How much influence does the US REALLY have in foreign societies?

[lawrocket 3]

No, Tom. Germany rebuilt itself via the strength of its democratically based systems ans became a power in the world, along with Italy.

It wasn't until the fascist and inhumane terrorost United States exercised its imperial will and committed terrible war crimes upon an innocent Germany that the Germans became powerless shills to US interests, where the oppression was conquered with the help of the altruistic USSR for only a period of time.
Have I got that right, errico?
(I know you aren't mallatesta - he's been taking a dirt nap for a while now.))

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,994]

>Germany definitely looked a lot like a Mad Max movie.

Well, there definitely were parts of Germany that looked like a Mad Max movie after WWI, leading up to WWII. (Think starvation of the population, whole cities laid waste, concentration camps and insane leaders.) A lot of the anger that fueled Germany's entry into WWII was due to the devastation of the country (and lack of rebuilding) caused by WWI.

Right after World War I, the anger that many Germans felt towards the Jews was used by the far-right nationalists to create the Dolchstoßlegende, which led directly to the genocide of the Third Reich. This anger was sustained by the draconian measures in the Treaty of Versailles. The crushing level of reparations required by the treaty, combined with the economic devastation caused first by the Allied blockades, then the invasion of Germany, and finally the worldwide depression of the 1930's, gave far more support to the radical positions of the Third Reich than they would have had otherwise.

If there had been a Marshall Plan for Germany after World War 1, and if Germany had been rebuilt and its economy restored, there's not much question that the anger that allowed the radical right to rise to power would have been greatly diminished. Their promises of full employment, at the cost of political freedoms, would have not had the attraction it had if the ecomony did not remain so poor for so long.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

If there had been a Marshall Plan for Germany after World War 1, and if Germany had been rebuilt and its economy restored, there's not much question that the anger that allowed the radical right to rise to power would have been greatly diminished. Their promises of full employment, at the cost of political freedoms, would have not had the attraction it had if the ecomony did not remain so poor for so long.

So, the end justifies the means?

If we'd simply killed every german, that would have worked, too, wouldn't it?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[billvon 2,994]

>So, the end justifies the means?

I don't recall saying that!

>If we'd simply killed every german, that would have worked, too, wouldn't it?

Edited to reply -

Probably not. The world stopped Hitler when he tried to do that, and he only killed 6 million Jews. After gassing, say, the ten millionth German, the world may have done the same to us.

[likearock 2]

Quote

Quote

Second, both Germany and Japan were knocking off countries one by one. It was clear to anyone, both at the time and after the fact, that their aggregate goal was world domination through military means.

World domination? Not only is that widely untrue historically but it was not clear to 'anyone' at the time.

Really? So what is your theory for why Germany invaded Poland, France, the USSR, and tried to mount an attack upon Great Britain? Or why Japan took over China and the countries in SE Asia? Certainly sounds to me like something out of the Alexander/Caesar/Napoleon playbook. Or perhaps you actually believe there was some short list of countries they felt should be part of their empire and once those were conquered, no further aggression would be necessary. Give me a break.

[lawrocket 3]

Japan and Germany were merely borrowing those countries at those countries' request. Poland asked Germany to exterminate it, after the other Eastern Europeans sought Germany's protection from the comparative military might and intellectual superiority of their Polack neighbors.

Thus, Germany acted in concert with all of Europe to be a stabilizing force. Only Churchill, with his capitalistic imperial aspirations, sought to end the peaceful utopia of Herr Hitler, after Churchill was brainwashed by Richard Mellon Scafe and Bill O'Reilly.

Am I correct here, errico?

Edited to add: I read this on alternet.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

Nor duid Japan need to attack us in that manner. Nor did Japan neeed to continue fighting. Nor did we need to fight back.

Nothing "needs" to be done. The US occupied Japan. The US didn't need to implement the Marshall Plan. Let me guess - another US fascist power grab?

Quote

Yes. We could have carpet bombed the rest of Japan. We didn't. I take it that America was wrong (no matter what, America did the wrong thing. I know)

Your original hypothesis was stupid and what you have said is in no measure a support of the original statement which without clicking back to get a full look was something absurd about never giving Japan back as if we still functioned on 18th century models of warfare.

Quote

Quote

Yeah I am sure that Italy really appreciated it when the US came in at the end of the war and broke up democratic institutions and restored fascist leadership.

They didn't have to give it back at all though right? If we go by your standard of conflict resolution and not anything based in reality.

