Using the term Paki

Tony EH

Davelarson wrote: »

Look mate I get that your wife is Japanese and you're fond of them, but you sound seriously naive. The Japanese committed atrocities on a scale that would make your blood chill. Have you read about the Rape of Nanking, Unit 731, the mistreatment of Allied POWs, the enormous number of women forced into sexual slavery to serve the Japanese Army? The Japanese viewed other Asians as inferior and allied themselves with the Nazis. Do Japanese school kids even learn these things?

Saying that people were brainwashed is not an excuse. These regimes could only have existed with the support of the civilian population. As for the Kagoshima museum: for every pacifist or subversive there was a hundred who eagerly sought victory and everything that would have followed in the event of victory.

Do other nations, other than Germany, shove their past excesses down their children's throats?

Does Russia? Does China? Does America? Does Britain?

Ad nauseum...

Go to Japan. You might be surprised what people know about their history over there.

old hippy

Davelarson wrote: »

Look mate I get that your wife is Japanese and you're fond of them, but you sound seriously naive. The Japanese committed atrocities on a scale that would make your blood chill. Have you read about the Rape of Nanking, Unit 731, the mistreatment of Allied POWs, the enormous number of women forced into sexual slavery to serve the Japanese Army? The Japanese viewed other Asians as inferior and allied themselves with the Nazis. Do Japanese school kids even learn these things?

Saying that people were brainwashed is not an excuse. These regimes could only have existed with the support of the civilian population. As for the Kagoshima museum: for every pacifist or subversive there was a hundred who eagerly sought victory and everything that would have followed in the event of victory.

First of all, I'm not your "mate". Secondly, I've spent a good deal of my life immersed in Japanese culture and history. I know all about the horrors of the past. So does my wife and her family.

It still doesn't give you carte blanche to be a racist. Or crow over the dropping of atomic bombs on civillians.

old hippy

Davelarson wrote: »

Ha ah ah ah ha. Are you for real, seriously? You think the Japanese are victims?? When did they receive abuse? After launching a sneak attack on America? After committing unspeakable atrocities in China and elsewhere? If people feel aggrieved against them I can assure you there are legitimate historical reasons. Japan was a formidable empire for centuries, they're still an economic superpower. Read a history book and wise up.

If you think racism is only perpetrated by whites you are laughably naive.

Nobody is saying racism is only perpetrated by whites. That's a myth which people like you like to employ when practising your own brand of hatred.

Perhaps you should do a bit of research about Japan before shooting your mouth off here. Japan hasn't been formidable for a long, long time. Their economy has been on the down for the last 20 years.

FTA69

Maruney wrote: »

Dub is fine as most are traditionally white
Paddy is fine as most are traditionally white
Cracker/vanilla is fine as it refers to white people

Paddy isn't fine. Racism and xenophobia aren't limited to issues of skin colour. It's no better to abuse someone who's white than someone who isn't.

chopper6

old hippy wrote: »

First of all, I'm not your "mate". Secondly, I've spent a good deal of my life immersed in Japanese culture and history. I know all about the horrors of the past. So does my wife and her family.

It still doesn't give you carte blanche to be a racist. Or crow over the dropping of atomic bombs on civillians.

Bully for you knowing so much about japan...it's really very impressive.

However where did the poster indicate that he was racist?

He pointed out that the japanese commited acts of genocide and horrific war crimes but at no stage did he say that he hated them for it.

Maybe it's only a despicable act if it's perpetrated by white people?

old hippy

chopper6 wrote: »

Bully for you knowing so much about japan...it's really very impressive.

However where did the poster indicate that he was racist?

He pointed out that the japanese commited acts of genocide and horrific war crimes but at no stage did he say that he hated them for it.

Maybe it's only a despicable act if it's perpetrated by white people?

He repeatedly used the racial slur (not repeating it) even when told it's offensive. He crowed about the Japanese getting what they deserved.

Yes, bully for me. The poster made out I knew nothing about Japan, so I told him otherwise.

And I've hilighted your tired mantra that right wingers like to trot out when they're losing the argument. Not so impressive mantra, is it?

chopper6

old hippy wrote: »

And I've hilighted your tired mantra that right wingers like to trot out when they're losing the argument. Not so impressive mantra, is it?

There you go again....where do you get this idea that everybody is a right-winger?

And i hope to **** you're not calling me a right winger(whatever that is)...you're using your allegedly PC username to insult people.

Davelarson

chopper6 wrote: »

Bully for you knowing so much about japan...it's really very impressive.

However where did the poster indicate that he was racist?

He pointed out that the japanese commited acts of genocide and horrific war crimes but at no stage did he say that he hated them for it.

Maybe it's only a despicable act if it's perpetrated by white people?

