If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic Wire)   Hillary Clinton sparks diplomatic friction with Japan after ordering all State Department staffers to fix usage of "comfort women" in documents, telling them the correct term is "enforced sex slaves"   (theatlanticwire.com) divider line 157
    More: Obvious, State Department, Clinton Sparks, comfort women, sex slavery, civil societies, documents  
•       •       •

2775 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Jul 2012 at 5:08 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



157 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-12 07:26:40 PM
Balls, she busted 'em.
 
2012-07-12 07:29:21 PM
You gonna provide comfort

i3.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-07-12 07:32:49 PM

Bennie Crabtree: Gyrfalcon: Girls in impoverished 3d-World nations, or anywhere where dowries are expected, are a liability to their families because they have to come up with money to marry them off. If you want to start alleviating the problem, Apple and other techno-firms could help by providing a dower fund so that any girl can be provided with a suitable dowry when or if it's needed. That way, families will not have to sell their daughters to provide food for their sons.

That is a very cool idea and could be extremely effective.

Keep in mind though, subsistence is not the huge problem that Westerners are taught it is. These families can normally feed themselves (natural disasters notwithstanding). It is the marketing and aggressive selling of tech that has become a major impetus for child prostitution. Once we realize it is not so much food and dowries, but that here in the West we ignore that families will sell children (to our men) to buy our products, we can do things like change how the products are marketed or sold or even used. So Apple could encourage sharing products instead of giving everyone their own iPhone, because while iPhones are amazing, their owners are culturally and historically situated in a different economic reality.


Mm, beg to differ. At least on the dowries part. You've still got women in India being murdered by their husbands' families for not providing sufficient bride-money (even as the girl's family is beggaring themselves to do so), and girls in Africa being sold for livestock; I've never seen anyone in either country demanding Western technology as part of the dowry. (If you do, I'd like to see it, it would be an appalling discovery)

Which is not to say that the whole "keep up with the American Jonses" is not a big factor in the sex trade overseas. Just that girls have always been disposable in poor rural countries, and this is just a new twist on an ancient problem. There's a saying in India that "Eighteen goddess-like daughters are worse than one son with a hump" and I think that's still the view of many poorer countries.
 
2012-07-12 07:34:17 PM

inner ted: Arkanaut: wee: kingoomieiii: Japan gave the Nazis a real run for their money in terms of absolute human rights disgrace during WWII. They REALLY swung for the fences acting on old grudges.

They were arguably as bad as the Nazis, if only because of things like Unit 731 (though we were complicit by letting war criminals go in exchange for bio war information). Sure, that's not the orchestrated killing of 6 million people, but Stalin had Hitler beat if you are scoring purely on those terms.

The Germans at least recognized POWs as being human, too. The Japanese didn't treat POWs very well.

BTW, Ghost Soldiers is a decent book about the Bataan surrender, the imprisonment, and the Army's prison break three years later. The author channel Stephen Ambrose's style a bit too much, but an interesting read nonetheless.

IMO the Japanese were worse, because in the Germans' case, they at least tried to distance themselves from the dirty work as much as possible -- at first by leaving it to the true fanatics (the so-called Einsatzgruppen), and later, when it became too expensive to actually go around shooting civilians, by making it a mechanized (and thus dehumanized) process in the concentration camps. This says to me that they acknowledged that most of their soldiers probably can't stomach such cruelty, even against supposed sub-humans.

The Japanese, however, actually encouraged their regular Army units to participate in massacring and raping civilians, and used POW's as bayonet practice. That means that they're even more interested in dehumanizing their enemies than the Nazis.

not sure how to play "nazis vs. japanese: who's the biggest war criminal??"

but i think i can comfortably disagree with that part of your statement.

like you pointed out: it was too costly to keep shooting people, so they mechanized their "production".

i don't think that had any connection to the nazi brass having any sympathy for their troops, but more to do with how lowly they viewed the peo ...


In German schools they teach that the soldiers who had to sit there with the gun and shoot the people one by one developed psychological and mental issues, so that's why they switched to the more mechanical process. That's what I was told while touring a concentration camp, and the Germans I was with on that tour confirmed that they were told that all of their lives as well.

So yeah, I suppose there is a cost element to it, but it was also a pretty human one as well.
 
2012-07-12 07:35:03 PM

inner ted: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Bloody William: For fark's sake, the Germans are less upset when we bring up Nazis and the Holocaust than the Japanese get when we point out anything bad or crazy they did during WWII.

