Or how about a nice reduction in the federal deficit. We have not yet reached the "point of no return" where our government collapses. But we are close.
Thats easy, vote democrat in the next election. Democrats are 100% spend and tax. Republicans are 50/50 spend and borrow and save and spend.
first, thanks for staying mute on my 'moot' mistake.
It has been a long time since I've taken material science. My verbage was less then accurate.
By strengh, I was thinking how much energy can it withstand before it burns up.
Good point, I imagine the point near the breaking points would be travelling at a high rate of speed. Fast enough to cause it to burn up?
If this thing is 32000Km high, and it looses it's counter weight how much wouldn't burn up? I would be surprised if there was less the 15,000Km that didn't burn up.
For the sake of arguement, lets say it did burn up, how much carbon nano tube residue would be created?
If it snapped by the counterweight and they made the cable flat, it's maximium speed woudl be negliagle. It's be liek having a coax cable fall on yrou head from a 20 story building. You'd get a bruise, maybe a cuncussion but it isn't goignt o destroy the earth.
I've always thought they should consider a variation on the space elevator, where the top was in LEO, and the bottom hung down into the atmosphere. To get things to the top, you simply fly something up high enough that it can latch onto the bottom. Then when you get to the top, you wait for a second one to swing by and take you higher.
the problem is, that while a elevator would be held up by centripital force and have much more force exerted outwards then any payload can exert downwards a orbiting satalite with a rope would be pulled down by any load you put on it. Thus a elevator coudl take loads up but your design would be dragged down over time or imidiately dependign on the size of the satalite at the end.
Short answer: it would have to survive any hurricane that passed it. If it broke... it could cut a path of destruction that would make a hurricane look like child's play...
err.. no. since it's being held in place by centripal force, if the cable breaks the whole things goes up and away.
A space elevator will be made of carbon fiber nanotubes correct?? What would be the effect on a hurricane hitting the elevator? Can the string be realed in from one end?? Would it be more prudent to build this in a place far away from a coastline??
negliable if built correctly. The local winds wouldn't have enough kinetic force to move the cable much.
Reginald Denny should have had a good handgun in his truck and the willingness to use it. The rest of the mob would have been de-motivated to continue attacking had their initial attempts resulted in dead attackers.
Yeah like the armed sodlier on the bus in isreal who shot some civillians. That rifle sure kept him from being beaten to death... wsit a minute.....
You see a lot of panty shots in anime or shots of girls in the shower, but in Japan all genitals are blacked out/fuzzed out/pixellated out.
Erect male genitalia and full shots of female genetalia are, however shots of children or unerect penises do occur. See for example dragon ball. Even breasts are displayed in childrens shows, see sailor moon. But it's often non-sexual. Handled often for comedy.
Fantasia would have been better if the Satyrs had genitalia?
That seems like a kind of nit-picky point.
Plenty of points to pick at... you chose that a childrens movie produced in the 60's or 70's didn't have full-frontal nudity.
HEres a better point. Disney has made animation onyl for kids. Disney has presented a neutered view of fairy tales and the world aroudn us. Disney is a souless corporation seeking to pay artists as little as possible for their talents as well as a IP tyrant. They claim IP to works that are Public domain. Things liek cinderella, sleepign beuaty ect.. I wouldn't be suprised that they would try and stifle any one else from staging an animated "huntch back of notre dame".
They started as an animation sweatshop. Hiring immigrant worked to do their animation, and they did so in some pretty poor conditions.
I know your not disagreeign with me, but I thought perhaps those are more valid arguements to not like disney.
You probably wonder why mainstream media doesn't seem to cater to your tastes. Here's a little clue, only lunatics want their children's movies with visible genitalia. Please go get yourself some counseling--preferrably somewhere far away from my children.
Only americans don't want things to have genetals. The asians and europeans are fine with genetals. Many kid oreinted shows show male genetalia in those cultures because there isn't the same conservative taboo against sex. IT's a part of life get oevr it. You little boy/girl is away they have genetals.
Ever think that the reason the science curriculum is set-up the way it is might be because industry is footing the bills? They want people graduating and filling science jobs. Industry does not care about a liberally educated populace. They care about getting a labor pool to draw from.
Liberally educated people (lawyers) run the US from the courts tot he executive to the senate. You arguement doesn't pan out. Some liberally educated people aren't vallued like philosophers but most liberally educated people graduate with a BA and then get a business degree and become management. I would say the problem is that these people are over valued. The US is quickly becomeing a country of nothing but managers and lawyers. Enrollment into the physical sciences has dipped lately. Scientists make next to nothing for their efforts and successful scientists aren't exactly exalted like successful lawyers.
As a math teacher, it may not be as obvious to you, but as someone who learned trigonometry in school and isn't a math teacher now I can say for certain. When people say they'll never use that in the real world, they're absolutely right.
Now sometimes while slogging through my day, paying bills, shopping, working and things like that I sometimes say "Man I really should calculate the cosine of this electric bill", but as of yet I haven't been harmed by not actually doing that.
When you learn this stuff it isn't that it is useful but that it excersises your mind in ways your not used to. That is the benifit.
This is bordering on the inane. It is a generalization based on no factual evidence
The people, no. The government yes.
