brand of insignificant contempt for America's leaders seem like the frothing monkey spittle that it actually is. I'm not sure why I should have mentioned these, can you explain?
/dev/null Posted July 16, 2008 Posted July 16, 2008 An interesting historical note but irrelevant. If you're going to be strike out and be wrong, you might as well swing for the fences. Both Japan and Germany were the very definition of fascist states in WWII. There's really no argument that they were not, even if they labeled themselves otherwise at that time. Okay for sh-ts and giggles..... How were Germany and Japan fascist? *before anybody gets worked up - note the "for sh-ts" and giggles part
SD Jarhead Posted July 16, 2008 Author Posted July 16, 2008 Okay for sh-ts and giggles..... How were Germany and Japan fascist? *before anybody gets worked up - note the "for sh-ts" and giggles part HOW DARE YOU! Oh, wait...I just filled in the missing letter/ pBills
John Adams Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Okay for sh-ts and giggles..... How were Germany and Japan fascist? *before anybody gets worked up - note the "for sh-ts" and giggles part Wiki-all-knowledge defines facism "as authoritarian nationalist political ideologies or mass movements that are concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence and seek to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, and promoting cults of unity, strength and purity." Japan and Germany typify this definition. Only some sort of leather-patch-elbowed intellectual would argue the finer points that Germany and Japan were not facist. I hope you got your stojans and giggles.
/dev/null Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Wiki-all-knowledge defines facism "as authoritarian nationalist political ideologies or mass movements that are concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence and seek to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, and promoting cults of unity, strength and purity." Japan and Germany typify this definition. Only some sort of leather-patch-elbowed intellectual would argue the finer points that Germany and Japan were not facist. I hope you got your stojans and giggles. Some call the bolded part fascism. Others call it Change You Can Believe In Thanks for the stojans and giggles
X. Benedict Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Okay for sh-ts and giggles..... How were Germany and Japan fascist? *before anybody gets worked up - note the "for sh-ts" and giggles part Without a faggot of sticks tied into a billet with an axe, they can't be fascist, right?
Nanker Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Without a faggot of sticks tied into a billet with an axe, they can't be fascist, right? A correct use of the term. From the French word for sticks. In Medieval times homosexuals were burned at the stake. Hence the word faggot = homosexual. Mussolini the "modern Caesar" coined the term to describe his own political party. The Germans were NAZIs the Japanese were a society driven by Medieval warlords. They were all totalitarian, but they were not all Fascists.
Nanker Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 I'm not sure why I should have mentioned these, can you explain? I thought the needless spilling of American blood was a sacrament of the modern age. If so, JFK should be denounced and condemned for his actions in Cuba, including the missile crisis, and Viet Nam - which he flamed into a full scale war which cost 56 thousand lives. The war accomplished nothing save giving America a bad name around the world and divided this country into the polar camps that are to this day at each others throats. The thing about liberals is they want to get involved in having the government making a difference in people's lives. The problem I have with them is that when they do that the differences they make are rarely for the better.
elegantelliotoffen Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 I thought the needless spilling of American blood was a sacrament of the modern age.If so, JFK should be denounced and condemned for his actions in Cuba, including the missile crisis, and Viet Nam - which he flamed into a full scale war which cost 56 thousand lives. The war accomplished nothing save giving America a bad name around the world and divided this country into the polar camps that are to this day at each others throats. The thing about liberals is they want to get involved in having the government making a difference in people's lives. The problem I have with them is that when they do that the differences they make are rarely for the better. So being against the Iraq War means that you're for the Vietnam War and the failed Bay of Pigs invasion? And by the way who said I was a liberal?
John Adams Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 They were all totalitarian, but they were not all Fascists. No. They were all practitioners of facism, under whatever name they chose to brand it, much like the Republican party is socialist but go by a different name.
X. Benedict Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 the Japanese were a society driven by Medieval warlords. That is exactly what Imperial Japan after the Meiji Revolution wasn't. An oligarchy perhaps, but they came from petite nobility involved in civil administration.
Nanker Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 So being against the Iraq War means that you're for the Vietnam War and the failed Bay of Pigs invasion? And by the way who said I was a liberal? Just pointing out the inconsistency regarding the railing against losing 4,000 American lives vs. a more ridiculous war spilling over a dozen times as many lives into the eternal sinkhole. Never called you a liberal.
Nanker Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 No. They were all practitioners of facism, under whatever name they chose to brand it, much like the Republican party is socialist but go by a different name. Socialist? Republicans? I think FDR and LBJ were by far more empathetic to the ideals of socialism than most Republicans.
Nanker Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 That is exactly what Imperial Japan after the Meiji Revolution wasn't. An oligarchy perhaps, but they came from petite nobility involved in civil administration. I could be wrong, but my understanding was the military ran Imperial Japan during WWII and they were a direct derivative of the feudal culture dominated by war lords. I doubt many banzai attacks were led by the polite petite nobility - even though they were devoted to their sun boy god. Albeit a few in top hat and tails climbed aboard the Missouri to lay ink to parchment ending the hostilities.
John Adams Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Socialist? Republicans? Fool. Substitute your first question mark for an equal sign and your second for an exclamation point and you have a T-shirt.
/dev/null Posted July 17, 2008 Posted July 17, 2008 Socialist? Republicans? I think FDR and LBJ were by far more empathetic to the ideals of socialism than most Republicans. FDR and LBJ took us on the highway to get there. Modern Republicans are just taking a more scenic route
Recommended Posts