Collectively, the Japanese seem to be in pretty deep denial about what they did during WWII. The Chinese and the Koreans, however, are very happy to remind them.

It really depends a lot on who you're talking about. Japanese government is actually fairly conservative (and, also tends to be rather corrupt in a... lackadaisical sort of way). The average Japanese person doesn't really give a whit one way or the other about China or Korea (Korean pop music and soap opera are really popular in Japan right now), but parts of the government PR have a standard issue line against certain things, and there's always the politician or two that needs to poke China or Korea with a stick (or the xenophobic activist group outside the TV station protesting that Korean soap operas are diluting the greatness of Japanese TV culture or some nonsense).

They could do better educating kids about WWII, but we could also do better educating kids about westward expansion and forced Native American "adoption", is what I'm sayin' here.

all i'm saying is that as a product of the american public school system, i learned about the holocaust.

i've never heard anything ever at all about the atrocities that japan visited upon chinese, korean & its own freaking population, until (god help it) i saw someone link about that camp 71 - ON A FARK THREAD.

so two points made: for whatever reason, american public schools choose not to discuss japanese war crimes.

fark can be educational.

/mind asploded


My high school American history class literally ended with the invasion of Pearl Harbor. The excuse given was that the AP exam had never had an essay question that covered a more recent time frame.

Our AP exam essay question: Was the United States justified in bombing Nagasaki? Show your work.

Yeah, really.
 
2012-07-12 07:37:12 PM

Gyrfalcon: Bennie Crabtree: Gyrfalcon: Girls in impoverished 3d-World nations, or anywhere where dowries are expected, are a liability to their families because they have to come up with money to marry them off. If you want to start alleviating the problem, Apple and other techno-firms could help by providing a dower fund so that any girl can be provided with a suitable dowry when or if it's needed. That way, families will not have to sell their daughters to provide food for their sons.

That is a very cool idea and could be extremely effective.

Keep in mind though, subsistence is not the huge problem that Westerners are taught it is. These families can normally feed themselves (natural disasters notwithstanding). It is the marketing and aggressive selling of tech that has become a major impetus for child prostitution. Once we realize it is not so much food and dowries, but that here in the West we ignore that families will sell children (to our men) to buy our products, we can do things like change how the products are marketed or sold or even used. So Apple could encourage sharing products instead of giving everyone their own iPhone, because while iPhones are amazing, their owners are culturally and historically situated in a different economic reality.

Mm, beg to differ. At least on the dowries part. You've still got women in India being murdered by their husbands' families for not providing sufficient bride-money (even as the girl's family is beggaring themselves to do so), and girls in Africa being sold for livestock; I've never seen anyone in either country demanding Western technology as part of the dowry. (If you do, I'd like to see it, it would be an appalling discovery)

Which is not to say that the whole "keep up with the American Jonses" is not a big factor in the sex trade overseas. Just that girls have always been disposable in poor rural countries, and this is just a new twist on an ancient problem. There's a saying in India that "Eighteen goddess-like daught ...


I don't get the whole dowry thing. If they couldn't pay it, couldn't they just....not marry off their daughter? Or if she insists on getting married, marry her to some cheap bastard who doesn't care if she comes with money?
 
2012-07-12 07:41:25 PM

Gyrfalcon: Mm, beg to differ. At least on the dowries part. You've still got women in India being murdered by their husbands' families for not providing sufficient bride-money (even as the girl's family is beggaring themselves to do so), and girls in Africa being sold for livestock; I've never seen anyone in either country demanding Western technology as part of the dowry. (If you do, I'd like to see it, it would be an appalling discovery)


Those places are far outside of where I was talking about. I am really fascinated by the cultural shifts with technology in Africa. Africa is a technologically diverse continent, and how cell phones are used in Ghana are totally different than in Nigeria, and so on... But I was being specific to southeast Asian countries, thinking those near China (and India as a totally different place).
 
2012-07-12 07:51:33 PM
Japanese state department retaliates by fixing usage of "enforced sex slave" to the correct term "US secretary of state".
 
2012-07-12 07:58:47 PM

Barricaded Gunman: Says the guy who wholeheartedly supported George W. "Never met a Saudi ass he wouldn't lick" Bush. If we ever forget how much value you add to the overall discussion, we can always count on you to jump up and remind us.


B-B-But Bush...!

They don't make ladders tall enough for you to reach the point that sailed over your head. Taking a stand on this issue is good. We shouldn't let the Japanese government brush under the rug with words what really went on but if standing up for women is important to you, as I assume it is to Hillary, where's the outrage over Saudi Arabia?

