"Heck, I am sure China wasn't exporting them food during WW2."
Not much after the US got done with the Jap merchant fleet. Choking Hirohito's Imperial ambitions required choking Japanese logistics, and those mostly moved by sea:
"UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT (Pacific War)
WASHINGTON, D.C. 1 JULY 1946
DESTRUCTION OF THE JAPANESE MERCHANT FLEET Japan's merchant shipping fleet, was not only a key link in the logistical support of her armed forces in the field, but also a vital link in her economic structure. It was the sole element of this basic structure which was vulnerable to direct attack throughout a major portion of the war.
Japan entered the war with some 6,000,000 tons of merchant shipping of over 500 tons gross weight. During the war an additional 4,100,000 tons were constructed, captured or requisitioned. Sufficient information was secured by the Survey in Japan concerning this 10,100,000 tons to tabulate ship by ship, (a) the name end tonnage, (b>) the date, location; and agent of sinking or damage, and (c) the present condition and location of such ships as survived. The sources from which evidence was obtained were in some respects conflicting. Where possible these conflicts have been resolved. The Joint Army and Navy Assessment Committee has tentatively arrived at similar results and is continuing its efforts further to refine the evidence. The Survey believes that the figures included in the following breakdown will not differ significantly from the final evaluation of the Joint Army and Navy Assessment Committee.
Eight million nine hundred thousand tons of this shipping were sunk or so seriously damaged as to be out of action at the end of the war. Fifty-four and seven-tenths percent of this total was attributable to submarines, 16.3 percent to carrier based planes, 10.2 percent to Army land-based planes and 4.3 percent to Navy and Marine land-based planes, 9.3 percent to mines (largely dropped by B-29s), less than 1 percent to surface gunfire, and the balance of 4 percent to marine accidents. "
Interesting that advocating the US NOT intervene in an Asian land war is considered Flamebait, or that Asians have responsibility to manage Asia!
Since when did/. join the John Birch Society? The American fondness for neo-colonial wars in Asia hasn't worked out well, has pissed off the locals, consumed vast blood and treasure, and mostly been a waste of effort.
If he didn't fight, hard, he would never have been listened too when his cause was a fringe movement. It really still IS a fringe movement, outside the world of Slashdot.
Being an asshole works well for some people, and I hope he stays at it.
Not unless you are perceptive enough to snuff the revolutionary before they get momentum. Killing Ghandi (for example) early on would have at least bought some time, but the British didn't really want their Empire any more so they gave up easily.
In two of the cited examples killing was vital in spreading the idea, and killing adjusted the power balance between the ideas. Islam and Christianity are still in conflict, all PC nonsense aside, but the conflict is quite mild nowadays.
"UFO" merely means "unidentified". If the Air Force is doing its job, there should always have been plenty of "UFOs" that the public have no idea about.
"Not considering loss of lives makes you an immoral bastard."
Considering OWN lives over ENEMY lives is hardly immoral, unless you are of the persuasion that there is no difference.
Why are YOUR moral taboos more precious than own-side lives in an existential struggle?
Why should we have been eager to kill millions of Allied troops in Operation Downfall rather than fry a few Japs?
Imperial Japan was not at all like the country so beloved of the weaboo geek crowd who so staunchly defend it today, and think WWII consisted of "Pearl Harbor, internment camps, and Hiroshima".
"That's the same bullshit excuse used to justify nuking Japan."
No excuse was needed. In Total War the enemy either surrenders or is destroyed. They must be beaten into either submission or death, and it does not matter which. There was no conceivable reason to consider the enemy civilians of Axis powers as anything but targets.
WWII was literally an existential struggle, so there is no logical justification for not doing everything to destroy Japanese resistance. A land invasion would have been tremendously costly, and there was less than zero reason to value _enemy_ civilians more than own side soldiers.
"You can throw around terms like freedom, security, self-defence and so on as much as you want, but it doesn't change the cold hard fact that the US isn't really excelling in any important metric as a result of it's gun culture."