I didn't say anything racist. I don't hate the Japanese or any people. But for people like old hippy the standard response to an opinion they don't like is 'you're racist!' It the same as: criticize the Israeli government you're anti-semitic, criticize feminism, you're misogynistic. Its how they shut down dissent. The irony is that they bang on about how important freedom and equality is. Free speech is great, until someone disagrees with you

Santa Cruz

Davelarson wrote: »

Fair enough but I suspect the average Chinese person would say something like 'who the hell are you to say that to me, you don't know anything my country's history' especially as its quite possible that that person's grand parents were raped and murdered by the Japanese Army.

All 1.2 billion of them?

Davelarson

Nodin wrote: »

That's not how I'd express it, but yes, I'd have no problem pointing out the hole in the logic.

Oh God I can imagine it now. Some spazzy white guy waddling up to angry Chinese people and saying 'um excuse me, but you can't say that.' You'd look a right tool and would soon be put in your place.

Davelarson

old hippy wrote: »

First of all, I'm not your "mate". Secondly, I've spent a good deal of my life immersed in Japanese culture and history. I know all about the horrors of the past. So does my wife and her family.

It still doesn't give you carte blanche to be a racist. Or crow over the dropping of atomic bombs on civillians.

Mate are you upset? The Japanese waged a war of conquest. The population supported the regime and paid the price. I believe America was justified in using the bomb because it saved more lives in the long run and (more importantly) they were attacked first. As much as you would disagree, expressing these opinions does not make me a racist.

Or do you somehow think Japan was fighting a defensive war? Did they gloss over WWII in equality school?

old hippy

Davelarson wrote: »

Mate are you upset? The Japanese waged a war of conquest. The population supported the regime and paid the price. I believe America was justified in using the bomb because it saved more lives in the long run and (more importantly) they were attacked first. As much as you would disagree, expressing these opinions does not make me a racist.

Or do you somehow think Japan was fighting a defensive war? Did they gloss over WWII in equality school?

I'm tired of dealing with people slamming the Japanese. I'm tired of having to explain why the term you used is racist. I've been doing it for far too many years. I guess the ignorance is in part due to isolation because only an isolated and wilfully ignorant person would use the term & then try to justify his or her ignorance with a potted history lesson.

The US were not justified in using the A bombs. It was one of their experiments, just like Agent Orange and napalm some years later not so far away from Japan. And I say this as someone who's grandad fought in the Pacific War against Imperial Japan.

Now, "mate", since you won't apologise for using that offensive term earlier, I'm going to leave you to your myopic views and head off before I say something that will result in one of us being banned.

Nodin

Davelarson wrote: »

I didn't say anything racist. I don't hate the Japanese or any people. But for people like old hippy the standard response to an opinion they don't like is 'you're racist!' It the same as: criticize the Israeli government you're anti-semitic, criticize feminism, you're misogynistic. Its how they shut down dissent. The irony is that they bang on about how important freedom and equality is. Free speech is great, until someone disagrees with you

You never mentioned criticising governments, you mentioned racism against people full stop. Don't try shifting the goalposts now.

Tony EH

Davelarson wrote: »

The Japanese waged a war of conquest.

Most wars are wars of conquest.

In terms of war, the Japanese have been rather tame considering the 1000's of years worth of war that history has to offer. Yet some people in the west want to continually bring up the same few years as a stick to beat them with. It's a convenient Orwellian two minutes of hate.

Davelarson wrote: »

The population supported the regime and paid the price.

The "population" didn't really have that much of a choice did they? When you're living under a military dictatorship, fudal system, junta, absolutist monarchy, totalitarian state, etc...you don't get to vote out the guys you don't like.

In addition, the war was carried out many, many miles from the home islands. As far as the Japanese at home were concerned, it could well have been on the moon, for all they knew.

Facbook and Twitter didn't exist in 1940's.

Davelarson wrote: »

I believe America was justified in using the bomb because it saved more lives in the long run and (more importantly) they were attacked first.

You clearly know nothing about the situation.

Davelarson wrote: »

Or do you somehow think Japan was fighting a defensive war? Did they gloss over WWII in equality school?

There are many reasons why Japan went to war. Perhaps you should read about some of them before spouting any more.

You really have a bug up your arse about the Japanese.

Davelarson

old hippy wrote: »

I'm tired of dealing with people slamming the Japanese. I'm tired of having to explain why the term you used is racist. I've been doing it for far too many years. I guess the ignorance is in part due to isolation because only an isolated and wilfully ignorant person would use the term & then try to justify his or her ignorance with a potted history lesson.

The US were not justified in using the A bombs. It was one of their experiments, just like Agent Orange and napalm some years later not so far away from Japan. And I say this as someone who's grandad fought in the Pacific War against Imperial Japan.

Now, "mate", since you won't apologise for using that offensive term earlier, I'm going to leave you to your myopic views and head off before I say something that will result in one of us being banned.

Sound mate we'll agree to disagree so. I'll sure we'll meet again in the future.

Davelarson

Tony EH wrote: »

Most wars are wars of conquest.

In terms of war, the Japanese have been rather tame considering the 1000's of years worth of war that history has to offer. