Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (660604)	11/15/2004 8:20:36 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Others, perhaps you, have said that there was no sabotage by JAs, offering that as proof that the internment was unnecessary. I'm saying that is no proof at all, given that they were confined and thus prevented from such acts. The situation you present is impossible to differentiate from one on which the JAs never intended to and never would have committed espionage or sabotage. The fact that it sis not not happen proves nothing. There was no need for confinement in Hawaii because the islands contained no war industry. Military facilities were under heightened guard and not vulnerable. In short, there were no viable targets at risk. If there had been, the JAs no doubt would have been confined. Pearl harbor- -the new HQ of the Pacific Fleet- -was there. AND, had the Japanese by means of subs or planes supplied disloyal JAs with weapons and explosives in sufficient quantity, I think you would have found out just how vulnerable those military facilities were. Remember, at the start of the war, they thought the fleet at anchor was not vulnerable too. Were they right? 10,000 German-Americans were interned or imprisoned in the U.S. Out of how many million? And why? Because they were suspicious? Why was not the same test applied to the JAs. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the internment did not violate the Constitution. Probably on the ground that there WAS due process. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Jim Crow and "separate but equal" were legal too. Were they? It's not a sin to admit your country did something wrong. In fact doing so can help prevent repetition of the mistake. What is wrong is to stubbornly refuse to recognize it.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (660604)	11/16/2004 12:38:54 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

People just don't understand how complex internment was. Many people who were interned should have been. The left and many do goodies two shoe criticize internment without any attempt to understand the complexities. Some people were interned who never should have been. Some people entered the camps voluntarily. There were Japanese American spies in the US. Some of the people in the camps probably avoided physical harm that might have befallen them if mobs had caught up with them. That wuld have bee a truely sad day in American history.