• Drusas@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    136
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    “So when we were faced with destruction as a nation after Pearl Harbor…"

    The US was never faced with destruction during World War II.

    • gramie@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 month ago

      Obviously you haven’t seen that fine documentary The Man in the High Castle.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Hey now. The threat of destruction was just as bad as the actual destruction across Europe and Asia.

    • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I mean, yes and no. Pearl harbor wasn’t the only place hit 12/7. Philipines, Guam and Wake were all hit as well

      Hong Kong and Singapore were also attacked and the empire invaded Malaysia.

      America took a sharp hit square in the face, but Britain got sent home in a body bag at the end of 1941. By Feb 1942 the UK had lost all of Malaysia, lost Hong Kong and lost Singapore. They lost 12,000 troops, the rest surrendering. Zero soldiers made it home. Out of 120,000. Australia and New Zealand were in extreme danger and the Raj was expecting assault at any moment. I’m the spam of a few months Japan had sunsetted the largest empire the world had ever seen.

      America had never been pit against such an enemy. You have to take all of WW2 into that context. Fuck in WW1 they played soccer across no-man’s-land on Christmas. The next year the Canadians had arrived and…well…I’m not saying shit about canuckistani military just that over half of the geneva convention exists because of Canada.

          • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            1 month ago

            How is loosing territories some 5.000-10.000 km away an “existential threat”? Even if they wanted to, Japan had no means of successfully invading main land US.

            The US justifies dropping the Nukes with it preventing an extraordinary loss of life if they had to stage an amphibious invasion of main land Japan. But at least the US could stage much closer to Japan, than Japan could to the US.

            In the same wake the Britains loosing their empire was not an existential threat to the US just as much as the genocide against China was not an existential threat for the US just as the Holocaust and the genocides in eastern Europe weren’t an existential threat to the US.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            Okay good point about the threat WWII Japan posed but you’re going too far in the other direction. When asked about going to war with America admiral Yamamoto said what amounts to “this is a bad idea don’t”. Now part of their failure definitely lies in poor leadership, and I can see the idea that if they’d concentrated on America instead of opening a war on three (two and a half?) fronts they might’ve made significant gains until America’s industry caught up, but they simply didn’t have the industrial base to keep the US down. The US also has very good natural defenses that you forgot to take into account. Remember: Their ships and airplanes were all handmade.

  • WatDabney@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    1 month ago

    Imagine how much better the world would be if there was just a simple process of psychological screening for would-be politicians, and psychopaths were barred from holding office.

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 month ago

    Casually arguing for breaking the taboo on using nuclear weapons.

    Forget Gaza, this is how human civilization ends.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      We have been saying that Israel is a moral and legal hazard to the entire world as it rallied its allies to throw out all resemblance of a rule based international order recognizing such basic human rights like not being slaughtered and having access to basic food, water and medicine.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    This should disqualify him from ever holding office again. I know it won’t, but it should.

  • MyPornViewingAccount@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 month ago

    Ya know, if post Civil War reconstruction had actually happened and we’d de-confederated the South like we de-nazi’d Germany and Japan the GOP wouldnt exist today.

    • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Well, kinda, since the parties swapped roles in the Southern Strategy as a response to the civil rights movements, back then the democrats were the overtly racist ones. So we could assume the GOP would still exist but it would look nothing like the “modern” (hah) version.

      • MyPornViewingAccount@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yes, the nuance of the party swap in the 60s is lost on most people.

        Thats how my ultra-maga relatives get to prpudly post on FB how theyre the party of Lincoln and in the very next post proclaim their hatred anything farther left than the taliban.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          “We’re the party of Lincoln, that’s why everything needs to be named after a Confederate general. State’s rights.”

    • freagle
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      We didn’t de-nazify Germany. We put Nazi officers in charge of NATO and we joined the Catholic Church in protecting Nazis and distributing them all over the world.

    • Kashif Shah@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      And we’d probably have actual human rights laws in America, instead of means-tested, drug-tested government aid.

      • freagle
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        Probably not. The North didn’t see enslaved people through some sort of egalitarian lens. They made their money financializing the slave trade.

        • Kashif Shah@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Fair point. I wonder what would have happened if they’d have amended the constitution so that states could actually secede, instead of having a war. I guess eventually international war instead of civil war?

          • freagle
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            It would have immediately created conflict over natural resources. There was no alternative. They had to unify and they had to get the capitalists on both sides into an alliance in order to proceed.

            • Kashif Shah@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              So, given that global society has advanced 150 years or so, what lessons can we take away from Brexit, USSR, Chechoslovakia, etc. on how to safely split a country or governmental organization?

              • freagle
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 month ago

                Give a nation of people their own state on their native land. That’s what the USSR did when it was founded. They worked to give every nation of people’s their own government and self-determination, they gave them all the right to secede, they elevated their national heritages

                The USA, however, is a colony that went rogue. It’s people are not a nation - there are many nations present. The nations that were here before the Europeans arrived need to be given full sovereignty, the American descendants of slaves are a nation unto themselves and they need the right to self-determination. The many persons of the various European nations need to lose their sovereignty in this place. That national self-determination is how it becomes sustainable and effective. Letting colonists run their little fascist fiefdoms is not and will never be a solution.

  • officermike@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 month ago

    Ahh yes, dropping nuclear weapons right next door, risking fallout in your own territory and pissing off every country around you, as well as all your allies. Why not?

    • FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      How dare you question the blinding brilliance that is Lindsey? I’m sure his masterplan accounts for things like inciting a global nuclear war with some clever solution that isn’t just waiting it out in a congressional bunker with all his cowardly friends while we all die horribly, right?

  • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 month ago

    Israel wouldn’t do that. They want to give the beachfront property to American politicians as a “gift that’s totally not a bribe”

  • blazera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    1 month ago

    “I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination."

    Only thing this guy deserves to hear for the rest of his life.

  • Takios@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    How is it even legal to call for the murder of so many people using one of the most atrocious weapons humanity has invented…but if one were to suggest to apply a guillotine to this person for doing so, they would be in severe legal trouble?

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Same way you can say guillotine the rich but not kill Jeffy Bezos

      One is seen as more direct, even though the other includes more people

    • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      You can suggest he deserves a lot of things - like you can a pedo. What you can’t do is say you’re going to do it yourself.

  • gentooer@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I’m from in Belgium, and have colleagues from countries from both sides of the second world war. The carpet bombing of cities is still talked about every now and then. It’s still remembered as one of the worst tragedies during that war (apart from the obvious), and the scars it left in many family trees still pain the people to this day.

    Hearing stories from Gaza and the Donbas always remind me of the stories I used to hear from my grandfather, and I believed we left those war tactics behind in the last century. It’s absolutely insane hearing an allied country to ours debating using those tactics again.

  • notannpc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m shocked! Who could have guessed this slimy invertebrate would have zero regard for anyone but himself!?

    It’s wild that if anyone were to suggest killing Lindsey Graham they would probably be arrested and called a terrorist. But he can just casually advocate for nuking a densely populated area that is inhabited mostly by civilians and a bunch of brain dead morons will still vote for him.

  • Fisk400@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 month ago

    So did we ever find out if Biden can use seal team six to kill political opponents?