The culture is a reasonable reaction to a government that can never protect its citizens without becoming a complete police state, and to the many, many, many citizens who are violent criminals and like it that way.
The US has demographic problems it brought on itself by slavery and by immigration policies (including de-facto open borders for everyone except airline passengers!) designed to bury the place in the poor and socially toxic.
We can't get rid of the bad citizens, so we will remain under permanent internal siege.
"If you have freedom why do corporations in the US have so much control both politically and personally?"
Because we are too comfortable and too divided to change that unless things get worse. Not a gun issue.
"If you have guns as a deterrent to criminals, why is crime so high?"
Because we have a lot of very bad people who cannot be dealt with using methods compatible with a reasonably free society. Also, much of the crime is in areas where citizens are DISarmed by law.
Kennesaw, GA, requires householders to be armed, and the results are gratifying:
"If you feel safe, free, and secure as a result of gun ownership why do Americans report so much lower levels of personal happiness?"
I'm quite content. I suggest that the personal happiness levels aren't connected to firearms ownership, but to economics. The vast and perpetually increasing number of poor in the US as its job market shrinks and quality jobs vanish certainly have much to do with it.
"Which, of course, completely explains why the violent crime rate is lower in the UK, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Canada, France, Germany, and a whole host of other countries where firearms are strictly regulated."
Those nations have very different demographics. It's an instant Troll mod for thoughtcrime to point that out, so I'll gently note that in neighborhoods that "demographically resemble" the traditional areas of the above-mentioned countries crime in the US is quite modest. Some of the best-armed areas in the US are quite peaceful.
The US is in a different situation, with uncontrolled borders, a failed narco-state to the south, a permanent willfully self-perpetuating narco-thug underclass (who revel about it in mass media), and most importantly citizens with NOTHING in common except location.
How does one keep guns out of an _anarchic_ country?
They are small, easy to make (even Afghans with very basic machine shops produce Kalashnikovs, and lots of USians machine their own firearms as a hobby)and don't require much special tooling.
Give me an "anarchy" and I'll be setting up machine tools and cranking out weapons for sale. Ammo too, it isn't rocket science to make the tooling. Under "anarchy", the same equipment can make other fun things such as simple mortars. A 60mm only takes a shotshell-sized lifting charge. Since "anarchy" = "power vacuum" everyone else who can do this will be having at it, and Cthulhu take the hindmost.
"The day you have to shoot at your own government, it's all over anyway."
It wasn't "all over" in 1776. The shooty bit changed governments. One shouldn't go all shooty as a matter of course, since its inconvenient for all concerned, but keeping the option open is different.
Slashdot Mirror
One thing USians don't get that rioty French and Greeks and such DO get is that without protest, the government will go on fucking them.
USians _used_ to get that, but 1776 was a long time ago.
"They did all this... twice... in the span of a single century, with no natural resources to speak of, save one: the Japanese people themselves."
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/53050/milton-ezrati/japans-aging-economics
"Heck, I am sure China wasn't exporting them food during WW2."
Not much after the US got done with the Jap merchant fleet. Choking Hirohito's Imperial ambitions required choking Japanese logistics, and those mostly moved by sea:
http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm#dotjmf
"UNITED STATES STRATEGIC BOMBING SURVEY
SUMMARY REPORT
(Pacific War)
WASHINGTON, D.C.
1 JULY 1946
DESTRUCTION OF THE JAPANESE MERCHANT FLEET
Japan's merchant shipping fleet, was not only a key link in the logistical support of her armed forces in the field, but also a vital link in her economic structure. It was the sole element of this basic structure which was vulnerable to direct attack throughout a major portion of the war.
