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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (244602)	10/10/2007 3:15:46 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Bravo! Regarding the left its interesting how the same people who opposed the vietnam war because vn was a "socialist' country are now enamored with rogue states who thumb their nose at Uncle. Many just hate the capitalist system so much that they will even make excuses for the worst types of reactionary regimes.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (244602)	10/10/2007 3:16:45 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

ok, this seems like a decent debate to take on, but I can't give it the time now. I'll get back to you on it.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (244602)	10/10/2007 3:27:37 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 281500

Excellent post Nadine. Very well said. Boiled down to its essence, it is crazy for the left to assert that the US must play by the Marquis of Queensbury rules, no matter what while the other side kicks, bites, scratches, gouges, etc.... J.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (244602)	10/11/2007 1:29:12 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine, re: "Refusal to take Japanese prisoners, as I also pointed out, was not race-based but behavior-based. It was based on the way the Japanese treated American prisoners and the danger involved in trying to take Japanese prisoners. ... Which leads me back to my original point, that any attempt to implement wars of war will be influenced by conditions in the field, and attempts to ignore this fact of life will only lead to the laws of war being ignored. When the laws of war are ignored, more civilians die and fewer prisoners are taken. Not only is paying attention to the behavior of the other side a fact of life, it is a necessary fact of life, as game theory proves. If you always cooperate and never go tit for tat even when the other side screws you, you lose the game. Going tit for tat provides real world incentive for the other side to obey the law." Your logic is faulty. Your insight is even poorer. The American response to Japanese atrocities was wrong from almost any point of view. It did not, as you would suggest from your "game theory" analogy, help win the game; not even a little bit. It did not, as you suggest, incentive the Japanese to quit killing Americans who surrendered and it did not aid the American war effort. Face facts. The American/Japanese war was won because we had a better war machine. The Japanese were fantastic soldiers who fought to the death again and again, even when outnumbered and living in the most miserable conditions imaginable. Our going "tit for tat" didn't give them an "incentive" to follow the rules and it didn't discourage their willingness to act in extreme brutality. We simply demeaned ourselves by mirroring their atrocities and by so doing we failed to live up to deeply held American standards. We're lucky we won that war or we might today be viewed as a dangerously "evil" people similar to the way the Japanese were viewed by the world when we got through writing our "winner's" history of the war. All of that should be patently obvious so why is it that you find yourself so willing to rationalize those brutal American atrocities? Is it because you are looking for justifications for the latest unAmerican responses such as targeting crowds when the presence of insurgents is suspected? Or maybe the torture of accused terrorists? Or maybe the rendition of such people? Or maybe the holding of human beings for years without the filing of charges or the opportunity for any fair and impartial hearing? In the end you do the right thing not because you have to, not because it's the easiest way and not because the other guy does it; you do the right thing because that's how you find out who you are. As Sun Tzu says, recent events are teaching us a lot about who we are today, and the picture isn't pretty. Ed