You take on Japan over this issue but not Saudi Arabia?
 
2012-07-12 07:59:08 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Good on her for calling it like it really is.


ignacio: Meh, on the one hand, I agree completely with her assessment of the "comfort women" and what they should be called, and I'm sick of all the political tip toeing around we do with other nations and their horrible human rights practices. On the other hand, there's a damn good reason I'm not a diplomat. Hillary's job is to make nice with places like Japan and not needlessly antagonize them over shiat like this, because it will and seems like it might have already, case international incidents


everyone who knows history knows what reality is, except for the asshole who decided this.

it isn't really a euphemism at this point, and hasn't been for decades and decades. it is the term for foreign national women that were forced to be japanese sex slaves during world war 2 for their military.

if you call them *enforced sex slaves* then people who know history go which sex slaves? where? when? why?
it makes about as much sense as refusing to call a tank a tank instead want it called a *death dealing tracked monstrosity*.
wait, which death dealing monstrosity? oh the one with tracked wheels and 120 mm gun? oh, so why didn't you just say tank?

this is pretty stupid, and it is so retarded I halfway doubt hillary was responsible for it.

it actually conveys less information, and clouds the issue. not helpful at all.

the term comfort women might have been used in 1933 to attempt to gloss over the state of servitude of these women and their very nasty jobs, but it lost whatever cover it provided a long time ago and know is handy shorthand for a horrible war crime that conveys a lot of information to anyone with a modicum of historical knowledge. that's why the koreans use the term. it doesn't gloss over the crime, it gives it a very specific term.
 
2012-07-12 07:59:42 PM
Well yes.
No need to sugar coat it.

/Diplomacy, how werk it.
 
2012-07-12 08:00:02 PM
Sex Slave Marathon is the name of my band so Im getting a kick out of these replies.

/we're famous from end of the garage to the other
 
2012-07-12 08:01:25 PM
Good for Hil. SoS is a really good place for her.
 
2012-07-12 08:03:03 PM

Jake Havechek: When they got nuked, they had it farking coming to them.


None of the civilians that were in the bombings had a say in what the government was doing.
 
2012-07-12 08:07:14 PM

kingoomieiii: Dancin_In_Anson: I hope she finds a way to nip this in the bud.

Shoehorned half-joke for the express purpose of using an antiquated racial slur.

Are you my dad?



Settle down and have a snack:

i121.photobucket.com
 
2012-07-12 08:07:55 PM

Need_MindBleach: I don't get the whole dowry thing. If they couldn't pay it, couldn't they just....not marry off their daughter? Or if she insists on getting married, marry her to some cheap bastard who doesn't care if she comes with money?


No.

Seriously, this is a complex and difficult concept to explain to modern Western minds, without a long course in anthropology and social customs. Basically, it comes down to how people live in conservative (in the traditional sense of the word), poor and agricultural societies. The eldest son gets the family farm, and his wife becomes the top woman on the place. Daughters leave the farm, usually to the younger sons of other farmers, and the dowry was originally used to help her husband get himself started on his own farm.

In traditional societies, the man is the landowner, worker and breadwinner; the eldest son is expected and even required to take care of his parents and younger siblings, and everyone else needs to get out as fast as possible. In these kinds of societies, women generally can't own property in their own right, so they can't buy their own land, have their own money or run their own lives. They are not producers, in the economic sense. So a bride-price was necessary to encourage a man to take on a "burden," and to encourage his family to care for her.

Where people are this poor, keeping a non-productive family member around is usually not an option, so a daughter who isn't married or marriagable is just a drag on her family. Where abortion is not allowed, infanticide of girls and sickly boys is always practiced. Where infanticide is criminalized, as it is in most developing nations today, a surplus of girls means their impoverished families can't find them husbands, hence, slavery and prostitution is the only other option. And perversely, or perhaps not, some families would rather have their girls in the hands of a brothel madam who has a stake in their well-being than married off to some shiftless thug who's as likely to murder her as not.
 
2012-07-12 08:14:08 PM

Gyrfalcon: If you want to start alleviating the problem, Apple and other techno-firms could help by providing a dower fund so that any girl can be provided with a suitable dowry when or if it's needed. That way, families will not have to sell their daughters to provide food for their sons.


I remember reading about a charity, impressively started by a teenager, that provides cows to families to keep their daughters from being sold.
It's bribery, but the cow can be worth more than their daughter, as depressing as that is to think about.
 