Japan 1895 - 1945 : incredibly evil
The people in general 50/50 they did support conquest which is in fact evil, the citizen soldiers undoubtly evil. The leaders as well. Thats a pretty much enumerates all of japan.
Americans 1900- 1960: good decent and somewhat arrogant people
The government is misguided, but they aren't the worst thing since the mongols. They are in the long view a relatively benign nation with machiavellian tendancies. They play the games most natiosn do. And they play them very poorly. On a scale from 1 Canada now (on of the most benign countries currently) to 10 Rampaging Mongols ~1100, the US is a 3. Japan 1895-1945 was a 9, germany was a 8.5.
This is just a reflection and a pithy statement of the actiosn of those nations. They were not 100% evil to a man. But the civillian germany and the civillian Japanese supported the conquests and subjigation. As for America, their the current "empire" and it hasn't lasted long or done much. They are currently incompetent and lettign things slip. They have been very bad at various places but in the long view their still not close to WWII Germany or Japan.
There are many Jewish survivors of the Holocaust (I know some personally) who would consider an uninformed statement like the Japanese are 'worse than the Nazis' to be insulting and unfair. Believe me, NOBODY IN THE ENTIRITY OF THE 20TH CENTURY WERE AS BAD AS THE NAZIS.
They would diminish their own cause if they deny others suffered as well. Just because they suffered doesn't mean that that statement is false. Tell the survivors of nanjing that since the holocaust was worse for some peopel that it must mean they didn't suffer very much....
To make any other statement is a blatant falsehood that invites anti-semites and white racists to start denying the holocaust and defaming Jewish culture, and we can't afford to allow such a thing to happen again.
There is no falsehood in that statement. All my facts are easy to come by and well documented. With some deviations about numbers, 9 million civillian deaths being a baseline. Remember japan never carpet bombed china, every single death was inflicted personally by a japanese soldier. The upper estimate is 30 million.
You can't judge the demerits of murder by the number of people that the murderers killed. That's too simplistic. As I maintain, the Nazis didn't just kill people, they tried to eradicate an entire way of life from the present as well as the past. They tried to erase the existence of the Jewish civilization from ALL recorded history. They did this for a reason. Their entire society (their vision of the 1000 Year Reich) was fuelled by ethnic hatred. They wanted somebody to blame, they wanted somebody to kill. The Jews were traditionally persecuted by the white christians for hundreds of years, and the intolerance of christianity created stereotypes and stigmas against Jews, many of which survive to this day. The Nazis rode on the anti-semetic bandwagon and tried to bolster their position of power by using anti-semetism as a means of distracting people in the Reich and turning their attention away from the real problems of German society (when all else fails, blame it on the Jews and round them up, the old Christian maxim).
The japanese killed over 9 million people, in a fashion similiar to the NAzi's. They executed some of them out right, they used other for ballistics testing, some for medical research, other were sent to labor camps and many many many women were forced into prostitution. This constitutes evil on a scale exceeding that of the NAzi's none of this is untrue, check your history. This was done because the japanese followed the ideal of buishido which includes the debasement of those you conquer. Japan was incredibly evil.
I do however draw a line, japan is no longer evil. Now if you forget what they did or think in some way their acts were not evil then you are the equivilent to a holocaust denier.
The murders perpetrated by japanese soldier was essentially unplanned, and a knee-jerk instinctive reaction modulated by the traditional rivalry between the two countries. That makes them human, not evil.
Some were, but the ballistics testign and medical research into dehydration, starvation, and when exactly someone is dead is not. The vivesectomy of living people wihtout anistetic is also not spur of the moment. In this way the japanese show they were more evil then the germans because the soldier took it upon themselves to murder people. GErman soldiers followed orders and generally didn't take their own initiative. The number of incidents like nanjing is non exsistant. For germany the evil was at the top. For japan is was uniform through out.
This is not to say current japanese culture is evil. it isn't. But all the facts I have given you are true.
That does not excuse the fact that Japanese soldiers committed atrocities, but it is not as frightening as the European holocaust, as there is no potential loss of an entire culture.
Look, the japanese use a similiar rationalization at why downplaying the massacre at nanjing
Like any other people, Japanese folks did some bad things. They have also done a lot of good in Asia. Maybe if you looked beyond the parochialism that blinds you by the fact that they did it to some people then you will see the broader perspective.
Japan was worse then the Nazi. They killed more civillians in the very similiar ways. All of the orient hates them. Any country they conquered. And they are not exactly qualified to rule asia. They were a colonial power and every bit as bad as spain at the height of it's colonial conquests.
As for the 6 million versus 11 million I was pointing out that they did most of their killing against the russians, my number support that. 11 is bigger then 6.
Japan is now much better, but not because they were always good people, it's because they were a defeated people who emulated their conquers, their conquers happen to be benevolent is somewhat condecending.
WHAT!!! ARE YOU FUNDAMENTALLY RETARDED? Or are you just another anti-semite and a holocaust 'revisionist' (read denier).
