About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


Post 40

Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - 9:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I've always thought that "guilty" is a wrong word to use here. When two countries declare war, their citizens become enemies. When two enemies face each other, it is either you die I live or else, regardless of  how virtuous each person might be.

"War is not a dinner party", Mao said. It has a whole set of different rules. 


Post 41

Tuesday, March 1, 2005 - 7:26amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Would it be a possible case of not immediately telling the public of the heavy losses at Pearl Harbor, so as not to confirm to the Imperial Japanese the surviving strength of the depleted USN Pac Fleet? 


Post 42

Tuesday, March 1, 2005 - 7:46amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Another case of innocents trapped in a bad situation.

Allied POWs being transported to Japan to work as slave labor.

There was a case where a IJN transport was torpedoed by a USN submarine, there was heavy loss of Allied life, some of the the POWs managed to escape and were later picked up by the USN submarine.

The ex-POWs when asked about the torpedoing, said that despite the cost, the right thing had been done.


Post 43

Thursday, March 10, 2005 - 10:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael, while your post was lengthy and made some valid points, you also brought up age old conspiracy theories to chew on if one had the time.
My suggestion is, if you want to reach a broader audience, a statement like On the one hand, the USA is not a "democracy" and never was." will not bode well with a majority.
In my own opinion, the USA is still the only true democracy today.  Whether Athens, as you believe was the only true democracy, is questionable considering their assembly only allowed men to speak.

 
 


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 44

Monday, May 23, 2005 - 2:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I am for sanity and sense and against warmongering. Still and though I am no great friend of Schopenhauer I adhere to what he said about the death penalty: “I will be  fully against the death penalty… as soon as murderers stop murdering.”

 

May I, thus, I remind those who profess to be Objectivists yet defend peace at all costs and don’t consider civilians (apart from young people up to the time when they are legally considered to be full adults – around age 21) to be responsible for some wars, etc. of some of Rand’s own words? I think this will clear the issue:

 

From “Collectivized Rights” (1963) (See. “The Virtue of Selfishness):

 

“There are four characteristics which brand a country unmistakably as a dictatorship: one-party rule – executions without trial or with a mock trial, for political offenses – the nationalization or expropriation of private property – and censorship. A country guilty of these outrages forfeits any moral prerogatives, any claim to national rights or sovereignty, and becomes an outlaw.”

 

“Dictatorship nations are outlaws. Any free nation had the right to invade Nazi Germany and, today, has the right to invade Soviet Russia (Reminder: This was written in 1963), Cuba or any other slave pen. Whether a free nation chooses to do so or not is a matter of its own self-interest, not of respect for the nonexisting “rights” of gang rulers. It is not a free nation’s duty to liberate other nations at the price of self-sacrifice, but a free nation has the right to do it, when and if it so chooses.”

 

Oh, and by the way, for those interested in the purely technical detail of carpet and pinpoint bombing: Bombers during WWII were already very able to accomplish these pinpoint bombings. There is a scale model in Frankfurt am Main showing the total destruction of the city… excepting one solitary building standing in the middle of the whole devastation. It had been selected by the American Task Force as the place for their Headquarters, and they used it as such after invading Germany!


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 45

Monday, June 6, 2005 - 1:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think something that's important to keep in mind is that even if you have a John Galt figure living in an aggressor state that is killed by the nation protecting itself, it's still not the fault of the protector state. (Protector state referring to the liberal-democracy which respects individual rights, retaliating against an initiation of force) The aggressor nation is always responsible for all casualties inflicted during a war by both sides. That also includes children in an aggressor nation who cannot be rationally expected to be morally culpible for the actions of that aggressor nation. So whether there was a John Galt that was killed by US atomic weapons, then the one who murdered the John Galts (and innocent children) of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was Imperial Japan, by forcing the US to use such tactics to defend herself. (The issue then, is moot, and the actions to bomb civilians to end a war, was and still is morally just) War criminals of Germany and Japan were not only responsible for the deaths caused by the Japanese and German war machine, but were also responsible for the deaths that occurred by US-Allied weapons. Even all friendly fire casualties by US military weapons, still make the Germans and Japanese morally culpible as the US-Allied forces had no wish to initiate a war and some level of friendly fire is unavoidable given current military reality.