You've shown yourself. You assert that Mussolini (leader of the Partito Nazionale Fascista) was not a fascist.
Il Duce was not a fascist. Nor was Emmanuel.


You've shown that you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

The US destroyed rapidly growing democratic practices and institutions all across Northern Italy, restored many fascist elements of the old society and absolutely none of it relates to Mussolini.

Quote

One more thing about dropping atom bombs and firebombing. Correct - it is not included as a legitimate method of defense. Present tense.

It, however, was in the past a legitimate method of defense. As was poison gas. And flamethrowers. And hot oil.

Wrong.

Quote

Back in 1945 atomic bombs, carpet bombing, buzz bombs WERE legitimate.

So clever use of present tense. No, it "is" not. But it "was.". Which is the relevant inquiry.

They were not considered legitimate and this is obvious as most of them were left out of Nuremberg trials.

• Quote

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

Really? So what is your theory for why Germany invaded Poland, France, the USSR, and tried to mount an attack upon Great Britain? Or why Japan took over China and the countries in SE Asia? Certainly sounds to me like something out of the Alexander/Caesar/Napoleon playbook. Or perhaps you actually believe there was some short list of countries they felt should be part of their empire and once those were conquered, no further aggression would be necessary. Give me a break.

It has nothing to do with my theory it has to do with basic historical facts and you conceptualising a fantasy in your head.

YOU painted the picture that Germany and Japan were not only out for "world domination" but that "anyone" (everyone?) knew it. There is no doubt that Germany and Japan were on a path of destruction but I suggest you either leave the thread or leave the childish conceptions of good vs evil at the door.

If Germany were pure evil hell bent on "world domination" and everyone knew it why were there massive celebrations in the streets of New York when Poland was invaded.

[likearock 2]

Quote

Quote

Really? So what is your theory for why Germany invaded Poland, France, the USSR, and tried to mount an attack upon Great Britain? Or why Japan took over China and the countries in SE Asia? Certainly sounds to me like something out of the Alexander/Caesar/Napoleon playbook. Or perhaps you actually believe there was some short list of countries they felt should be part of their empire and once those were conquered, no further aggression would be necessary. Give me a break.

It has nothing to do with my theory it has to do with basic historical facts and you conceptualising a fantasy in your head.

You've got to be kidding me. Where is the fantasy in the historical record of all the countries that were invaded? How about answering my question, what exactly were Japan and Germany doing if it was not world domination?

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

You've got to be kidding me. Where is the fantasy in the historical record of all the countries that were invaded? How about answering my question, what exactly were Japan and Germany doing if it was not world domination?

I'm not kidding you - the fantasy I refer to is in your head which doesn't allow you to conceptualise what people of the period were doing, thinking and believing.

I have already given one example that contradicts your recount of history - If "anyone" knew how 'evil' Germany was why were there parties in the streets of NYC the day Germany invaded Poland?

To specifically (re-)answer your two questions...

1. I didn't infer this was the fantasy.
2. Germany and Japan were carrying out a brutal war of territorial expansion.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

How much influence does the US REALLY have in foreign societies?

Enough to stop a democratically elected Mosadegh and his entire government, and enough to set up puppet governments that basically do there bidding.

So I would say a lot.

I think like any other nation our first priority is us. Our government only cares in how it will effect our economy, security, and image in that order. I truly do believe that we are money whores.

We have done some great thing like WWII but lets not forget we did not get involved until it was our ass that was on the line.

Please note: I am not saying were bad all i am saying is were like most others. Selfserving

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

the fantasy I refer to is in your head which doesn't allow you to conceptualise what people of the period were doing, thinking and believing.

So, when I point out the deeds, thoughts and beliefs of people at the time - like that bombing civilians was an accepted act of war or that the atom bomb was considered to be nothing more than a huge bomb - you say I'm wrong.


[Reply] If "anyone" knew how 'evil' Germany was why were there parties in the streets of NYC the day Germany invaded Poland?

[ErricoMalatesta 0]

Quote

So, when I point out the deeds, thoughts and beliefs of people at the time - like that bombing civilians was an accepted act of war or that the atom bomb was considered to be nothing more than a huge bomb - you say I'm wrong.

'people at the time'- what people? You mean power centers? Yeah if you murder millions of people come out on top of other systems and then tell everyone you had too than sure, 'people at the time' just didn't understand the concept of gross human violence and mass murder.

If we can leave the fantasy land for a moment there is a reason why post war most things that both sides could be proven to have done weren't considered crimes while things only the Axis powers had done were some of the greatest crimes going.