You have the effrontery to say that the bloody Germans were less brutal than Japan, when the Germans killed more then 6 MILLION Jews in the Holocaust, and tried to (and nearly succeeded in) eradicating an ENTIRE CIVILIZATION? Buchenwald, Osweiceim-Aushwitz, Dachau, Gas Chambers, the mass burials, the random killings, the confiscation of their livelihoods, the tortures, the 'experimentations'. For pete's sake man, they used to skin Jewish prisoners alive and make wallets out of them. Nothing that the Japanese did was remotely as reprehensible
Just to put that into perspective, even with these conservative numbers :
The chinese civillians that were killed (9 million according to wikipedia, 20 million according to some other history books, and 30 million according to the chinese government) were not killed in bombings, instead it was during the occupation that they were killed. They were tortured, used as scientific experiments, raped, forced into labour, and massacred. now even with the 9 million estimate, it woudl place it as worse then the holocaust. At the 20 and 30 million maker it makes the japanese as evil as the ancient mongols. Far surpassing the germans. This is from 1 country. Japan did the same to the rest of it's neighbors. That is why there is a deep seated hatred for the japanese all over asia.
WHAT!!! ARE YOU FUNDAMENTALLY RETARDED? Or are you just another anti-semite and a holocaust 'revisionist' (read denier).
You have the effrontery to say that the bloody Germans were less brutal than Japan, when the Germans killed more then 6 MILLION Jews in the Holocaust, and tried to (and nearly succeeded in) eradicating an ENTIRE CIVILIZATION? Buchenwald, Osweiceim-Aushwitz, Dachau, Gas Chambers, the mass burials, the random killings, the confiscation of their livelihoods, the tortures, the 'experimentations'. For pete's sake man, they used to skin Jewish prisoners alive and make wallets out of them. Nothing that the Japanese did was remotely as reprehensible.
6 million holocaust victims versus 11 million Russian soldiers. As for Japan, 20-30 million civillian chinese were killed (chinese estimates) while the more conservative estimates on wikipedia peg it at 11 million deaths in china the vast majority of it civillian. estimates vary.
hina's primordial history is mostly folktales and legend, unsubstanciated by arqueology. You can only say China was more advanced technologically from around the time of the Warring States period to the Mongol invasion.
For all of history up untill about 1600 the collective states now known as china were more powerful then any other region on earth. Due to having a great technological atvantage and the atvantage of the beucratic system and a educational system. However it fell into conservatism because the Qin dynasty forsaw the rise of the middle class and tooks steps to hedge it, which promoted the status quo. We were defeated by a number of factors during the last 400 years, principally amoung them was a shift in focus of innovation, because you rarely truly stagnate btu instead you move from revolution to incremental improvement of exsisting technologies.
China however has gotten on its feet again and is again a rising power. I agree with most fo your statements. But even after the mongols China has a significant technological lead. It pissed it away to maintain imperial rule.
The Germanz were more humane then the spanish or the japanese. Depite killing millions of minorities, gays, and the retarded they did not have wholesale slaiughters of civilian people liek the japanese or the spanish in the new world. So compared to those two Germany was fairly civil. The majority of german killing was done to the russian military. While the majority of the japanese killing was done to defenceless civillians. 20 million died in China alone. But Germany was evil as well, in comparison Japan was worse. Not since the mongols had there been a regime as brutal as the japanese.
OK, I deserved that for thinking you to be white, and I'm sorry. I know that Japan did many questionable things in China (and don't forget Korea, Sumatra, Singapore, and many other places).
Questionable isn't the word. They were outright evil. They killed and raped indiscriminately and thought of all the other Asians as inferior races. They were far worse in behavior and thought then any of the Europeans except the Spanish and were one of the worse conquers since the Mongols. I have read up on my history.
I am also an Asian person. I believe that the natural resources of our continent, together with the labour of our people, should be utilized by the people of Asia, and not stolen and raped by foreign powers. I believe in the idea of Asian solidarity, even if it is at the cost of some human lives (as ghoulish as it sounds, it is also the truth).
Asia is not homogeneous, you and I might meet, decide our Asian heritage is something we have in common and have a drink but Japan is as different from China as England is to France. While England and France have largely forgotten their warring past, their last war was a long time ago. Japan invaded china a scant 75 years ago and the things Japan did are still remembered.
Therefore it is my considered opinion that, in the long run, Japanese rule would have been beneficial to Asia, and a realization of the idea of Asian solidarity. I think that your perspective is slightly tainted by the long standing blood feud that exists between Japan and China. I can understand that, since such things have happened everywhere in the world (English--French, Germany--Russia, Uganda--C.A.R , Israel--Palestine, India--Pakistan etc.).
Don't confuse modern Japanese culture with pre 1945 Japan, today they are a liberal democracy, the model of what those words mean. Before they were a military fascist state run by the military. The odds the military would relinquish power voluntarily are zero, they would have eventually become a feudal or imperialistic pan Asian state. They would strip mine Asia for resources to compete or keep up with its perceived equals (Britain, France, US). They would not have been better then those other power because the idea of liberal democracies and equality did not occur to them.
Bear in mind that most of the atrocities you mention were committed by the Japanese military, and was the result of a military junta. I believe that, had Japan been victorious in WW-II, the military would have been disbanded eventually, and the territories annexed by Japan would come under civilian government control. I think that, if you look at this hypothetical situation in an objective fashion, you will be hard-pressed to deny that that a modern civilian government of an Asian country would not engage in random acts of genocide against their own people (Asians).
