…so they could capture the Philippines unimpeded. That is not “hoping for peace”. That is hoping for an easier war.

Lol, they invaded the Philippines the same day they bombed pearl harbor… Like I said, they wanted to take the US out in one fatal blow and make it to where the US didn’t have the ability or the motivation for a pacific campaign.

This isn’t even up for debate, it’s well documented history. "Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto recognized Japan’s industrial inferiority to the U.S. and knew that a prolonged conflict would lead to defeat. The surprise attack was intended to deliver such a heavy blow that the U.S. would sue for peace, avoiding a war they couldn’t win. "

You could say that. It would be more accurate to say the venn diagram of the overlap is a circle. It’s weird that you oppose fighting one and not the other. What is the difference you’re concerned with? Do you just not like the word “fascism”, and are ok with governments that are fascist in all but name?

Idk…maybe it’s the fact that the modern political history of the Middle East and 1930s Europe are different? Maybe it’s that I disagree with how the second gulf war was conducted and justified. Maybe our history of supporting and arming both Iraq and Iran may add some nuance to the scenarios?

Do you just not like the word “fascism”, and are ok with governments that are fascist in all but name?

Fascism does not just mean authoritarianism.

More like pan Sunni supremacy. Are you forgetting he gassed an entire region trying to genocide an ethnic minority in his own country?

The majority of Iraq is Shia… He is Sunni and elevated the Sunni minority, however his attacks against Kurds were because Kurds, like Persians are not Arabic. Again, the history of the middle East is complicated and conflict can be raised from anything from tribalism, nationalism, ethnic conflict, economics, or secretarial violence.

Hussein was about as socialist as the National Socialists I guess.

It’s like you are allergic to nuance…

The Nazi party was not socialist, the only reason it has socialism in the name is because socialism was so popular in Germany in the 20s and 30s that you couldn’t get on the ballot without giving it the nod. The Nazi government only nationalized resources and existing businesses so they could then privatize it to someone with in the party as a favour.

The baathis party had a state planned economy. According to Phebe Marr, Saddam “provided widespread health, education, and social benefits that went well beyond those of any previous regime”.[4] Saddam implemented land reform, made hospitals and education free, doubled the number of students in schools and developed infrastructure such as roads, access to electricity and water, in addition to increasing life expectancy and decreasing child mortality.[4]

While he was literally crazy, and an authoritarian, he was still a socialist.

Chamberlain gave the UK time to arm so they didn’t get blitzkrieged into extinction.

Lol, this is the most ahistorical take on Chamberlain ever… It ignores his attitude towards appeasement that he held since the beginning of his tenure. “Chamberlain sought to conciliate Germany and make the Nazi state a partner in a stable Europe.[85] He believed Germany could be satisfied by the restoration of some of its colonies, and during the Rhineland crisis of March 1936 he had stated that “if we were in sight of an all-round settlement the British government ought to consider the question” of restoration of colonies.[86]”

Also, how exactly would Germany be “blitzkrieg” Britain while invading the rest of Europe?

All of your takes are historically inaccurate and based solely on generalizing to the point of indistinction.

Oh, ok. That must be why the Japanese attacked the US, right? Because they were hoping for peace.

Literally yes. The Japanese were trying to wipe the entire Pacific fleet out with one punch, making it too costly for the Americans to enter the war. They were hoping that America would cut their losses and settle for a negotiated peace that allowed the Japanese to keep their Pacific holdings.

Saddam Hussein was just as racist, nationalist, authoritarian, expansionist, and cruel as Benito Mussolini. So what exactly is the difference?

Saddam Hussein was just as racist, nationalist, authoritarian, expansionist, and cruel as Benito Mussolini. So what exactly is the difference?

The devil is in the details… Fascism may have some overlaps with the Baathis party, mostly with their authoritarianism. But it’s pretty distinct from it considering Baathism revolves around pan Arabic unity and socialism.

You sound like a republican, circa 2003

Lol, and you sound like Neville Chamberlain circa 1930’s.

Lend lease was in full swing, and they were sanctioning the imperial Japanese.

Not really… Sanctions against Japan and Lend and lease were approved the same year we entered the war.

there was a glimmer of hope at the time that the problem could be resolved with political pressure.

I mean, that’s what both the Japanese and the Nazi were hoping for. That the rest of the world would settle for peace and allow them to keep their spoils.

Putting boots on the ground without trying anything else first is Bush doctrine level bullshit.