On a personal note, my father grew up as a teenager in WW2 Greece, at 15 years old serving the Greek resistance army. As he told me, nothing he experienced in his life was as traumatic as running away from advancing German tanks. He served as a lookout for his villiage. When the Germans arrived at Greek villiages, all males from age 13 and up, were executed. And the homes of the villiagers were burned. My father's villiage got wind of the Nazi tactics. As a lookout, it was my father's job to radio ahead if Germans were coming to the villiage to give the villiagers the chance to escape and hide high up into the mountains. My father recalls hiding with his brother-in-law as the Nazi's announced over loudspeakers that if the villiages did not come out of hiding, all houses would be destroyed. Nice guys eh?

The allies, in an effort to drive out the Germans from Greece, heavily bombed the port city of Piraeus where my father was at the time. The city was completely destroyed, a lot of Greeks died from allied bombs. My father does not recall one Greek, who complained. The bombing worked and the Germans left. Everyone was in a celebratory mood when the Germans left and no one even thought to blame the allied bombing deaths of Greek civilians on the allies.

-John

Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 46

Monday, June 6, 2005 - 7:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Magdeburg. June 7, 1631.

My captains!  Hear me!  Our siege will be successful.  The city will be ours. Have no doubts.  The protestents cannot hold out now that we have been resupplied by Spain and the Holy Roman Emperor himself.  Our victory has been assured by God Almighty for the sake of His Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. 

That said, I would like you, my captains, now to clear your consciences.  I know that you have all been to confession many times and oftener as of late, for you are troubled.  Inside Magdeburg are Catholics.  Our cannons kill them as surely as if they were excommunicated protestents.  Yet, the very fact that they are Catholic, and therefore saved, means that in sending them to their deaths, we send them to their Salvation.  They pray for your success. 

When we bash down the walls, and storm the gates, the looting and pillaging and usual atrocities will fall heavily on our Catholics.  How could it not?  Know first that  they martyr themselves willingly for your Cause. Know furthermore that in your ignorance, you are incapable of freewill and therefore unable to commit a sin in this case.  Therefore, do not trouble yourself with consequences, but keep your minds and your hearts pledged to the task at hand.

And now a blessing from the good Bishop...


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 47

Tuesday, June 7, 2005 - 10:51amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When we bash down the walls, and storm the gates, the looting and pillaging and usual atrocities will fall heavily on our Catholics.

Mr. Marotta, when did the US pilliage anyone in WW2? What is the point of your recent post? The US never pilliaged anyone during that war. The US did not initiate a war with Japan. The US did not rampage through out Asia, executing young boys, raping women, and burying people alive as the Japanese did all over Asia and the Pacific. The US did not burn down villiages all over Europe, and gas civilians in death chambers as the Germans did. The US did not initiate a war in Europe. Pilliaging countries, as Japan and Germany did, has no moral equivalency to civilian casualties by US weapons which were unavoidable by the US to end a war it did not start or want to be in. The US did not round up civilians and execute them.

 
Inside Magdeburg are Catholics.  Our cannons kill them as surely as if they were excommunicated protestents.  Yet, the very fact that they are Catholic, and therefore saved, means that in sending them to their deaths, we send them to their Salvation.  They pray for your success. 
Or perhaps (as this analogy is quite frankly stupid) the occupied allies (such as Greece) pray for the success of the Allies for it will mark the end of their slavery, torture chambers, executions, rape rooms, and the forced starvation of 2 million Greeks. You're right Mr. Marotta, far be it for a few thousand Greeks to die in a bombing campaign to free the 10 million Greek population. Better that millions just starve to death over one winter and the rest just enslaved and tortured than a few thousand to die to free the rest.

Therefore, do not trouble yourself with consequences
Or perhaps please do trouble yourself with the consequences. For the conseqeunces will be the end of Japanese tyranny over Asia and the end of German tyranny over Europe. Please trouble yourself because the consequences of your actions will save millions of lives. The choice to do nothing will mean the death sentence of yourself, and millions of people.


Post 48

Tuesday, June 7, 2005 - 8:32pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Man, brought this up again.

Hmmm, I haven't done any good pilliging in a while...can never seem to find the time.

Anyway, if your going to follow an evil government and act like sheep to the slaughter, then you deserve what you get. If we're in YOUR country trying to rid YOUR government of its evil government and your not lifting a finger to help us; screw you, we're not going to bother telling you to get out of the way.

Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 49

Tuesday, June 7, 2005 - 11:06pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jason Pappas is right in Post 8 when he says there is "no moral equivalence between them and us then ,or the Islamist and us now (contrary to the outrageous implications of Michael E Marrota in post 2.)"

However, Michael's post says no such thing about equating the U.S. military and the Japanese Imperial forces, or U.S. government today versus the 9/11 terrorists.