The military didn't instigate the violence and rapes, they let it happen for morale. Blame Buishido and the sick natures of fascism and the soldiers themselves. A man like Yamamoto I can generally respect but it was the soldiers themselves who decided it was a good idea. Buishido held that all the soldiers who surrendered were less the human and were executed, it held that all the conquered people had no honor and could be done with as they pleased. The soldiers followed this and murder 20 million Chinese people. That isn't something people will forget.
This would not have happened under European/American dominance. Bear in mind that China and India were the most enlightened and advanced civilizations in the old world until the western powers came. Our standard of living was considerably higher in the first millennium of the Christian era than any country in Europe. We were building empires and writing philosophy when they were burning witches and fighting absurd religious crusades. All this is verifiable truth. Ask yourself then, why is it that Asian countries suffer from such abject poverty today?
And the first thing to say in protest is, "My rights are granted by God or by birth." I don't think the GP was implying that all of our rights are eternally safe. He was saying that they are eternally defensible. Especially when the central law of the land, the Constitution, says that his rights are inherent.
Perhaps the Constitution and its Bill of Rights were meant to allow regular people with little knowledge of the law to trump the semantic knowledge of the lawyers when their rights were trampled. I'm not saying that this is a panacea, but knowing your "God-given" rights is a huge step forward from not knowing...or from having them be "permitted rights" instead of inherent ones.
Actually, the constitution is a agreement between the power brokers of the late 1700 hundreds to legitimize a government. It defines a legalist document that outlines basic ideals and laws that would govern the country. It was not meant for normal people. Normal people at that tiem still were mostly not literate. It's a fairly liberal and enlightened document for its time. Many of the initial signers and the drafters where stone masons and thus it support many of the masionic ideals of equality, fraternity, and freedom.
It does not allow people without knowledge of the interpretation to do anything, it is itself a legal docuemnt and most people have only vague clues to what it means. Most people interpret it wrong. For instance the first amendment outlines that the state cannot interfere with someones religion, someones political/religious speech or the right of indiviuals to gather. Most americans take it as a blank check to say what ever they want, when ever they want to.
As for inherent rights history shows that the rights you have are only the ones you can defend. No rights are inherent, a change in leadership can legislate out all yoru rights. The presumption that they are inherent leads many to assume that this can't happen, and leads them all to fight less for their rights. See Rome and germany.
That is the prevalent idealogy of Nordic Christianity. Anyone who dares to challenge your innate belief in the racial superiority of the "Aryan Race" (as Japan did) deserves to be murdered en-masse and demonized. Your ignorant and hatemongering statements will only be believed by other Nordic Christians, not by thinking people who have actually studied real history. They know that Japan was the only Asian country to have challenged the white lords. In order to do that, they had to be a bit nasty sometimes, but that behavior was motivated by pragmaticism and a long-term view of achieving Asian solidarity and freedom from being killed by white people. In the final analysis, Japan cared (and still cares) more about the future prosperity of Asia than any European/American. Better an Asian country be ruled by fellow Asian people than by a bunch of tyrranical, arbitrary and murderous thugs that Europeans and Americans were and still are.
Actually, I think they deserved it because I'm chinese. The europeans were never quiet as brutal as the japanese, except maybe the spanish.
And no, I'd rather british rule then japanese rule. The japanese were basically comitting genocide. 20 million chinese(WWII chinese civillian and miliarty loses.) deaths doesn't sound better to be then british subjigation. In one, you are oppressed but the other means you are no longer alive.
No paper will flat-out lie because that would ultimately hurt sales, but papers and media outlets do and will push the truth as close as possible to sex, violence, or rock and role in a bid to increase sales.
Sweeping generalities also makes for bad arguments:) -- my degree was in experimental physics, and several of my co-workers have hard science degrees, even up to Ph.D level, yet we're journalists all. And my magazine isn't exactly unique in that, there are a lot of scientifically trained people on the staff of science/tech publications. But even then, we've staff with humanities backgrounds that are top notch, mainly because at a science/tech publication, the staff is more likely to have the time to learn something in depth, with management that can demand and recognize good quality science reporting.
Yes, generalities are bad. You have spoken with your daily print counterparts? Tell me My generalities are wrogn about 90% of them? I guess I needed to refine my accusation, daily print media is full of retard sensationalists. Tech/ science oriented media obviously have higher skilled people. I get this point of view from personal experience. Having seen drug dealer aquantances refered to as "innocent university student" and rowdy university friends involved "gang related violence".
I'm sorry that I rounded you up in my generalization. I am problbly not 100% right, but I believe that a lot of the dailies have some pretty poor journalists and that journalism in general has always had a problem with fact checkign and sensationism.
Slashdot Mirror
Or how about a nice reduction in the federal deficit. We have not yet reached the "point of no return" where our government collapses. But we are close.
Thats easy, vote democrat in the next election. Democrats are 100% spend and tax. Republicans are 50/50 spend and borrow and save and spend.
first, thanks for staying mute on my 'moot' mistake.
