The Hiroshima Myth

[eye95]

The average American gained by the destruction of several fascist states that eventually would've become powerful enough to destroy our Republic. Make no mistake about it; they wanted to and would have.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[davidmcbeth]

The reason nobody else is arguing the point is the same reason I should have never entered this thread; the OP's article (which I only skimmed) established quite the wrong tone.

I never said the US government forced us into war. I said the government didn't do as much to avoid it as it should have. I don't really give a damn what was said in the article from the OP, because it's not my opinion.

Of course everybody wanted to enlist after Pearl Harbor – we were attacked. I mean, duh.

But that's the whole point. If the US government can act with impunity overseas, it can take overt steps which predictably increase the likelihood of war, rendering popular opposition to war moot.

What I'm saying is, the fact that the people of the US wanted peace before Pearl Harbor is enough reason to avoid overseas interventionism.

If popular opposition to war isn't enough to inspire the government to avoid actively making enemies, then popular opposition to war is irrelevant, for the government can manipulate a war regardless (this is not the same as forcing us into war). The Göring quote is quite apropos:

Remember the Maine ! 2nd Gulf War ! Vietnam ! People are easily swayed into supporting a war that they really have zero information about ...

 

[77zach]

The average American gained by the destruction of several fascist states that eventually would've become powerful enough to destroy our Republic. Make no mistake about it; they wanted to and would have.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

I think that's obviously wrong. Theoretically possible, but ludicrous, IMO. Germany lost the war when Hitler decided to attack Russia.

 

[OneForAll]

The average American gained by the destruction of several fascist states that eventually would've become powerful enough to destroy our Republic. Make no mistake about it; they wanted to and would have.

I would also add that it effectively ended the depression, allowing many soldiers returning home from the war to build their own houses, start their own businesses, and yes.... they got to keep speaking English.

 

[77zach]

Remember the Maine ! 2nd Gulf War ! Vietnam ! People are easily swayed into supporting a war that they really have zero information about ...

Yeah, they've gone out and done polls of high school and college students (cannon fodder age) and asked them to find places like Libya and Afghanistan on a map with no names. The results were.....less than stellar, as in few college students and very very few high school students could do it, yet they were strongly in favor of the US.gov adventures in nation building.

 

[77zach]

I would also add that it effectively ended the depression, allowing many soldiers returning home from the war to build their own houses, start their own businesses, and yes.... they got to keep speaking English.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be mean, but this is an economically ignorant statement (yes, I know what the Keynsian economists reference in High School history books say). Please start with the "broken window fallacy" as a good starting point. You'll have to do several months of reeducation probably. Appropriately enough Mises.org (the website from the OP) can help you understand your error. Everyone has to start sometime. I recommend, Henry Hazlit's "Economics in one lesson" as a start

http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One...&qid=1376266691&sr=8-1&keywords=henry+hazlitt

 

[eye95]

Yeah, let's not let the depression argument derail the discussion. Not only did the war not end the depression, such would be a lousy reason to go to war.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[OneForAll]

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be mean, but this is an economically ignorant statement (yes, I know what the Keynsian economists reference in High School history books say). Please start with the "broken window fallacy" as a good starting point. You'll have to do several months of reeducation probably. Appropriately enough Mises.org (the website from the OP) can help you understand your error. Everyone has to start sometime. I recommend, Henry Hazlit's "Economics in one lesson" as a start

http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One...&qid=1376266691&sr=8-1&keywords=henry+hazlitt

I never said the depression was the reason we went to war. I merely stated that when my grandfather got home from Europe, he was approved for a housing loan. Would that of happened before the war, no. I do not think you were mean.

 

[eye95]

Fair enough. The war still did not end the depression. It defeated some very dangerous instances of fascism--which is all the reason needed.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[marshaul]

Yeah, let's not let the depression argument derail the discussion. Not only did the war not end the depression, such would be a lousy reason to go to war.

Well, we can agree on this much.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Apparently they didn't care what the American people wanted either. We didn't want a war. They started the war isn't as black and white as it would seem when you look at the events for the previous several decades. U.S. has no more a "right" to engage in imperialism as any other nation.

Japan may have said the very same thing about us "raping" the Philippines

Of course, just ask any Filipino alive at the time of the Japanese occupation, they'll tell you all about how wonderfully the Japanese treated them, it was literally a golden age in Manila those 3 years.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

The average American gained by the destruction of several fascist states that eventually would've become powerful enough to destroy our Republic. Make no mistake about it; they wanted to and would have.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Post Hoc fallacy. And then leaves out we handed half of Europe to someone who killed more than Hitler. FDR was a fan of Hitler until he attacked Stalin. There is no way that Germany could have used up all it's resources attacking and conquering Europe and then destroy our Country.