People understood that firebombing entire cities were massive human rights abuses even if there was no global legislature. Further they dropped two and the internal documents are out there to read so the second half is wrong also.

It is funny no matter what part of the political spectrum Americans cannot let go of WW2. All the powerful states of WW2 committed massive war crimes - you just apply scrutiny to everyone but yourself it would seem lawrocket. It is very evident when you dedicate entire posts to postulating absurd stories and implicating me as a shared holder of said ideas.

Quote

[Reply] If "anyone" knew how 'evil' Germany was why were there parties in the streets of NYC the day Germany invaded Poland?

Because some people KNEW how evil Germany was.


I thought we couldn't drop the bar further.

They knew did they? German-Americans knew Germany was evil? US business knew Germany was evil? A society at the peak of Western intellectual and artistic culture?

I am just going to stop here.

Quote

[Reply]
2. Germany and Japan were carrying out a brutal war of territorial expansion.

Thank you.

Yet you deny that the end of the war were war crimes? Ok so here is your reasoning laid out...

Japan attacked Pearl Harbor so several years later in a defense move we atom bombed and firebombed entire cities. Is that justification? Do you believe that? Does anyone believe that?

Before Japan attacked the US and before the US even entered the war the US press was full of stories about how b-52 bombers rolling off assembly lines would be more than capable of reducing Japan's wood cities to ash - by your logic this is a very strong validation for Japanese action... not something I would agree with however.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Before Japan attacked the US and before the US even entered the war the US press was full of stories about how b-52 bombers rolling off assembly lines would be more than capable of reducing Japan's wood cities to ash - by your logic this is a very strong validation for Japanese action... not something I would agree with however.

Yeah, you *might* just want to recheck those history books that you have that you keep saying are better than ours...because the B-52 didn't enter the inventory until 1955.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[lawrocket 3]

One sided? Haven't I said repeatedly that war is immoral? That an "act of war" is inherently an act against humanity?

Yes - the firstorming of Tokyo (killed more people than either of the A-Bombs) was an act against humanity. The bombing of Hiroshima was an act against humanity. Nagasaki - that was proof that "we've got more for you."

I've said it and reiterated it.

And I, in myself, can find reasonable justifications.

Guess what - you didn't have to be a power center to wish your side had the weapons so that your side could use them.

I apply scrutiny to all - including the US and myself.

I apply scrutiny because there are people out there who will spin. There are intelligent and educated people who hate Jews. There are learned people who identify themselves with people who speak of fomenting class warfare and killing those of another "class" in pursuit of social consciousness. People who think crimes and murder are okay if for a cause they find worthwhile.

People like the individual for whome ypu have listed as your screen name.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[likearock 2]

Quote

Quote

You've got to be kidding me. Where is the fantasy in the historical record of all the countries that were invaded? How about answering my question, what exactly were Japan and Germany doing if it was not world domination?

I'm not kidding you - the fantasy I refer to is in your head which doesn't allow you to conceptualise what people of the period were doing, thinking and believing.

I don't know. Seems to me that someone with any knowledge of that era (German pattern of invasions leading into the war; Hitler's stated belief in a "master race") who can't put two and two together is locked into a pretty deep denial fantasy of his own. But that's cool - I understand how projection works.

Quote

I have already given one example that contradicts your recount of history - If "anyone" knew how 'evil' Germany was why were there parties in the streets of NYC the day Germany invaded Poland?

This is so ridiculous it almost doesn't warrant an answer. Suffice it to say that "clear to anyone" does not literally mean "every single person in the world agrees with it". Don't waste my time with such pedantic nonsense.

Quote

To specifically (re-)answer your two questions...


1. I didn't infer this was the fantasy.
2. Germany and Japan were carrying out a brutal war of territorial expansion.

Finally! So I take it that we both agree on that last point and our only difference is one of degree. That is, you believe the territorial expansion would have ceased short of world domination and I don't. In other words, you subscribe to the "short list" theory I alluded to previously:

Quote

Or perhaps you actually believe there was some short list of countries they felt should be part of their empire and once those were conquered, no further aggression would be necessary.

Fair statement?

[justinb138 0]

Quote

I think like any other nation our first priority is us. Our government only cares in how it will effect our economy, security, and image in that order.

Our government only cares about their (re)electability, image in the media, and personal finance. Everything relating to matters of citizens of this and other countries is a distant fourth.

Our nation (referring to the people, not the government) is probably closer to your statement.