The post he refers to compares the reasoning given by the 9/11 terrorists and that of the Truman administration for its justification of targeting civilians.

Both are the same: civilians are legitimate targets because of the actions of their government, acting out of their will or not. It's also the same line "professor" Ward Churchill gave for his "little Eichmanns" comment.

There is a word for militarily targeting civilians for the purpose of political change: terrorism.

Japanese had already offered their surrender before months before the bombing, asking only to keep their emperor. Truman rejected the deal in favor of an unprecedented complete surrender. Never mind that Japan kept the emperor even after the peace deal.

Eisenhower later told Newsweek that "the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing."

Pappas should do better at defending his opinions than guilting us with a classic bait-n-switch.

Post 50

Wednesday, June 8, 2005 - 6:03amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"For the conseqeunces will be the end of Japanese tyranny over Asia and the end of German tyranny over Europe. Please trouble yourself because the consequences of your actions will save millions of lives."

WWII scorecard-
(Leader / Country / civilians killed)

Losers:

Tojo Hideki / Japan / 3,990,000
Adolf Hitler / Germany / 20,946,000

Winners:

Chiang Kai-shek / China / 10,214,000
Mao Tse-tung / China / 37,828,000
Joseph Stalin / USSR / 42,672,000


Post 51

Wednesday, June 8, 2005 - 7:53amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Aaron,
I am not sure about others, but your numbers for Mao is NOT WWII figures. Most of those deaths under Mao happened after WWII, i.e., after 1949. See a detailed break down on R.J. Rummel's site here.

Hong


Post 52

Wednesday, June 8, 2005 - 9:46amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rummel was the source of my numbers as well. I consider the post WWII body count created by those who preserved or gained power by the 'end of Japanese tyranny' relevant when John made the claim 'the consequences of your actions will save millions of lives'.


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 53

Wednesday, June 8, 2005 - 6:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I consider the post WWII body count created by those who preserved or gained power by the 'end of Japanese tyranny' relevant...

Relevant to what? Those astronomical body counts are not from India, Europe, Africa, South America, or anywhere else, but from the two "reddest" countries in the world. Isn't it clear that it is the ideology and the iron will of those Communist leaders that were responsible for those atrocities?

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 6/08, 6:38pm)


Post 54

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 6:17amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Certainly communism is terrible and it led to grand scale atrocities; the WWII question here is about how the Allied effort fought fascism but did so by aiding even those more destructive warlords and communists. John brought out a consequentialist argument that Allied fighting in WWII was good since ending the German and Japanese tyrannies 'save[d] millions of lives'. I don't necessarily buy such utilitarian arguments even when true, but I was pointing out that in this case the argument doesn't even hold water at all.

The European theater is the closer call, but the German tyranny was ended at the expense of aiding and expanding the power of an even more experienced and efficient killer from the USSR. In Asia the utilitarian argument for Allied intervention is still more clearly flawed. Japan's 14 year occupation of Manchuria, 8 year occupation of China and several year occupation of Indochina and various islands to be sure entailed atrocities such as the infamous Rape of Nanking. However, Allied end of Japanese occupation restored the power of warlord Kai-shek, and allowed the rise to power of Mao, both of whom were far more prolific at democide of their people than were the occupiers.


Post 55

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 7:37amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Aaron wrote: "Allied end of Japanese occupation restored the power of warlord Kai-shek, and allowed the rise to power of Mao, both of whom were far more prolific at democide of their people than were the occupiers."

Taiwan has been discussed more than a few times.  See for instance:

... Taiwan War Around the Corner
http://solohq.com/Forum/NewsDiscussions/0434.shtml
Betraying the Real Freedom Fighters
http://solohq.com/Forum/NewsDiscussions/0670.shtml
Should the US Intervene militarily in Taiwan?
http://solohq.com/Forum/GeneralForum/0395.shtml

The salient facts are that Taiwan and China have evolved along parallel paths over the last 50 years.  For many reasons -- ties to the USA; smaller size -- Taiwan is perhaps "ahead" of the mainland now in terms of freedom and liberty as we Objectivists understand them.  That might not be saying much.