I would also add that it effectively ended the depression, allowing many soldiers returning home from the war to build their own houses, start their own businesses, and yes.... they got to keep speaking English.

It decidedly did not "end the depression" if anything it helped prolong it, all those resources getting destroyed in war. Rations, etc. You hint at one of the real reasons depression ended , soldiers not being at war and engaging in business.

Of course, just ask any Filipino alive at the time of the Japanese occupation, they'll tell you all about how wonderfully the Japanese treated them, it was literally a golden age in Manila those 3 years.

Sigh.....this does not contradict my point at all. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[Deanimator]

FDR was a fan of Hitler until he attacked Stalin.

A statement so colossally stupid that you had to have heard it first from Joe Biden.

Oh yeah, Hitler would have really been in a bind if FDR hadn't sent him all of that Lend Lease equipment. Those four stack destroyers were a real godsend to the Kriegsmarine, and I don't know WHAT the Luftwaffe would have done without those P-36s, P-39s, P-40s, Baltimores, and Marylands

The true measure of the stupdity of what you've said is proved by the fact that even Pat Buchanan isn't stupid enough to believe it.

 

[OneForAll]

It decidedly did not "end the depression" if anything it helped prolong it, all those resources getting destroyed in war.

Prolonged it, the depression ended in the mid-40's, WW2 ended in 1945....

 

[77zach]

A statement so colossally stupid that you had to have heard it first from Joe Biden.

I'm not sure when FDR's man crush on Time's Man of the Year, Adolf Hitler, ended. I know FDR loved "Uncle Joe" Stalin. They were great buds and Stalin was a bigger murderer than Hitler.

But seriously, if we were transported back to that time, if you wanted to go over and fight against Adolf, that's your right. Just don't do it in my name or steal my money at gunpoint to pay for your excursion. Certainly don't tell me I can't have new tires, butter, and have to be taxed at 80% or 100% if I make over a certain amount (Tax rates during WW2). That would be, um, communist, or fascist.....oh, wait.

 

[marshaul]

Deanimator has made it clear he is incapable of contributing anything to this discussion other than calling his opponents "colossally stupid". Despite that, his "contributions" have come to dominate this thread, thanks to his O'Reilly-esque bluster.

He may be under the impression that this is an effective way of debating, or he may be under the impression that we're so obviously wrong it justifies such. It's clear in any other context that the person who resorts to ad hominem attacks (rather than concrete arguments) is upset at their inability to articulate a defense to their position.

For that reason, this thread has become "colossally stupid" and I'll be "Moving on..."

 

[JamesCanby]

But seriously, if we were transported back to that time, if you wanted to go over and fight against Adolf, that's your right. Just don't do it in my name or steal my money at gunpoint to pay for your excursion. Certainly don't tell me I can't have new tires, butter, and have to be taxed at 80% or 100% if I make over a certain amount (Tax rates during WW2). That would be, um, communist, or fascist.....oh, wait.

If you "were transported back to that time," I doubt that you would have the balls to become a conscientious objector, given that the people understood that we were attacked and that Germany declared war on us, and the people had little respect for, and had great animosity toward those who refused to answer the draft.

 

[marshaul]

If you "were transported back to that time," I doubt that you would have the balls to become a conscientious objector, given that the people understood that we were attacked and that Germany declared war on us, and the people had little respect for, and had great animosity toward those who refused to answer the draft.

Your high horse would be much more impressive if it weren't for that pesky "draft" word at the end of it.

WWII may be the exception, but generally a draft doesn't bolster the case of "popular support".

Just sayin'.

 

[eye95]

Post hoc fallacy implies a lack of causation, just one event following another. WWII decidedly destroyed three fascist powers that would have threatened the US (and IMO, won a war we entered to late). That is absolute causation. WWII caused the end of these three powers and made impossible their attacking us any more than one of them had already done--prematurely, it seems.

Moving on. You can continue to try to falsely attribute logical fallacies where they clearly do not apply. Unless you have a different vein to mine, this one has played out.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[77zach]

If you "were transported back to that time," I doubt that you would have the balls to become a conscientious objector, given that the people understood that we were attacked and that Germany declared war on us, and the people had little respect for, and had great animosity toward those who refused to answer the draft.

So, so wrong dude. You should have seen me after "nineleavin". Let's just say there were a couple times I was glad I was armed, as I encountered ignorant neocons making threats against me.