2012-07-12 08:15:32 PM
Ya know, I still like that I voted for President Obama in 2008, but damned if Secretary Clinton isn't impressing me at every turn. If she runs again, she's got my vote.
 
2012-07-12 08:15:51 PM

Gyrfalcon: Need_MindBleach: I don't get the whole dowry thing. If they couldn't pay it, couldn't they just....not marry off their daughter? Or if she insists on getting married, marry her to some cheap bastard who doesn't care if she comes with money?

No.

Seriously, this is a complex and difficult concept to explain to modern Western minds, without a long course in anthropology and social customs. Basically, it comes down to how people live in conservative (in the traditional sense of the word), poor and agricultural societies. The eldest son gets the family farm, and his wife becomes the top woman on the place. Daughters leave the farm, usually to the younger sons of other farmers, and the dowry was originally used to help her husband get himself started on his own farm.

In traditional societies, the man is the landowner, worker and breadwinner; the eldest son is expected and even required to take care of his parents and younger siblings, and everyone else needs to get out as fast as possible. In these kinds of societies, women generally can't own property in their own right, so they can't buy their own land, have their own money or run their own lives. They are not producers, in the economic sense. So a bride-price was necessary to encourage a man to take on a "burden," and to encourage his family to care for her.

Where people are this poor, keeping a non-productive family member around is usually not an option, so a daughter who isn't married or marriagable is just a drag on her family. Where abortion is not allowed, infanticide of girls and sickly boys is always practiced. Where infanticide is criminalized, as it is in most developing nations today, a surplus of girls means their impoverished families can't find them husbands, hence, slavery and prostitution is the only other option. And perversely, or perhaps not, some families would rather have their girls in the hands of a brothel madam who has a stake in their well-being than married off to some shiftless thug who's as likely to murder her as not. ...


Smart'd. Nice sum up.
 
2012-07-12 08:18:19 PM

randomjsa: You take on Japan over this issue but not Saudi Arabia?


Why just Saudi Arabia? Why don't you have any outrage over this isssue in Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, India, Iran,Thailand, New Guinea, Kenya etc.. etc...?
 
2012-07-12 08:37:20 PM
One minor point: exactly what is an enforced sex slave, as opposed to an unenforced one?

Still, good for her to call a spade a spade.
 
2012-07-12 08:49:16 PM

Rincewind53: I love Hillary Clinton so much. I would gladly vote for her in 2016. GLADLY.


On this alone I have decided that I am for Hillary 2016, this is my main takeaway. After 67 years it's time for the Japanese to learn that they did more in WWll than have an a-bomb dropped on them, that they did "some things" to cause that to happen.
 
2012-07-12 08:57:09 PM
lysdexic's photo up there is great.... there's a lot of people in this world you can feel free to fark with... I would venture to say that Hillary Clinton is not one of them. Add me to the list of people who want to vote for her in 2016.
 
2012-07-12 08:57:52 PM

Aldon: randomjsa: You take on Japan over this issue but not Saudi Arabia?

Why just Saudi Arabia? Why don't you have any outrage over this isssue in Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, India, Iran,Thailand, New Guinea, Kenya etc.. etc...?


Look, when discussing issues in one place, you have to mention ALL the places with similar issues--every single time--or else your criticism is invalid and you therefore like all those other places.

If you discuss Japan's sexual indiscretions, and fail to mention the sexual issues of every other country, that means you're picking on Japan and really approve of the things going on in Saudi, Pakistan, China, etc etc.

If you can understand how that works, let me know, because it's a completely asinine way to argue.
 
2012-07-12 09:01:07 PM

wee: cman: The Russians may disagree with your statement

Perhaps, but the Japanese damn near turned abusing POWs into an art form...


To be fair, the Germans mostly just starved their Russian (actually Soviet, many and perhaps most probably weren't ethnic Russians) prisoners, left them to die from exposure, or used them for target practice. I'm not sure that's "abuse."

That was snark. Pow rates for Soviets in German camps was near 60% (over 3 millions Soviets died in German POW camps; most that survived did so b/c the Germans realized they needed their labor), that for Americans in Japanese camps was about 33% (I can't find the numbers but I doubt that more than a few thousand Americans died in Japanese camps). German polices were literally genocidal. Japanese were merely abusive.
 
2012-07-12 09:16:23 PM
It's consistent with US policy. In 2007 the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed a resolution that Japan "should acknowledge, apologize and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its military's coercion of women into sexual slavery during the war".

Hirohito should have been tried for war crimes with his generals after Japan surrendered too.
 
2012-07-12 09:35:23 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Good on her for calling it like it really is.