Japan entered the war with some 6,000,000 tons of merchant shipping of over 500 tons gross weight. During the war an additional 4,100,000 tons were constructed, captured or requisitioned. Sufficient information was secured by the Survey in Japan concerning this 10,100,000 tons to tabulate ship by ship, (a) the name end tonnage, (b>) the date, location; and agent of sinking or damage, and (c) the present condition and location of such ships as survived. The sources from which evidence was obtained were in some respects conflicting. Where possible these conflicts have been resolved. The Joint Army and Navy Assessment Committee has tentatively arrived at similar results and is continuing its efforts further to refine the evidence. The Survey believes that the figures included in the following breakdown will not differ significantly from the final evaluation of the Joint Army and Navy Assessment Committee.
Eight million nine hundred thousand tons of this shipping were sunk or so seriously damaged as to be out of action at the end of the war. Fifty-four and seven-tenths percent of this total was attributable to submarines, 16.3 percent to carrier based planes, 10.2 percent to Army land-based planes and 4.3 percent to Navy and Marine land-based planes, 9.3 percent to mines (largely dropped by B-29s), less than 1 percent to surface gunfire, and the balance of 4 percent to marine accidents. "
"And when China becomes disfunctional you won't be able to buy anthing anymore, because every frikkin thing you buy these days is made in China."
Nonsense. It would just create new opportunity for other countries with cheap labor and a diverse industrial base such as India.
There is nothing special about China its competitors couldn't replace, and they are already trying.
Their presence suggests otherwise. What they think about it doesn't matter in an evolutionary sense. A considerable number survived to reproduce.
Interesting that advocating the US NOT intervene in an Asian land war is considered Flamebait, or that Asians have responsibility to manage Asia!
Since when did /. join the John Birch Society? The American fondness for neo-colonial wars in Asia hasn't worked out well, has pissed off the locals, consumed vast blood and treasure, and mostly been a waste of effort.
"Lucky for the Japanese, China is still pissed over that whole "Rape of Nanking" deal."
There are plenty of living Chinese who experienced that and much more. Hirohito's BW unit for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731
China isn't worth nuking nor Asia worth wasting US resources on a problem ASIANS should solve themselves.
If he didn't fight, hard, he would never have been listened too when his cause was a fringe movement. It really still IS a fringe movement, outside the world of Slashdot.
Being an asshole works well for some people, and I hope he stays at it.
"killing them won't stop the idea."
Not unless you are perceptive enough to snuff the revolutionary before they get momentum. Killing Ghandi (for example) early on would have at least bought some time, but the British didn't really want their Empire any more so they gave up easily.
In two of the cited examples killing was vital in spreading the idea, and killing adjusted the power balance between the ideas.
Islam and Christianity are still in conflict, all PC nonsense aside, but the conflict is quite mild nowadays.
"Thanks in advance for any protection you can afford me as a sovereign individual."
Post your name and personal information on 4chan in the /b/ forum so they may assist you in your cause.
"So in effect what the Russian Minister said the VOA and BBC in the 60s through 90s was an act of aggression."
Rock'n'roll as cultural WMD? I approve.
"And Humans will adapt by dying out."
The many survivors of atomic testing and nuclear attack suggest otherwise.
It will drive smart users. The rest don't care. Not my problem.
"UFO" merely means "unidentified". If the Air Force is doing its job, there should always have been plenty of "UFOs" that the public have no idea about.
"If curse words become a part of normally accepted speech, what the hell will we use for curse words then???"
Vivid expressions using words that aren't taboo. Easy enough.
"Not considering loss of lives makes you an immoral bastard."
Considering OWN lives over ENEMY lives is hardly immoral, unless you are of the persuasion that there is no difference.
Why are YOUR moral taboos more precious than own-side lives in an existential struggle?
Why should we have been eager to kill millions of Allied troops in Operation Downfall rather than fry a few Japs?
Imperial Japan was not at all like the country so beloved of the weaboo geek crowd who so staunchly defend it today, and think WWII consisted of "Pearl Harbor, internment camps, and Hiroshima".
It ain't Flamebait when the man betrayed his base.
