Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil
How shameless can one be? I wonder? How dare one accuse China to play the victim card when he plays the victim card to justify the past atrocities?
|
Dare what? China simply can't see past the fact that it screwed up itself domestically and had to resort to nitpick history to justify a national rally, and still continues on without realising that it is a different era and time where mindsets are different.
What can you do? Suck a thumb and chill out man.
Quote:
Sure, innocents died in Hiroshima and Nakasaki. But they have the Imperial Japan to blame, not the Allies. It was the Imperial Japanese government who slaughtered people in their invasions. It was the Imperial Japanese government who force the woman in their occupied areas and colonies into comfort women. It was the Imperial Japanese government who experimented germ wars on humans. It was the Imperial Japanese government who encouraged people in Okinawa to commit mass suicides. Nobody f*king forced them to do any of that.
Yes, innocent people died in Hiroshima and Nakasaki, it was because the Imperial Japanese government brought it on themselves. That precisely the f**king reason why those bastard should not be worshiped in shrines.
|
大人不記小人過, 小人全杖大人扶. So China is a 大人 or 小人? That mentality simply gives detractors more ammo to use the term 小中国; so can I say that they brought that negative image upon themselves?
So why the heck are the Japanese being blamed? They are NOT the imperial Japanese of the past
anymore.
And also, what makes you think the soldiers and children had the bloody choice to be indoctrinated into fighting for imperial Japan? And how the emperor was misled by Tojo?
It is like how the Red Guard had to help enforce the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. Those people don't have a choice when getting marginalised socially would mean a bad end to the people around them.
That is the power of social pressure. Soldiers are simply tools of their leader - if the leader is such of an egomaniac, the tool shall be that of one wielded by an egomaniac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant
Debates last long not because both sides are equally valid. It just means neither side are willing to concede ground. If you think just because an argument went nowhere, meant the two sides are equal, then we have a problem. A side that refuse to concede when they have been proven wrong, doesn't mean they were not wrong. They still are wrong, they just refuse to admit it.
|
Reminds me of a saying in the workforce that goes, "If the boss doesn't admit he is wrong, he is not wrong.". From a technical debate standpoint, he/she is not wrong because there is no 100% agreement that he/she is wrong. As a participant in the issue, he is that percentage point away from a unanimous decision.
Though that doesn't mean he/she is dumb or stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Hat and Clogs
It's always the same people arguing the same points every time the thing comes up as well. Clogging up the news thread with a debate that no one is going to change their view or stand point on. It's been 69 years, let the dead rest and get on with something more productive.
|
It is only 69 years. The Northern Irish and the rest of the Britain have been bickering over the Plantation of Ulstler for 405 years, the Shia and Sunni over Mecca for 1382 years, and Jewish, Christian and Muslims over Jerusalem for approximately 3891 years.
So what is 69?