It has been a long time since I've taken material science. My verbage was less then accurate.
By strengh, I was thinking how much energy can it withstand before it burns up.
Good point, I imagine the point near the breaking points would be travelling at a high rate of speed. Fast enough to cause it to burn up?
If this thing is 32000Km high, and it looses it's counter weight how much wouldn't burn up? I would be surprised if there was less the 15,000Km that didn't burn up.
For the sake of arguement, lets say it did burn up, how much carbon nano tube residue would be created?
If it snapped by the counterweight and they made the cable flat, it's maximium speed woudl be negliagle. It's be liek having a coax cable fall on yrou head from a 20 story building. You'd get a bruise, maybe a cuncussion but it isn't goignt o destroy the earth.
I've always thought they should consider a variation on the space elevator, where the top was in LEO, and the bottom hung down into the atmosphere. To get things to the top, you simply fly something up high enough that it can latch onto the bottom. Then when you get to the top, you wait for a second one to swing by and take you higher.
the problem is, that while a elevator would be held up by centripital force and have much more force exerted outwards then any payload can exert downwards a orbiting satalite with a rope would be pulled down by any load you put on it. Thus a elevator coudl take loads up but your design would be dragged down over time or imidiately dependign on the size of the satalite at the end.
Short answer: it would have to survive any hurricane that passed it. If it broke... it could cut a path of destruction that would make a hurricane look like child's play...
err.. no. since it's being held in place by centripal force, if the cable breaks the whole things goes up and away.
A space elevator will be made of carbon fiber nanotubes correct?? What would be the effect on a hurricane hitting the elevator? Can the string be realed in from one end?? Would it be more prudent to build this in a place far away from a coastline??
negliable if built correctly. The local winds wouldn't have enough kinetic force to move the cable much.
Reginald Denny should have had a good handgun in his truck and the willingness to use it. The rest of the mob would have been de-motivated to continue attacking had their initial attempts resulted in dead attackers.
Yeah like the armed sodlier on the bus in isreal who shot some civillians. That rifle sure kept him from being beaten to death... wsit a minute.....
I don't know why you say that.
You see a lot of panty shots in anime or shots of girls in the shower, but in Japan all genitals are blacked out/fuzzed out/pixellated out.
Erect male genitalia and full shots of female genetalia are, however shots of children or unerect penises do occur. See for example dragon ball. Even breasts are displayed in childrens shows, see sailor moon. But it's often non-sexual. Handled often for comedy.
This is why I say Miyazaki reminds me of the old Disney in that he's creating stories that people will remember.
Old disney films was alright, Old walt disney was not. He was a pretty miserly old man who prolly would sell your kids for a buck.
Fantasia would have been better if the Satyrs had genitalia?
That seems like a kind of nit-picky point.
Plenty of points to pick at... you chose that a childrens movie produced in the 60's or 70's didn't have full-frontal nudity.
HEres a better point. Disney has made animation onyl for kids. Disney has presented a neutered view of fairy tales and the world aroudn us. Disney is a souless corporation seeking to pay artists as little as possible for their talents as well as a IP tyrant. They claim IP to works that are Public domain. Things liek cinderella, sleepign beuaty ect.. I wouldn't be suprised that they would try and stifle any one else from staging an animated "huntch back of notre dame".
They started as an animation sweatshop. Hiring immigrant worked to do their animation, and they did so in some pretty poor conditions.
I know your not disagreeign with me, but I thought perhaps those are more valid arguements to not like disney.
You probably wonder why mainstream media doesn't seem to cater to your tastes. Here's a little clue, only lunatics want their children's movies with visible genitalia. Please go get yourself some counseling--preferrably somewhere far away from my children.
Only americans don't want things to have genetals. The asians and europeans are fine with genetals. Many kid oreinted shows show male genetalia in those cultures because there isn't the same conservative taboo against sex. IT's a part of life get oevr it. You little boy/girl is away they have genetals.
Disney. John Lasseter could learn a few things about creativity from this man.
Disney isn't worthy to learn anything from anyone. They have been a animation sweatshop from day one and old walt was a scrooge.
Ever think that the reason the science curriculum is set-up the way it is might be because industry is footing the bills? They want people graduating and filling science jobs. Industry does not care about a liberally educated populace. They care about getting a labor pool to draw from.
Liberally educated people (lawyers) run the US from the courts tot he executive to the senate. You arguement doesn't pan out. Some liberally educated people aren't vallued like philosophers but most liberally educated people graduate with a BA and then get a business degree and become management. I would say the problem is that these people are over valued. The US is quickly becomeing a country of nothing but managers and lawyers. Enrollment into the physical sciences has dipped lately. Scientists make next to nothing for their efforts and successful scientists aren't exactly exalted like successful lawyers.
As a math teacher, it may not be as obvious to you, but as someone who learned trigonometry in school and isn't a math teacher now I can say for certain. When people say they'll never use that in the real world, they're absolutely right.
Now sometimes while slogging through my day, paying bills, shopping, working and things like that I sometimes say "Man I really should calculate the cosine of this electric bill", but as of yet I haven't been harmed by not actually doing that.
