world 37 history debate

[DeletedUser]

When talking about history, there are multiple perspectives on the same subject. It is the speaker's job to remove these biases and try to reach the big picture. Once this picture is achieved, the speaker will no doubt throw his own bias in, and his thoughts will have to be looked at as only part of the picture yet again.

 

[Zschech]

also strike if you look into all the examples of gun control being introduced to the massacres you would notice that most of these were planned by the governments who had control of the armies of that country (Hitler, Stalin etc.) and so the citizens would be up against the army who are fully trained with guns and are accustomed to taking someones life

Basically they may not have died in the same way as they had but would most likely still have died for reasons such as treason (fighting against ones own country) and because the governments would want to crush any thoughts of rebellion by wiping them and all associated with them out (which you saw in how the Bolsheviks worked against those that opposed them in the first few years of their power)

Also if you look at the purges from Stalins period of Russia many people who had access to guns were exterminated too such as army officials and members of the KGB so all of what you were saying does not fit

 

[DeletedUser71940]

Stalin went after the intellectuals that would figure out the flaws in his cult of personality that he had created and spread the propaganda against his rule, millions were deported to the Gulags just because they were smarter than your average twerp. Besides the whole idea of communism is idiotic, why would you expect someone to spend years studying to become a doctor when he would earn the same wage and near enough the same privileges as a cleaner. Might as well just go clean the toilets or whatever, hence the decline in the communist state by the end of the 1980s. During the rule of the Brezhnev, who in fact was braindead for several years, resulting in further decline, increase in alcoholism and increase in the hereditary diseases due to alcohol abuse.

Millions were unemployed - Why work when you can get food, flat, near enough all basic essentials for free? This had resulted in an increase of poverty in most regions of Russia due to lack of government funding needed to maintain schools, hospitals etc. Although the healthcare system was even better than that of the United Kingdom NHS , it had declined since the 1950s, after the Stalin's "Steel" rule had gone everyone started chilling pretty much. Khruschev was a complete moron, a peasant with dreams, I would take a guess at him being illiterate because of his pure stupidity. He tried to remove the traces of Stalin through a process of "De-stalinsation" but had failed after the unrest in Hungary during which he had ordered the red army to put down the unrest. No better than Stalin. The executions, show trials had resumed after the Hungarian Uprising after Khruschev had realised that giving a little freedom results in hunger for more. Eventually he resigned from the office with a statement "At least I went voluntarily". Yes he did indeed.

Then came the era of failed communist leaders that our school had not even bothered to teach, they were that much of a fail. Blah blah blah, up comes Gorbachev, he announces several policies which include the "Perestroika" - The economic restructure of Russia in order to remove the Government Monopoly, allowing some of the businesses to become privately owned. The policy of Glasnost was also famous, it also translates as "Openness"- I am Russian and I have no clue as to how they've managed to scramble that one out. Anyhow, it allowed the first McDonalds to open in the Red square and Russians had finally received some freedom and some of the better quality Western Goods, Journalists were also allowed into Russia where they have been strictly forbidden. Blah Blah Blah, talks with Reagan

1990, Collapse of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev makes the Communist parties illegal and strictly forbids it. Eatern Bloc start rebelling after one another.

End of Cold War.



Cold War Rant, 'tis late so I had nothing else to do.

 

[DeletedUser]

I see the point about ww1, however our navy was at war with Germany long before we really declared war. Most of America wanted to be isolationists, and not get involved in Europe's wars. However once we went to war with japan, Germany declared war on us to back there allies. Which turned our shipping war with Germany into an all out war. Also the only reason why japan attacked us is because we stopped trading them oil, and only reason why we did that is because the UK had interests in china at the time. So really us getting involved in that war at all is because we were backing the UK the whole time, though not very directly minus our shipping war with Germany.

As far as our other wars with Vietnam and such, those were mistakes made in WW2, instead of pussy footing with the USSR thinking we could be all buddy buddy. We should have attacked them after Germany surrender, that is also another fine example of a psychological mistake. We knew Stalin would go against us just based on his imperialistic nature, not to mention the ideological differences between us. I mean come on, he sided with Germany for half of Poland, and then declared war on japan to cease 2 islands of there's after we dropped the 2 nukes on them.

