Historical Scenario: Internment During Wwii

[add]

In retrospect, This internment is nothing really, that is compared to nagasaki bombing

[4588686]

It does make me wonder though, why people continue to scoff at concerns like Nihil is raising. Typically it is in context to the 2nd amendment, but still. There are many people still alive today that remember this happening here and other terrible abuses over the last century, and other countries continue to see the same things happen in modern times.

 

Are we delusional enough to think that our grandparents were just gullible fools? that these things are impossible, or will never happen here again because of ____?

 

It could happen here.  But you having an AR-15 is not going to stand up to a team of Navy SEALs fresh off Arghanistan or North Africa.  People in Afghanistan have a lot of guns and a whole lot more combat experience than you or anyone on this board will ever have and that's bought them a protracted war with lopsided causalities and political and economic collapse.  It's just romanticism to suggest that letting people have AR-15s is some serious check on government power.     

Edited January 23, 2013 by Hasan

[Winchester]

I know several SEALS, and they didn't get into the program to fire on American citizens in the name of Dear Leader's agenda. I know and work with a lot of combat veterans, and generally, they think the gun bans are asinine, illegitimate commands. The glorified mall cops in the ATF don't represent the attitude of the soldiers I know. Although I'd expect many to follow the order to murder/assault/kidnap citizens.

 

Taking cities is hard, even against irregulars. It's dirty, expensive, and bloody. It's far cheaper and easier to deal with a disarmed public, and the political class loves cheap and easy. Like it or not, an armed citizenry is a deterrent to a tyrant.

[4588686]

I know several SEALS, and they didn't get into the program to fire on American citizens in the name of Dear Leader's agenda.

I know and work with a lot of combat veterans, and generally, they think the gun bans are asinine, illegitimate commands. The glorified mall cops in the ATF don't represent the attitude of the soldiers I know. Although I'd expect many to follow the order to murder/assault/kidnap citizens.

 

Taking cities is hard, even against irregulars. It's dirty, expensive, and bloody. It's far cheaper and easier to deal with a disarmed public, and the political class loves cheap and easy.

 

 

And very few men joined the JNA to rape Bosnian women.  Very few soldiers joined the American army to invade Virginia or burn down Atlanta.  It's funny how security spirals work and how conflict multiplies.     

 

 

Like it or not, an armed citizenry is a deterrent to a tyrant.

 

It's also a great way to hype up supposed threats and justify the use of force in the first place.  Egyptians used minimal physical force and resistance to Mubarak.  Compare that to Syria.  Lot's of people have guns there.  Real assault rifles too.  It's weird that Assad doesn't realize what an effective deterrent that is to tyranny.   

[Winchester]

And very few men joined the JNA to rape Bosnian women.  Very few soldiers joined the American army to invade Virginia or burn down Atlanta.  It's funny how security spirals work and how conflict multiplies.     

 

 

 

It's also a great way to hype up supposed threats and justify the use of force in the first place.  Egyptians used minimal physical force and resistance to Mubarak.  Compare that to Syria.  Lot's of people have guns there.  Real assault rifles too.  It's weird that Assad doesn't realize what an effective deterrent that is to tyranny.   

 

You're confusing my anecdotal experience with your third hand information and assumptions.

 

"Deterrent" does not mean what you think it means. A lock is a deterrent to a thief. But thieves will kick in doors, sometimes.

[Nihil Obstat]

In retrospect, This internment is nothing really, that is compared to nagasaki bombing

The nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the firebombings of Tokyo, Osaka, Kobe, Berlin, etc., were shockingly evil.

But that does not reduce the fact that interning innocent people because of where their families come from is simply inexcusable.

[4588686]

You're confusing my anecdotal experience with your third hand information and assumptions.

 

"Deterrent" does not mean what you think it means. A lock is a deterrent to a thief. But thieves will kick in doors, sometimes.

 

It doesn't seem to be a very good deterrent since most state-corporate systems have found pretty effective means of controlling their populations without armed conflict and those thuggish and unsophisticated enough to require outright fighting don't seem too bothered with high body counts.  

[Jesus_lol]

It could happen here.  But you having an AR-15 is not going to stand up to a team of Navy SEALs fresh off Arghanistan or North Africa.  People in Afghanistan have a lot of guns and a whole lot more combat experience than you or anyone on this board will ever have and that's bought them a protracted war with lopsided causalities and political and economic collapse.  It's just romanticism to suggest that letting people have AR-15s is some serious check on government power.     

 

 

And my motorcycle helmet isnt gonna save me if I get run over by a semi truck. But I would rather have one anyways for the amount of good it can do, than just see it as hopeless and go without. Similarly, I would rather have a gun, a nice gun, if bullets ever started flying near me, and I think you would too, to be honest.

 

One can always choose not to use a gun when you have one. Its pretty hard to decide to use one when you are unarmed.

[Nihil Obstat]

And my motorcycle helmet isnt gonna save me if I get run over by a semi truck. But I would rather have one anyways for the amount of good it can do, than just see it as hopeless and go without. Similarly, I would rather have a gun, a nice gun, if bullets ever started flying near me, and I think you would too, to be honest.

 

One can always choose not to use a gun when you have one. Its pretty hard to decide to use one when you are unarmed.

 

Good philosophy for life, really. 

[4588686]

And my motorcycle helmet isnt gonna save me if I get run over by a semi truck. But I would rather have one anyways for the amount of good it can do, than just see it as hopeless and go without. Similarly, I would rather have a gun, a nice gun, if bullets ever started flying near me, and I think you would too, to be honest.