Don't ask, don't tell, don't trust the people you voted for to fight for your rights.
So much for the Magic Negro (thank Spike Lee for the wonderful phrase!) and Change We Can Believe In.
BTW, ask the LGBT folks how the view is from Under The Bus, where they were just thrown by Dems desperate for re-election.
"That's the same bullshit excuse used to justify nuking Japan."
No excuse was needed. In Total War the enemy either surrenders or is destroyed. They must be beaten into either submission or death, and it does not matter which. There was no conceivable reason to consider the enemy civilians of Axis powers as anything but targets.
WWII was literally an existential struggle, so there is no logical justification for not doing everything to destroy Japanese resistance. A land invasion would have been tremendously costly, and there was less than zero reason to value _enemy_ civilians more than own side soldiers.
"Persians aren't threatening to destroy Israel, Arabs are."
Persian inaction is consent. If the Persians view remaining as serfs under Arab masters to be a problem, they should revolt and kill all the Arabs.
The solution to being mastered by an ethnic enemy is ethnic cleansing.
Just because something "isn't acceptable" is not a reason not to do it.
Pragmatism matters in the real world, while morality is self-indulgence.
"You can throw around terms like freedom, security, self-defence and so on as much as you want, but it doesn't change the cold hard fact that the US isn't really excelling in any important metric as a result of it's gun culture."
The culture is a reasonable reaction to a government that can never protect its citizens without becoming a complete police state, and to the many, many, many citizens who are violent criminals and like it that way.
The US has demographic problems it brought on itself by slavery and by immigration policies (including de-facto open borders for everyone except airline passengers!) designed to bury the place in the poor and socially toxic.
We can't get rid of the bad citizens, so we will remain under permanent internal siege.
"If you have freedom why do corporations in the US have so much control both politically and personally?"
Because we are too comfortable and too divided to change that unless things get worse. Not a gun issue.
"If you have guns as a deterrent to criminals, why is crime so high?"
Because we have a lot of very bad people who cannot be dealt with using methods compatible with a reasonably free society. Also, much of the crime is in areas where citizens are DISarmed by law.
Kennesaw, GA, requires householders to be armed, and the results are gratifying:
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=41196
"If you feel safe, free, and secure as a result of gun ownership why do Americans report so much lower levels of personal happiness?"
I'm quite content.
I suggest that the personal happiness levels aren't connected to firearms ownership, but to economics.
The vast and perpetually increasing number of poor in the US as its job market shrinks and quality jobs vanish certainly have much to do with it.
"Which, of course, completely explains why the violent crime rate is lower in the UK, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Canada, France, Germany, and a whole host of other countries where firearms are strictly regulated."
Those nations have very different demographics. It's an instant Troll mod for thoughtcrime to point that out, so I'll gently note that in neighborhoods that "demographically resemble" the traditional areas of the above-mentioned countries crime in the US is quite modest. Some of the best-armed areas in the US are quite peaceful.
The US is in a different situation, with uncontrolled borders, a failed narco-state to the south, a permanent willfully self-perpetuating narco-thug underclass (who revel about it in mass media), and most importantly citizens with NOTHING in common except location.
How does one keep guns out of an _anarchic_ country?
They are small, easy to make (even Afghans with very basic machine shops produce Kalashnikovs, and lots of USians machine their own firearms as a hobby)and don't require much special tooling.
Give me an "anarchy" and I'll be setting up machine tools and cranking out weapons for sale. Ammo too, it isn't rocket science to make the tooling. Under "anarchy", the same equipment can make other fun things such as simple mortars. A 60mm only takes a shotshell-sized lifting charge. Since "anarchy" = "power vacuum" everyone else who can do this will be having at it, and Cthulhu take the hindmost.
"The day you have to shoot at your own government, it's all over anyway."
It wasn't "all over" in 1776. The shooty bit changed governments. One shouldn't go all shooty as a matter of course, since its inconvenient for all concerned, but keeping the option open is different.