Yup. If there was ever a semantic diplomatic battle worth fighting, it's this one.
 
2012-07-12 10:01:55 PM

kingoomieiii: Dancin_In_Anson: I hope she finds a way to nip this in the bud.

Shoehorned half-joke for the express purpose of using an antiquated racial slur.


Since when is nip a racial slur? Now, if Dancin_In_Anson had alluded to "slanty-eyed bastards"...well, THAT would be a racial slur. But nip is derived from Nippon, the Japanese word for their country, and so is a nationalist slur like limey, kraut, frog, etc.

Sheesh...this being Fark you'd think peeps would have their slurs properly categorized.
 
2012-07-12 10:12:14 PM

SkunkWerks: No comfort for Japan. Not yours.


This.

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Good on her for calling it like it really is.


That; Unlike Germany and Italy, Japan hasn't absolved themselves for what they committed in WWII. Hell, China AND South Korea are still pissed at them! Think about that.
 
2012-07-12 10:15:43 PM

kingoomieiii: nekom: And we didn't use nuclear weapons on them during WWII either, we just had a few bombs with an unrequested fission surplus.

Listen, it's been said time and again. The Japanese military (as confirmed by internal memos) was 100% willing, and actively planning, to grind every single Japanese soldier and civilian against the United States until they were all gone. A blaze of glory.


This, completely agree with this. So long as the military kept their power and influence intact, they'd burn Japan to the ground if need be.

They accepted surrender only because we made it clear we could defeat them without them ever being able to shoot back.

Well that and the Emperor effectively cut the military's balls off when he offered himself to be prosecuted by the Americans, according to what I've read. Of course, the US and McArthur had a different idea for Hirohito.
 
2012-07-12 10:21:39 PM

Highroller48: Japan has been guilty of committing some of the most heinous wartime atrocities of the past 100 years.

Why should Japan be off the hook for forceably abducting Korean women to serve as sexual slaves for their troops? When you say "Comfort Women" to Koreans, they know what you're talking about and it's no big deal. But the rest of the world needs to know excatly what happened. Imagine the reaction if we tried to call Slavery "involuntary subsitence farming"?

Now, just because the DPRK has been railing against the Japanese refusal to fully address, atone for, or even admit to the true extent of the "comfort women" issue for decades, some right-wing nutjob will be certain to jump all over the Administration for "pandering to the commies". What they won't tell you is that South Korea and the entire Pacific Rim have long been calling on Japan to stop downplaying this heinous chapter in its military past.


Ironically my gut reaction was, "doesn't everybody know what that term actually means anyway?" Then I remembered how many people don't know shiat about history.

Interesting thing about Japan's dismissal of it's sins; they were actually making progress on that front, even admitting the Rape of Nanking happened, and then 9/11 happened. The regression of civilization worldwide from that one act was depressing.
 
2012-07-12 10:23:54 PM

kingoomieiii: nekom: And we didn't use nuclear weapons on them during WWII either, we just had a few bombs with an unrequested fission surplus.

Listen, it's been said time and again. The Japanese military (as confirmed by internal memos) was 100% willing, and actively planning, to grind every single Japanese soldier and civilian against the United States until they were all gone. A blaze of glory.

They accepted surrender only because we made it clear we could defeat them without them ever being able to shoot back.


Pretty sure Nekom wasn't actually deriding the deployment of nukes, but rather the use of euphemisms.

relax.
 
2012-07-12 10:26:05 PM

thisispete: It's consistent with US policy. In 2007 the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed a resolution that Japan "should acknowledge, apologize and accept historical responsibility in a clear and unequivocal manner for its military's coercion of women into sexual slavery during the war".

Hirohito should have been tried for war crimes with his generals after Japan surrendered too.


There were other reasons for not trying the Emperor, and probably good ones at the time.

Hirohito was still worshipped as a deity by many Japanese, and having him surrender unconditionally to America was a shock to all of them. However, if America had gone ahead and executed him, it would have provided a great trigger for the military and other nationalists to try attacking again. Unlike Hitler, Hirohito was generally revered by his people, and executing the son of a god is a bad way to get on their good side.

Not prosecuting Hirohito gave him the opportunity to renounce his divinity--an important step in transitioning from the semi-feudal monarchy Japan was in pre-war and into the democracy they became after the war; it also permitted Hirohito to use his position as figurehead to encourage his people to cooperate with the US as often as he could, and to downplay any attempts to restore the Empire. Had he been executed, as he probably would have been, the benefits of a gradual transition out of monarchy would not have occurred. That's important to consider, because there were Emperor-worshippers even as late as the 1970's, and a divine Emperor dead at the hands of the Americans would have given them more of a rallying cry than just "We hate America!"
 