And when has appeasing fascist with political discourse ever worked? There’s a difference between standing up to literal fascist invading allies, and Bush’s “war on terror”, trying to conflate the two is pathetic.

The hyper imperialism kinda kicked off before ww2, it was kinda the reason we got involved in the first place.

Goodish news… You wouldn’t be eating the poop. It’d be thrown in a blender until it reached an enema appropriate viscosity.

You have plenty of non-profit newspapers. ProPublica. The Guardian. The Colorado Sun. The Salt Lake Tribune. Mother Jones. Le Devoir. La Presse. Mediapart

And how much of the market do these networks control? Just because there are non profits available doesn’t negate their claim.

Also, if a journalist writes total bullshit, they lose their job. It’s career suicide. Their articles follow them for their entire career. So they have to be careful.

Depending on what network they are submitting their work to… It’s not like “journalists” on Fox News are being shamed for submitting fake stories.

Yeah, give me the “I want to see your manager” in the front and “I am the fire starter” in the back. Thanks.

They were, but when evaluated against their original claim its pretty apparent they were doing it to establish a whataboutism.

It’s because he’s attempting to utilize the fact that America was and potentially still is an ethno-state to lessen the culpability of the Israeli ethno-state.

While modern America uses systemic racism to establish an ethnic hierarchy, unlike Israel it doesn’t expressly by law prohibit the movement or upward mobility of different ethnicities. Even if it did, that fact would not lessen the culpability of another state doing the same.

Context and nuance is important.

For the vast majority of its history absolutely. It wasn’t until the civil rights movement where that was even somewhat debatable.

considering Israel is more ethnically diverse

Apartheid South Africa was ethnically diverse… Still an ethno-state.

Ethno-states aren’t defined as lacking diversity, they are defined by an ethnic creating and maintaining a dominant hierarchy of that diversity.

Gosh why do people hate the Jews so much. 🫤

The problem with ethno-states is that it makes it super easy for people like yourself to conflate ethnicity with nationality.

People don’t hate the Jews, people hate ethno-states who are currently committing a genocide. Many of these people who hate the state of Israel for their genocide are Jews themselves.

Yeah… No. I’ve posted on that sub not knowing the community rules and had a mod thank me for my insight and then politely inform me of the rules.

You know what I did…? I apologized for not reading the rules before posting and then took my leave. It’s perfectly fine if you’re not a whiny little dweeb about it. People deserve private spaces, especially considering I don’t own or contribute to the cost of that server space.

It’s so weird seeing people making poor interpretations of another ethnicity’s culture their entire identity. I wonder if there are weirdos in India rocking lederhosen or milkmaid outfits at random music festivals and ranting to strangers about Calvinism?

Worm no eat dirt, worm make dirt.

This is just the sunk cost fallacy though. You can inflate the paper value of assets by playing games like this, but the bill always comes due in the end. Yes, companies that do this can juice their books a bit in the short term, but they’re harming themselves in the long term.

I mean… That’s kinda what late stage capitalism is all about, squeezing blood from stones on a quarterly basis.

You could create a subsidiary and have that company rent out some of your floor space for absurdly high rates. But you’re ultimately just robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Reminds me of the twin towers. One of the reasons it was such a catastrophe is because the towers were such a money sink that the city of New York subsidized the development by relocating a ton of government offices to there.

Fuck, these companies might actually be violating the law. Deliberately choosing unproductive business practices just to cook your real estate books is something Enron would do.

Pretty much the standard quo nowadays…why invest in things like labour when you can just inflate the worth of assets for free? Capitalism is about reducing cost while simulating growth, there is no reason to actually invest in the company if you can simulate investment enough to make share price go up.

Maybe if capitalism actually relied on competition for growth as capitalists often claim, however it’s pretty easy to recognize that corporations often work together to create their own demand.

You’re forgetting the whole…" I invested entirely too much in corporate real estate".

When there’s instability in the market a lot of fortune 500 corporations will start investing in corporate real estate as a “safe bet” to hedge more risky investments.

Skyscrapers and large office spaces are on paper horrible investments and have an awful time filling enough vacancies to offset their upkeep. The only thing that makes them a “safe” investment is that every company uses them as a way to bank equity. If those same companies pulled the rug from under themselves they would all lose that safe equity piggy bank.

Lol, right?

My dad was in the Air Force so we moved all over the place, but whenever we were stationed in the South in the 90’s I would often be the first Asian person to ever go to that school.

Doesn’t really mean a whole bunch if the “normal levels” of empathy are inadequate to create a humane society.