If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
"Tracy Barber" wrote in message
... On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:07:10 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote: "Tracy Barber" If compassions were a word that the Japanese knew and felt, an apology would have been made by now - not a 1/2 arse one that we got sideways. It seems that the U.S. did more to be compassionate / compensate than the Japanese have done, but of course, I'm always missing the boat, so I may be wrong. I may be right. I just may be the lunatic you're looking for... :^P If by "the Japanese" you mean the goverment (people) of that nation on the other side of the Pacific, then what does it have to do with the those who were interned and lost property? Those were not "the Japanese". The point. You appear to be making the same connnection that was what got the US into this mess in the first place. OK, not all of them, but count the spies, the rogues, etc. Has anyone ever done that - or were they all saints? Dunno who were rogues, spies, or saint. Do know that they had a right to presumption of innocence, the right not to have their goods siezed without due process, the right not to be incarerated without an arrest, a stated charge, and a trial by peers, etc. You know, the usual. And the least they should expect from a nation that claims it fights to defend those same rights for others. Not disputing the intent to fight, only the oddity of suspending the rights of those at home while you fight for them abroad. Seems conflicted to me. |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 02:41:13 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote:
"Tracy Barber" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:07:10 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote: "Tracy Barber" If compassions were a word that the Japanese knew and felt, an apology would have been made by now - not a 1/2 arse one that we got sideways. It seems that the U.S. did more to be compassionate / compensate than the Japanese have done, but of course, I'm always missing the boat, so I may be wrong. I may be right. I just may be the lunatic you're looking for... :^P If by "the Japanese" you mean the goverment (people) of that nation on the other side of the Pacific, then what does it have to do with the those who were interned and lost property? Those were not "the Japanese". The point. You appear to be making the same connnection that was what got the US into this mess in the first place. OK, not all of them, but count the spies, the rogues, etc. Has anyone ever done that - or were they all saints? Dunno who were rogues, spies, or saint. Do know that they had a right to presumption of innocence, the right not to have their goods siezed without due process, the right not to be incarerated without an arrest, a stated charge, and a trial by peers, etc. You know, the usual. And the least they should expect from a nation that claims it fights to defend those same rights for others. Not disputing the intent to fight, only the oddity of suspending the rights of those at home while you fight for them abroad. Seems conflicted to me. As to my previous post, the govt. didn't know who were spies and who weren't and couldn't take the risk. YES, YES, YES - it was sad that this had to happen. Unfortunately, a Jap spy was sending info to Tokyo about the whereabouts of every damn ship in the harbor - and he did a good job of it. To be fair, he wasn't the only thing that was goofy. Plenty of other snafus (I really don't care what Stephen thinks of this acronym) that caused enough damage in PH. Delayed messages, Churchill knew, screwed up human error, wasn't there a radar problem?, the Japs couldn't type in English, blah, blah, blah... too many to ponder. One can only assume, when caught up in the (non?) hysteria (heh!) of the day, that such a knee-jerk reaction would happen as a matter of course. Whereas, yes, the Germans had subs off the Atlantic sea walls, but they weren't lobbing shells into Washington or sending those goofy weather ballons across the Pacific to attack us. (Fortunately, only a few people died because of those ballons - could have been worse with their germ warfare crap.) Germany and Italy only signed on against us AFTER Japan did. This was part of thr tri-partite agreement. Plenty of German POWs housed in Canada though... Anyway, that was then. This is now. We have Guantanamo as a reminder. Tracy Barber |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
"Tracy Barber" wrote in message
As to my previous post, the govt. didn't know who were spies and who weren't and couldn't take the risk. I'm sorry, Tracy, but that doesn't matter. Otherwise they might as well lock everyone up. I mean that's the only guaranteed way to get all the spies, yes? The 'downside' of a democracy is that it is, well 'democratic'. the 'upside' of a fascist state is that it is well, a fascist state. Democracies don't lock people up for what they might be. They lock people up for _actions_ that can be _proven. They dont' lock people up because of their ethnicity or colour. Ideally, that is. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:30:40 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote:
"Tracy Barber" wrote in message As to my previous post, the govt. didn't know who were spies and who weren't and couldn't take the risk. I'm sorry, Tracy, but that doesn't matter. Otherwise they might as well lock everyone up. I mean that's the only guaranteed way to get all the spies, yes? The 'downside' of a democracy is that it is, well 'democratic'. the 'upside' of a fascist state is that it is well, a fascist state. Democracies don't lock people up for what they might be. They lock people up for _actions_ that can be _proven. They dont' lock people up because of their ethnicity or colour. Ideally, that is. Sorry, but it's easy to see things in hindsight that with foresight are blinded. Let's agree to disagree about the STATE OF THINGS in 1941, not looking back on it today. Were we there? No. Tracy Barber |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
"Tracy Barber" wrote in message
... On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:30:40 GMT, "Peter D" [email protected] wrote: "Tracy Barber" wrote in message As to my previous post, the govt. didn't know who were spies and who weren't and couldn't take the risk. I'm sorry, Tracy, but that doesn't matter. Otherwise they might as well lock everyone up. I mean that's the only guaranteed way to get all the spies, yes? The 'downside' of a democracy is that it is, well 'democratic'. the 'upside' of a fascist state is that it is well, a fascist state. Democracies don't lock people up for what they might be. They lock people up for _actions_ that can be _proven. They dont' lock people up because of their ethnicity or colour. Ideally, that is. Sorry, but it's easy to see things in hindsight that with foresight are blinded. Tragically, the blindness was self-induced. And the tragedy was that the blindness ignored the very foundation of the nation. The very rights that the nation fought to so hard to secure were ignored. Much like the rights of "spies" were ignored by the British Crown. When was that? Back in the 1700s I think. It is said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it's mistakes. True. Let's agree to disagree about the STATE OF THINGS in 1941, not looking back on it today. Were we there? No. If not being there disqualifies opinion, then none of us have a right to speak. Come to think of it, that means none of us can comment on 1776 or much that followed. IOW, it's an absurb disqualifier. But, yes, we can agree that my point is the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were ignored. You can agree to disagree. After all, it is a democracy -- well, for now. :-) |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:04:04 GMT, Bob Ingraham
wrote: Amen! What is a collection of WWII stamps and covers like mine if it isn't first and foremost political? In fact, I doubt that I would be very interesting in continuing that collection if it weren't for the fascinating history, large chunks of it political, that I learn as a result of the collection. I'm trying to get a Vietnam War collection started. It seems rather political already.... Bob That is because most wars are started by politicians. Blair -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =----- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GLIMPSES OF A MYSTERY | GLIMPSES OF A MYSTERY | Books | 0 | August 29th 04 06:07 AM |
FA: CONTEMPORARY AMERICAN PHILOSOPHY - PERSONAL STATEMENTS - Two Volume Set | DuLaze | Books | 0 | June 30th 04 07:15 PM |
Ira has been served! | Ira Stein | Coins | 53 | May 8th 04 08:48 PM |
Interesting case | Ned Flanders | Coins | 1 | April 16th 04 10:34 PM |
FS: 1989 "Personal Fouls" (N.C. State Basketaball) 1st Edition Hardcover Book | J.R. Sinclair | Basketball | 0 | November 25th 03 05:31 AM |