 

One can always choose not to use a gun when you have one. Its pretty hard to decide to use one when you are unarmed.

 

Sure.  Guns can make you feel safe.  I can think of plenty of instances where I would have felt much safer if I had been armed and a few where I actually would have been much safer had I been armed.  But again we are back to feelings.  In the highly unlikely event that you are in a state of armed revolt against the Canadian government having a gun will make you feel safer.  And on that basis mild gun control laws that could save thousands of lives cannot be passed.  That strikes me as selfish.  

[Winchester]

It doesn't seem to be a very good deterrent since most state-corporate systems have found pretty effective means of controlling their populations without armed conflict and those thuggish and unsophisticated enough to require outright fighting don't seem too bothered with high body counts.  

 

Unless you've access to alternate realities (and you don't, since I've prevented that from occurring), you really don't know how much it has deterred.

[Jesus_lol]

Sure.  Guns can make you feel safe.  I can think of plenty of instances where I would have felt much safer if I had been armed and a few where I actually would have been much safer had I been armed.  But again we are back to feelings.  In the highly unlikely event that you are in a state of armed revolt against the Canadian government having a gun will make you feel safer.  And on that basis mild gun control laws that could save thousands of lives cannot be passed.  That strikes me as selfish.  

 

I consider defending against the canadian govt to be about as likely as zombies actually happening. At least currently. But with a wider view of history, so far every nation eventually fails, is taken over, or implodes. Maybe we are past that now, but I kinda doubt it.

 

Still, other scenarios are much more immediate and useful to consider. For instance, survival in natural disaster type scenarios. Like when Katrina happened and the police and military were completely unable to stop roaming bandits/looters/murderers. Heck, the police were part of the problem when they started going door to door and permanently confiscating legally owned guns from citizens there. Current society is nice, but it doesnt take more than a few days without power/food/shelter/etc for that to all go to hell.

 

But more pressingly, defending from animals and criminals is a real problem here. Still unlikely, but it still happens on a fairly regular basis.

 

What sort of gun laws do you expect will save thousands of lives in the USA?

[add]

The nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the firebombings of Tokyo, Osaka, Kobe, Berlin, etc., were shockingly evil.

But that does not reduce the fact that interning innocent people because of where their families come from is simply inexcusable.

 

put this scenario in prospective

 

The A-bomb dropped on Nagasaki, killed an estimated 40,000 people on the day it was dropped.

 

 

Because the Americans were afraid of the Japanese race they forced every Japanese citizen living in America to live in internment camps.  Some people had to live in the camps for up to four years.  When the government realized that the Japanese-Americans were innocent they were released and every person that was kept in a camp and gave them each $20,000.

 

they was 1,555,308 japanese casualties from 1941-45 in the Pacific War.
 

1. Against US - 485,717
2. Against UK/Netherlands - 208,026
3. In China - 202,958
4. Against Australia - 199,511
5. French Indochina - 2,803
6. Against USSR - 7,483
7. Other overseas - 23,388
8. Japan proper - 10,543
9. Navy 1941/45 - 414,879

- Only one third of the military deaths occurred in actual combat, the majority being caused by illness and starvation.

[Nihil Obstat]

put this scenario in prospective
 
The A-bomb dropped on Nagasaki, killed an estimated 40,000 people on the day it was dropped.
 
 
Because the Americans were afraid of the Japanese race they forced every Japanese citizen living in America to live in internment camps.  Some people had to live in the camps for up to four years.  When the government realized that the Japanese-Americans were innocent they were released and every person that was kept in a camp and gave them each $20,000.
 
they was 1,555,308 japanese casualties from 1941-45 in the Pacific War.

• 
  
• Against US - 485,717
• Against UK/Netherlands - 208,026
• In China - 202,958
• Against Australia - 199,511
• French Indochina - 2,803
• Against USSR - 7,483
• Other overseas - 23,388
• Japan proper - 10,543
• Navy 1941/45 - 414,879

- Only one third of the military deaths occurred in actual combat, the majority being caused by illness and starvation.

 
I am not sure what you are trying to tell me, but I stand by what I said:
 

The nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the firebombings of Tokyo, Osaka, Kobe, Berlin, etc., were shockingly evil.
But that does not reduce the fact that interning innocent people because of where their families come from is simply inexcusable.

Every single time the nuclear bombings come up on Phatmass I am more than willing to argue about their absolute horrific nature and complete moral depravity, so you do not need to convince me.

[add]

 
I am not sure what you are trying to tell me, but I stand by what I said:
 

Every single time the nuclear bombings come up on Phatmass I am more than willing to argue about their absolute horrific nature and complete moral depravity, so you do not need to convince me.

 

the interment was " a piece of cake"

[Nihil Obstat]

the interment was " a piece of cake"

A piece of cake filled with barbed wire and flagrant moral transgression?

[Jesus_lol]

Add, are you actually trying to defend the internment of japanese and asian citizens in canada and the USA?

[add]

Add, are you actually trying to defend the internment of japanese and asian citizens in canada and the USA?

 

 

I’m not advocating interment,   

 

[Nihil Obstat]

Add, are you actually trying to defend the internment of japanese and asian citizens in canada and the USA?

 

 

I’m not advocating interment,   

Close, but that is not exactly what Nick asked.

[Groo the Wanderer]

the interment was " a piece of cake"

 

and it was ordered by a democrat