When you learn this stuff it isn't that it is useful but that it excersises your mind in ways your not used to. That is the benifit.
China 1953 - now : moderatly evil
This is bordering on the inane. It is a generalization based on no factual evidence
The people, no. The government yes.
Japan 1895 - 1945 : incredibly evil
The people in general 50/50 they did support conquest which is in fact evil, the citizen soldiers undoubtly evil. The leaders as well. Thats a pretty much enumerates all of japan.
Americans 1900- 1960: good decent and somewhat arrogant people
The government is misguided, but they aren't the worst thing since the mongols. They are in the long view a relatively benign nation with machiavellian tendancies. They play the games most natiosn do. And they play them very poorly. On a scale from 1 Canada now (on of the most benign countries currently) to 10 Rampaging Mongols ~1100, the US is a 3. Japan 1895-1945 was a 9, germany was a 8.5.
This is just a reflection and a pithy statement of the actiosn of those nations. They were not 100% evil to a man. But the civillian germany and the civillian Japanese supported the conquests and subjigation. As for America, their the current "empire" and it hasn't lasted long or done much. They are currently incompetent and lettign things slip. They have been very bad at various places but in the long view their still not close to WWII Germany or Japan.
There are many Jewish survivors of the Holocaust (I know some personally) who would consider an uninformed statement like the Japanese are 'worse than the Nazis' to be insulting and unfair. Believe me, NOBODY IN THE ENTIRITY OF THE 20TH CENTURY WERE AS BAD AS THE NAZIS.
They would diminish their own cause if they deny others suffered as well. Just because they suffered doesn't mean that that statement is false. Tell the survivors of nanjing that since the holocaust was worse for some peopel that it must mean they didn't suffer very much....
To make any other statement is a blatant falsehood that invites anti-semites and white racists to start denying the holocaust and defaming Jewish culture, and we can't afford to allow such a thing to happen again.
There is no falsehood in that statement. All my facts are easy to come by and well documented. With some deviations about numbers, 9 million civillian deaths being a baseline. Remember japan never carpet bombed china, every single death was inflicted personally by a japanese soldier. The upper estimate is 30 million.
You can't judge the demerits of murder by the number of people that the murderers killed. That's too simplistic. As I maintain, the Nazis didn't just kill people, they tried to eradicate an entire way of life from the present as well as the past. They tried to erase the existence of the Jewish civilization from ALL recorded history. They did this for a reason. Their entire society (their vision of the 1000 Year Reich) was fuelled by ethnic hatred. They wanted somebody to blame, they wanted somebody to kill. The Jews were traditionally persecuted by the white christians for hundreds of years, and the intolerance of christianity created stereotypes and stigmas against Jews, many of which survive to this day. The Nazis rode on the anti-semetic bandwagon and tried to bolster their position of power by using anti-semetism as a means of distracting people in the Reich and turning their attention away from the real problems of German society (when all else fails, blame it on the Jews and round them up, the old Christian maxim).
The japanese killed over 9 million people, in a fashion similiar to the NAzi's. They executed some of them out right, they used other for ballistics testing, some for medical research, other were sent to labor camps and many many many women were forced into prostitution. This constitutes evil on a scale exceeding that of the NAzi's none of this is untrue, check your history. This was done because the japanese followed the ideal of buishido which includes the debasement of those you conquer. Japan was incredibly evil.
I do however draw a line, japan is no longer evil. Now if you forget what they did or think in some way their acts were not evil then you are the equivilent to a holocaust denier.
The murders perpetrated by japanese soldier was essentially unplanned, and a knee-jerk instinctive reaction modulated by the traditional rivalry between the two countries. That makes them human, not evil.
Some were, but the ballistics testign and medical research into dehydration, starvation, and when exactly someone is dead is not. The vivesectomy of living people wihtout anistetic is also not spur of the moment. In this way the japanese show they were more evil then the germans because the soldier took it upon themselves to murder people. GErman soldiers followed orders and generally didn't take their own initiative. The number of incidents like nanjing is non exsistant. For germany the evil was at the top. For japan is was uniform through out.
This is not to say current japanese culture is evil. it isn't. But all the facts I have given you are true.
That does not excuse the fact that Japanese soldiers committed atrocities, but it is not as frightening as the European holocaust, as there is no potential loss of an entire culture.
Look, the japanese use a similiar rationalization at why downplaying the massacre at nanjing
Like any other people, Japanese folks did some bad things. They have also done a lot of good in Asia. Maybe if you looked beyond the parochialism that blinds you by the fact that they did it to some people then you will see the broader perspective.
Japan was worse then the Nazi. They killed more civillians in the very similiar ways. All of the orient hates them. Any country they conquered. And they are not exactly qualified to rule asia. They were a colonial power and every bit as bad as spain at the height of it's colonial conquests.
As for the 6 million versus 11 million I was pointing out that they did most of their killing against the russians, my number support that. 11 is bigger then 6.
Japan is now much better, but not because they were always good people, it's because they were a defeated people who emulated their conquers, their conquers happen to be benevolent is somewhat condecending.