I admit, it is nice to look to the future, but by looking at the past you can see that it constantly repeats it's self. I don't believe any country on the map today will be there in the next 1-2 thousand years, and that some of our countries are bound to try and seize control. It's not really a matter of if, but a matter of when. I hope that someday we can drop all this country crap and just be the earth, but till then we gotta deal with whats on our plate.

As far as historically, ya it's true. I cant think of a single government that has lasted with the faith of there people for more then 1.000 years. Though the UK is close, minus it's not the same government just the same plot of land.

Another thing is that I believe saying things like, they just don't do that, or they just dont think that way is an opinion rather then factual. Where there is a will there is a way, and were there is want, there will be those that will take measures to get what they want.

I do agree on the part of education, that it is not wide spread enough for us to have as many guns as we do. But as always I stick to education is the solution not complete banning of them. I do agree with gun regulation laws for violent criminals, cause there far more likely to use them for unlawful purposes. Also gun registration is a good policy so we can figure who shot when and where should anything happen.

Also of course people don't get exterminated because of gun control, they simply cant fight back effectively. Along the lines of dont bring a knife to a gun fight, imagine if all the Jewish people that had been killed had weapons rather then being disarmed prior to that. Even if only 1/8 of the people killed were capable combatants, that is still one good sized rebellion. Another note, on rebellions vs large governments with superior training and troop counts; gorilla warfare is by far the most effective method to take down those types of powers. By no means is it impossible to make happen against even the greatest powers out there, but it is definitely a lot more effective if ya have guns rather then having to souly rely on chemistry/IED's.

Personally my work makes me deal with numbers, and facts... and really thus far throughout history governments have always fallen apart, and someone has always tried to take more power. That's simply in our nature as humans, so till that part is gone for good I want to keep my guns, not pray it doesn't happen to me.

 

[DeletedUser71940]

One correction, Japan had attacked USA because the USA had the biggest fleet in the Pacific and if the Japan did invade the islands then they would have been pretty screwed due to the size of the fleet under US command, hence the sneak attack in an attempt to cripple the navy at least untill the invasion of the islands is complete. At the end of the day, the participants at the time could be compared to any TW tribe - All they wanted was land, and more land. Except for the Allies who were on the defensive.

Funny thing is there was only one other attack on the US soil, that was when a Japanese pilot attempted to drop a bomb of some sort, but it malfunctioned.


Also, there are rumours that the Japanese attack was initially provoked by the US, a Japanese submarine was sunk somewhere in the pacific by the US navy, and the attack on Pearl Harbour was a retaliation. But this theory is yet to be proven, without the actual remains of the submarine the theory is still considered, just a theory.

 

[DeletedUser]

Pearl Harbor was not meant to be a sneak attack, it goes strictly against the ideology of Bushido. They went to declare war before they attacked so that we would have a chance to defend themselves. I don't remember the exact quote but when someone suggested it be a sneak attack admiral yamamoto said a samurai doesn't attack his enemy in his sleep, he kicked him awake and hands him his sword. There embassy was told to deliver the 14th page of there last message to the USA stating that war was imitate. Odd thing is, and a big shame on the higher ups not listening to naval intelligence is that we already had that 14th a good amount of time before they launched there attack. However due to the slow typing and description the Japanese had in there embassy it took to long for them to have it delivered 30 minutes before the attack.

There was also an attempted invasion in Alaska by the japanese military.

Never heard of a submarine incident minus us destroying a mini sub that got caught in our sub nets off of pearl harbor.

During the beginning of the war the Japanese navy dwarfed the USA navy, but they knew our industrial capability. That's why they wanted to take out our ability to fight right away, so we would be forced to surrender. If they had done that we simply couldn't put enough ships to sea to keep them at bay while our navy got rolling.

They attacked because they only had another 18 months of oil left, and with a war with Britain and china they would have been screwed without it. All they really wanted from us is oil, we wouldn't have cared if they decided to take any island except midway, and they only considered taking that because they knew war with America do to a hault of trade was inevitable.

( I also apologize about the false NRA info crap I posted prior, however I was drunk and on the phone with my brother, and he sent me it to post. I was just to drunk to think about sourcing it all to find corrections. Some of it is true however)

 

[DeletedUser71940]

The thing is, if what you say is true, attacking someone isn't exactly going to tempt them to restart the trade negotiations right? Unless they attempted to destroy fleet to commence invasion, which is just pure silly. Yeah I have just remembered the warning about the war as you posted the post, 'tis correct Americans were warned, they were just too arrogant to believe it. And I believe the sub that was sunk was quiet important within the Japanese Navy for it to declare war on the United States openly.