Historically, Taiwan was always as much of a dictatorship as the mainland.  When Chiang kai-Shek landed, his Kuomintang executed 10,000 to 15,000 potential opponents.  The legislature was "elected" from "districts" on the mainland It was illegal to advocate independence for Taiwan.  Taiwan was a one-party fascist state, with Spain, perhaps the last of the true fascists from the 1930s.  Chiang kai-Shek established relationships with Italy and Germany as he built his power in the 1920s and 1930s.  Italian air force trainers set up the KMT air force -- with predictable results: students were passed on the basis of their family's social status.  Madame CKS -- herself a Soong, of course, and the sister of Madame Sun Yat Sen -- hired the American "flying tigers" to save the situation.    Any "western influence" came via the Soong family -- and they took their banking interests away from Chiang after he looted their banks of silver.  (See The Soong Dynasty by Sterling Seagrave.)  The point is that Chiang kai-Shek was never a friend of democracy or liberty or any of that.  He was always a military dictator and until about 1995 or so, Taiwan was a military dictatorship... (depending on how you define "free" election).  Therefore, as bad the Japanese military was, it is not true that killing Japanese civilians brought any benefits that could be tallied in a utilitarian calculcus of consequences.

(Incidentally, Taiwan is no more "Chinese" than Puerto Rico is "American."  The movie Eat Drink Man Woman was recommended here by Hong Zhang http://solohq.com/Forum/Movies/0093.shtml and in it, one of the lines spoken by one chef to another is that Chinese cooking has been imported to Taiwan for many years and it is popular, but hard to do well. And it is not for nothing that all those students were in military uniforms...)


Post 56

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 9:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
However, Allied end of Japanese occupation restored the power of warlord Kai-shek, and allowed the rise to power of Mao, both of whom were far more prolific at democide of their people than were the occupiers.

Aaron, this statement shows that you don't know much about that part of China /WWII history. And there are just too much hindsights in this kind of arguments.

"Restored the power of warlord Chiang Kai-shek" and "allowed the rise to power of Mao" were two contradictory statements. First, warlord or not, Chiang was the legitimate State head of China, heir to China's first President Dr. Sun Yat-Sen ever since Dr. Sun died in 1925. Second, Chiang was the starchiest opponent of CCP. He wouldn't budge from his anti-Communist stance even under the Japanese invasion. Only after he was hold hostage by one of his generals Chang Hsüeh-liang in Xi'an in 1936, that he was forced to cooperate with CCP. The death toll under his regime (1928-1949) was largely due to his constant campaign with Mao's guerrilla forces.

Mao's CCP beat Chiang's KMT and won. Period. Just like Bolsheviks had won in 1917 in Russia. It appears to me that one thing that's hard for some Westerners to grasp is the historical context of those events. Both Bolshevik and CCP managed to have their countries' and their people's sentiments on their sides. The support from the mass was one of the main reasons why they had won.

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 6/09, 9:48am)


Post 57

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 12:33pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
""Restored the power of warlord Chiang Kai-shek" and "allowed the rise to power of Mao" were two contradictory statements."

No more so than it would be a contradiction to say the American Revolution allowed Washington to lead a country, and allowed Adams to do so. I admit sloppy simplified wording concerning Kai-shek, though, and clarify: "restored Chiang Kai-shek's power over much of eastern China and Manchuria". I know he was not completely out of power; he had only lost control of significant parts of the country.

As for Mao, do you believe he would have been able to come to power and do his damage if under Japanese occupation? If so, then that will be an interesting alternate history concept to hear about. If not, then that agrees with my statement.

"And there are just too much hindsights in this kind of arguments."

Such is the nature of historical what-ifs. I don't advocate German or Nationalist or Japanese or Communist tyrants, and would have preferred they'd all met much earlier unnatural demises. I just get tired of seeing WWII glorified and horrors committed in its pursuit whitewashed due to pragmatist arguments about stopping tyrants and saving lives, while such arguments require specious historical what-ifs that must ignore even bloodier tyrants.


Post 58

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 12:44pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Chiang was the starchiest opponent of CCP

Not only that, but whatever his faults may have been. His actions still set up one of the most economically prosperous countries in Asia, Taiwan.

And I do love it how the democratic and free-market oriented Taiwan still gets up the nose of the CCP :-)


Post 59

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 5:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
As for Mao, do you believe he would have been able to come to power and do his damage if under Japanese occupation?
He might, or might not. There is just no second guessing in history; no going back in time. 

When I say "hindsight", I meant that nobody at the end of WWII would have predicted that Mao was actually such a mad man, that he would let tens of millions common people starve to death during 1959-61 famine, or that he would initiate the Culture Revolution, etc. etc. Certainly not the general mass who had supported him then.

On the other hand, I don't think we differ that much in thinking that ALL wars are an ugly ugly thing. Though I do believe that the war of driving the Japanese out of China (and the other similar ones) had a just cause, they were horrendous and ugly nevertheless. Such is the nature of war.

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 6/09, 6:10pm)


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.