WHAT!!! ARE YOU FUNDAMENTALLY RETARDED? Or are you just another anti-semite and a holocaust 'revisionist' (read denier).
i es#Casualties_by_country
You have the effrontery to say that the bloody Germans were less brutal than Japan, when the Germans killed more then 6 MILLION Jews in the Holocaust, and tried to (and nearly succeeded in) eradicating an ENTIRE CIVILIZATION? Buchenwald, Osweiceim-Aushwitz, Dachau, Gas Chambers, the mass burials, the random killings, the confiscation of their livelihoods, the tortures, the 'experimentations'. For pete's sake man, they used to skin Jewish prisoners alive and make wallets out of them. Nothing that the Japanese did was remotely as reprehensible
Just to put that into perspective, even with these conservative numbers :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualt
The chinese civillians that were killed (9 million according to wikipedia, 20 million according to some other history books, and 30 million according to the chinese government) were not killed in bombings, instead it was during the occupation that they were killed. They were tortured, used as scientific experiments, raped, forced into labour, and massacred. now even with the 9 million estimate, it woudl place it as worse then the holocaust. At the 20 and 30 million maker it makes the japanese as evil as the ancient mongols. Far surpassing the germans. This is from 1 country. Japan did the same to the rest of it's neighbors. That is why there is a deep seated hatred for the japanese all over asia.
WHAT!!! ARE YOU FUNDAMENTALLY RETARDED? Or are you just another anti-semite and a holocaust 'revisionist' (read denier).
You have the effrontery to say that the bloody Germans were less brutal than Japan, when the Germans killed more then 6 MILLION Jews in the Holocaust, and tried to (and nearly succeeded in) eradicating an ENTIRE CIVILIZATION? Buchenwald, Osweiceim-Aushwitz, Dachau, Gas Chambers, the mass burials, the random killings, the confiscation of their livelihoods, the tortures, the 'experimentations'. For pete's sake man, they used to skin Jewish prisoners alive and make wallets out of them. Nothing that the Japanese did was remotely as reprehensible.
look here
6 million holocaust victims versus 11 million Russian soldiers. As for Japan, 20-30 million civillian chinese were killed (chinese estimates) while the more conservative estimates on wikipedia peg it at 11 million deaths in china the vast majority of it civillian. estimates vary.
hina's primordial history is mostly folktales and legend, unsubstanciated by arqueology. You can only say China was more advanced technologically from around the time of the Warring States period to the Mongol invasion.
For all of history up untill about 1600 the collective states now known as china were more powerful then any other region on earth. Due to having a great technological atvantage and the atvantage of the beucratic system and a educational system. However it fell into conservatism because the Qin dynasty forsaw the rise of the middle class and tooks steps to hedge it, which promoted the status quo. We were defeated by a number of factors during the last 400 years, principally amoung them was a shift in focus of innovation, because you rarely truly stagnate btu instead you move from revolution to incremental improvement of exsisting technologies.
China however has gotten on its feet again and is again a rising power. I agree with most fo your statements. But even after the mongols China has a significant technological lead. It pissed it away to maintain imperial rule.
Umm... did we forget the Germans?
The Germanz were more humane then the spanish or the japanese. Depite killing millions of minorities, gays, and the retarded they did not have wholesale slaiughters of civilian people liek the japanese or the spanish in the new world. So compared to those two Germany was fairly civil. The majority of german killing was done to the russian military. While the majority of the japanese killing was done to defenceless civillians. 20 million died in China alone. But Germany was evil as well, in comparison Japan was worse. Not since the mongols had there been a regime as brutal as the japanese.
OK, I deserved that for thinking you to be white, and I'm sorry. I know that Japan did many questionable things in China (and don't forget Korea, Sumatra, Singapore, and many other places).
Questionable isn't the word. They were outright evil. They killed and raped indiscriminately and thought of all the other Asians as inferior races. They were far worse in behavior and thought then any of the Europeans except the Spanish and were one of the worse conquers since the Mongols. I have read up on my history.
I am also an Asian person. I believe that the natural resources of our continent, together with the labour of our people, should be utilized by the people of Asia, and not stolen and raped by foreign powers. I believe in the idea of Asian solidarity, even if it is at the cost of some human lives (as ghoulish as it sounds, it is also the truth).
Asia is not homogeneous, you and I might meet, decide our Asian heritage is something we have in common and have a drink but Japan is as different from China as England is to France. While England and France have largely forgotten their warring past, their last war was a long time ago. Japan invaded china a scant 75 years ago and the things Japan did are still remembered.
Therefore it is my considered opinion that, in the long run, Japanese rule would have been beneficial to Asia, and a realization of the idea of Asian solidarity. I think that your perspective is slightly tainted by the long standing blood feud that exists between Japan and China. I can understand that, since such things have happened everywhere in the world (English--French, Germany--Russia, Uganda--C.A.R , Israel--Palestine, India--Pakistan etc.).
Don't confuse modern Japanese culture with pre 1945 Japan, today they are a liberal democracy, the model of what those words mean. Before they were a military fascist state run by the military. The odds the military would relinquish power voluntarily are zero, they would have eventually become a feudal or imperialistic pan Asian state. They would strip mine Asia for resources to compete or keep up with its perceived equals (Britain, France, US). They would not have been better then those other power because the idea of liberal democracies and equality did not occur to them.