And I was taught that in fact the US navy was the largest navy within the Pacific followed closesly by Japan, hence the targeting of Pearl Harbour, destroying the biggest navy within the Pacific would make sense right? After all, without it there is nothing else but the fishing boats crafted by the Indonesian locals.

 

[DeletedUser]

We had a lot more battleships, but once carriers were introduced battleships became a thing of the past. Japan had a lot more carrier, and higher quality then we did. Only country that had better carriers then japan was Britain, and that is because there flight decks were made of steel rather then wood. Which we soon adopted after the pearl harbor attack.

To note training wise japan beat us in everything, from pilots to ship crews. Only thing we had better was damage control on ships, and that's because we used carbon monoxide to put out fires.

The attack was meant to get us to surrender, and the terms would have been better oil trading for them at least. They tried to get us to start trading them oil again via diplomacy for some time, but we simply sided with Britain over japan and thus wouldn't give them oil. They would have literally run out of all there oil reserves had they not gotten America to surrender, they really didn't want to make a lot of enemies. But we really left them no choice but war, cause surrender to china and Britain was out of the question for them since the terms would have undoubtedly been to severe, and inhibiting of there own goals.

America should have seen it coming since we stopped trading oil with them. Along the lines of if you take food from someone, they will come try and take it back before they starve to death. That goes especially with military nations and there oil since it is necessary to fuel there operations.

 

[DeletedUser71940]

Assumption such as destruction of the fleet will cause surrender is arrogant beyond belief, it's like assuming that all Americans are stupid, which was a plain myth. No I doubt that the Japanese Navy was that arrogant, there were other reasons behind it rather than plain attack in order to attain Oil, you do not just randomly attack the fleet of the second largest country in the world in an attempt to make it surrender. No one is THAT arrogant.

 

[DeletedUser]

Assumption such as destruction of the fleet will cause surrender is arrogant beyond belief, it's like assuming that all Americans are stupid, which was a plain myth. No I doubt that the Japanese Navy was that arrogant, there were other reasons behind it rather than plain attack in order to attain Oil, you do not just randomly attack the fleet of the second largest country in the world in an attempt to make it surrender. No one is THAT arrogant.

If they took out our carriers we would have been blockaded into starvation, or simple lack of supplies. It's a very common and effective tactic, Germany almost successfully did that to Britain, except it didn't work because Britain still was a huge naval power.

Though I have to say when it comes to conspiracy theories I have to acknowledge it seems that we knew the attack was coming, cause we found a really cheesy reason to send out all our carriers before the attack. If they had taken our carries we would have been completely boned, and wouldn't have had the ability to protect our shores.

 

[DeletedUser71940]

Yeah but the help could have been requested from the other members of the Allies or the fact that America is quiet a large country to blockade completely.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yeah but the help could have been requested from the other members of the Allies or the fact that America is quiet a large country to blockade completely.

Ya we are large, but we couldn't have asked for help from the European nations. Britain was having a tough enough time with Germany's navy, and the USSR was simply useless to us except against Germany. I only say that about the USSR because they were the only "allies" that only ever took help rather then give it. Mainly they turned against Germany and not japan with the rest of us, which is yet another big clue that war was inevitable with them. However they were brave enough to attack japan after we dropped nukes on them, and then they only took 2 under fortified islands from them. That is more of them gaining rather then helping, since the nukes ended the war.

Without our carriers, we only had battleships which are easy for carriers to take out, and are even to under par compared to the Japanese battleships. Once they parked outside of our major sea ports that would have been the end of the fight for us, I mean once we got in bombing range / had the superior numbers to bomb Germany's ports they were incapable of putting more ships to sea. It would have been along the same lines for us, had the Japanese gotten that much leverage in sea superiority. Invasion of the USA was something they never considered, minus Alaska to take our oil supplies. But in Alaska our population was low so they didn't expect much civilian interference, however we armed the escomo's and they really took the fiht above there ability to handle. I mean that's islander people going to a place that hits below freezing constantly fighting a population that is not only used to the terrain but thrived in it. Once they got in the fight the winner was clear since the Japanese didn't have the training or the proper equipment to combat us in that enviroment.