2012-07-12 10:45:09 PM
randomjsa: B-B-But Bush...! They don't make ladders tall enough for you to reach the point that sailed over your head. Taking a stand on this issue is good. We shouldn't let the Japanese government brush under the rug with words what really went on but if standing up for women is important to you, as I assume it is to Hillary, where's the outrage over Saudi Arabia? You take on Japan over this issue but not Saudi Arabia?

Heh... I've never been accused of B-B-But Bushing before. But the Saudi record on women's rights has been appalling since the 12th century or so, and I seriously doubt that you were calling for outrage over Saudi Arabia's brutal treatment of women at any point during GWB's presidency.
 
2012-07-12 10:56:27 PM
 
2012-07-12 10:57:44 PM
sendtodave: Preview fail :( Sorry.
 
2012-07-12 11:06:02 PM
Hey, it's not allowed to use proper terminology, you must use Politically Correct terminology!
...and we know what politicians do.
 
2012-07-12 11:06:45 PM

Need_MindBleach: I don't get the whole dowry thing. If they couldn't pay it, couldn't they just....not marry off their daughter?


Then they'd have to continue to pay for and support the daughter. Forever.
 
2012-07-13 12:12:20 AM
Unflattering nontroversy, unflattering portrait pic.

Gee, I wonder if the Atlantic Wire has some sort of agenda here? Seems legit enough.
 
2012-07-13 01:11:40 AM

sweetmelissa31: "The Comfort of Nanking"


I laughed and then I felt bad.



Good for Hillary. Japan needs to start confronting the shiat they did before and during WWII. You think our right-wingers are psycho? You haven't seen their's.
 
2012-07-13 01:23:41 AM

pueblonative: One minor point: exactly what is an enforced sex slave, as opposed to an unenforced one?

Still, good for her to call a spade a spade.


Probably depends on whether the woman was kidnapped by an invading nation or sold by her family (or willingly sold herself). The first is a war crime and the second is the result of economic factors.
 
2012-07-13 01:40:11 AM

platedlizard: sweetmelissa31: "The Comfort of Nanking"

I laughed and then I felt bad.



Good for Hillary. Japan needs to start confronting the shiat they did before and during WWII. You think our right-wingers are psycho? You haven't seen their's.


Ultranationalism is not considered completely off the wall in undiverse nations. See also Israel, Germany.
 
2012-07-13 01:50:59 AM

kingoomieiii: nekom: And we didn't use nuclear weapons on them during WWII either, we just had a few bombs with an unrequested fission surplus.

Listen, it's been said time and again. The Japanese military (as confirmed by internal memos) was 100% willing, and actively planning, to grind every single Japanese soldier and civilian against the United States until they were all gone. A blaze of glory.

They accepted surrender only because we made it clear we could defeat them without them ever being able to shoot back.


Well that and japan used chemical and biological weapons on the chinese and it seems the universally agreed rule of thumb is that if you use weapons of mass destruction on others, then weapons of mass destruction get used on you
 
2012-07-13 02:07:32 AM
If true, good for her. About time someone said it.
 
2012-07-13 02:10:32 AM

kingoomieiii: Seriously, it's bullshiat. While we're at it we should start referring to their Traditionally-Justified Whale-Genocide Expeditions exactly as stated.


+1
 
2012-07-13 02:20:07 AM

cman: wee: The Germans at least recognized POWs as being human, too.

The Russians may disagree with your statement


When did German POWs return home from Russia?
When did they return home from the US and Canada?
 
2012-07-13 02:22:18 AM
I think this might of been more appropriate:

t2.gstatic.com
 
2012-07-13 02:31:51 AM

randomjsa: Yeah I'd take a stand on something like this...

And not, you know, what Saudi Arabia does to women in the modern day and age.


Red Herring while roughing a Tu Toque
15 yard penalty, First down!

i.istockimg.com
 
wee [TotalFark]
2012-07-13 02:51:50 AM

Corvus: I think this might of been more appropriate


Hey, FYI: "of" isn't a verb. Sounds like one, I know, but it isn't one.

Just so you know.
 
2012-07-13 03:38:23 AM

Corvus: I think this might of been more appropriate:

[t2.gstatic.com image 497x101]


I agree. This deserves the Herro tag.
 
Displayed 50 of 157 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report