Bear in mind that most of the atrocities you mention were committed by the Japanese military, and was the result of a military junta. I believe that, had Japan been victorious in WW-II, the military would have been disbanded eventually, and the territories annexed by Japan would come under civilian government control. I think that, if you look at this hypothetical situation in an objective fashion, you will be hard-pressed to deny that that a modern civilian government of an Asian country would not engage in random acts of genocide against their own people (Asians).
The military didn't instigate the violence and rapes, they let it happen for morale. Blame Buishido and the sick natures of fascism and the soldiers themselves. A man like Yamamoto I can generally respect but it was the soldiers themselves who decided it was a good idea. Buishido held that all the soldiers who surrendered were less the human and were executed, it held that all the conquered people had no honor and could be done with as they pleased. The soldiers followed this and murder 20 million Chinese people. That isn't something people will forget.
This would not have happened under European/American dominance. Bear in mind that China and India were the most enlightened and advanced civilizations in the old world until the western powers came. Our standard of living was considerably higher in the first millennium of the Christian era than any country in Europe. We were building empires and writing philosophy when they were burning witches and fighting absurd religious crusades. All this is verifiable truth. Ask yourself then, why is it that Asian countries suffer from such abject poverty today?
What happened was our civilizati
And the first thing to say in protest is, "My rights are granted by God or by birth." I don't think the GP was implying that all of our rights are eternally safe. He was saying that they are eternally defensible. Especially when the central law of the land, the Constitution, says that his rights are inherent.
Perhaps the Constitution and its Bill of Rights were meant to allow regular people with little knowledge of the law to trump the semantic knowledge of the lawyers when their rights were trampled. I'm not saying that this is a panacea, but knowing your "God-given" rights is a huge step forward from not knowing...or from having them be "permitted rights" instead of inherent ones.
Actually, the constitution is a agreement between the power brokers of the late 1700 hundreds to legitimize a government. It defines a legalist document that outlines basic ideals and laws that would govern the country. It was not meant for normal people. Normal people at that tiem still were mostly not literate. It's a fairly liberal and enlightened document for its time. Many of the initial signers and the drafters where stone masons and thus it support many of the masionic ideals of equality, fraternity, and freedom.
It does not allow people without knowledge of the interpretation to do anything, it is itself a legal docuemnt and most people have only vague clues to what it means. Most people interpret it wrong. For instance the first amendment outlines that the state cannot interfere with someones religion, someones political/religious speech or the right of indiviuals to gather. Most americans take it as a blank check to say what ever they want, when ever they want to.
As for inherent rights history shows that the rights you have are only the ones you can defend. No rights are inherent, a change in leadership can legislate out all yoru rights. The presumption that they are inherent leads many to assume that this can't happen, and leads them all to fight less for their rights. See Rome and germany.
That is the prevalent idealogy of Nordic Christianity. Anyone who dares to challenge your innate belief in the racial superiority of the "Aryan Race" (as Japan did) deserves to be murdered en-masse and demonized. Your ignorant and hatemongering statements will only be believed by other Nordic Christians, not by thinking people who have actually studied real history. They know that Japan was the only Asian country to have challenged the white lords. In order to do that, they had to be a bit nasty sometimes, but that behavior was motivated by pragmaticism and a long-term view of achieving Asian solidarity and freedom from being killed by white people. In the final analysis, Japan cared (and still cares) more about the future prosperity of Asia than any European/American. Better an Asian country be ruled by fellow Asian people than by a bunch of tyrranical, arbitrary and murderous thugs that Europeans and Americans were and still are.
Actually, I think they deserved it because I'm chinese. The europeans were never quiet as brutal as the japanese, except maybe the spanish.
And no, I'd rather british rule then japanese rule. The japanese were basically comitting genocide. 20 million chinese(WWII chinese civillian and miliarty loses.) deaths doesn't sound better to be then british subjigation. In one, you are oppressed but the other means you are no longer alive.
No paper will flat-out lie because that would ultimately hurt sales, but papers and media outlets do and will push the truth as close as possible to sex, violence, or rock and role in a bid to increase sales.
No paper except the tabloids.
Sweeping generalities also makes for bad arguments :) -- my degree was in experimental physics, and several of my co-workers have hard science degrees, even up to Ph.D level, yet we're journalists all. And my magazine isn't exactly unique in that, there are a lot of scientifically trained people on the staff of science/tech publications. But even then, we've staff with humanities backgrounds that are top notch, mainly because at a science/tech publication, the staff is more likely to have the time to learn something in depth, with management that can demand and recognize good quality science reporting.
Yes, generalities are bad. You have spoken with your daily print counterparts? Tell me My generalities are wrogn about 90% of them? I guess I needed to refine my accusation, daily print media is full of retard sensationalists. Tech/ science oriented media obviously have higher skilled people. I get this point of view from personal experience. Having seen drug dealer aquantances refered to as "innocent university student" and rowdy university friends involved "gang related violence".
I'm sorry that I rounded you up in my generalization. I am problbly not 100% right, but I believe that a lot of the dailies have some pretty poor journalists and that journalism in general has always had a problem with fact checkign and sensationism.