 

[DeletedUser71940]

But the thing is, America is large, you could probably build up a whole fleet somewhere in the middle and move it out through some god forsaken river without the Japanese realising what the hell was going on, thus rebuilding the fleet and ending the blockade, it just doesn't seem like a logical solution to expect surrender from destruction of a fleet and blockade of the country. I mean it is easier to blockade Japan seeing as it is an island, but USA is landlocked from North and South, thus leaving East and West open, and if they were willing to blockade the West that would take months to do so since they would have to travel around the whole of Canada or the South America.

 

[DeletedUser]

Pittsburgh was our biggest shipyard. The thing is they would have followed the attack with bombing the hell out of our ports, and with no real defensive ability they would have destroyed our industry. Without our export trade, our sea faring cities under siege we would have fallen. Even our Mississippi river isn't deep enough to put out carriers, and the parts that are deep enough are within bombing range of the sea. It would just be hell for us to try that since they would shell the hell out of our shores.

 

[DeletedUser]

The Japan actually tried to bomb us after the Pearl Harbor incident but it did't work very well since there were some complications. They use ballons carrying bombs and they had jet stream that blew from Japan over the Pacific Ocean into US. They got pretty far and they did hit us but for some reason it failed....don't know why tho

 

[DeletedUser]

I remember hearing about that. They wanted to start forest fires, so that our troops would go home to put them out. Then they would be able to rebuild once we were gone...

 

[DeletedUser]

Another thing is that I believe saying things like, they just don't do that, or they just dont think that way is an opinion rather then factual. Where there is a will there is a way, and were there is want, there will be those that will take measures to get what they want.

FWIW, I used those words about 2 things that it was alleged people who couldn't easily get hold of guns would do;

1) Build guns from internet schematics
2) Build explosive/chemical weapons instead

These things simply do not happen in european countries. You can describe that as opinion if you want, but...they don't happen. Fact.

I understand that coming from a gun culture this is a difficult fact, but it remains a fact.

 

[DeletedUser]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate

Suggests that the primary reason for the attack was to prevent the US intervening in defending the british and dutch in south-east asia...among other reasons.

 

[DeletedUser71940]

Pittsburgh was our biggest shipyard. The thing is they would have followed the attack with bombing the hell out of our ports, and with no real defensive ability they would have destroyed our industry. Without our export trade, our sea faring cities under siege we would have fallen. Even our Mississippi river isn't deep enough to put out carriers, and the parts that are deep enough are within bombing range of the sea. It would just be hell for us to try that since they would shell the hell out of our shores.

Yeah but the technology progressed it is likely due to the American industrial capacity, they would have found a solution of some sort, like expanding the fuel tank to travel further distance and bombing the hell out of the japanese ships, or a new ship altogether. Suprisingly Americans are very quick to develop millitary solutions to the problems(Atomic bomb springs to mind).

 

[DeletedUser]

We only got the A-bomb before Germany cause they discarded all there best scientists as inferior beings, and our country attracted them, so there contributions were given to us.

The links for the pearl harbor info dont show anything other then some random search site.

Though I cant prove it, but I have family that was on both sides in that war. I have always read, and have been told that it was purely because of oil. The world knew our population wouldn't support us going to war with any nation for any reason. Thats why F.D.R had to pussy foot about war, and make it not official war, and just "escorted shipping" to our allies. When in fact it was more war like then just shipping. Simple thing is that our population was not going to support a war, and everyone knew that. It was simple for anyone to see, even my grandfather told me that they never though america would get involved directly since america was isolationist. We took away there ability to sustain warfare against the britain and left them no other choice in the matter but to try and force us back to the table.

Also you cant state that as a fact, unless you have some program that tells you how everyone thinks and feels. There is NO ABSOLUTE to humans. Look at the people that were sleepers in the Europe that bombed bus's and such. Like I said, all someone needs is a justifiable reason, and then the will to get it done. We really are simple and predictable creatures, whether opression comes from the scoll or the sword in time it always comes. If you can find a 1.000 year period in which nations haven't broken apart, and reformed in some way or another I will eat my words. Past that, the facts say it happens, and will happen again.

As far as guns, I will always stand with better to hope for the best, and prepare for the worst. When you get complacent is when you are most vulnerable. What would happen if your government started oppressing people threw diplomacy in your country? what could you do to stop it? nothing unless you got a magic vest that protect you from all gun fire, and missiles. You would literally have no way but hand to hand to try and claw back your rights.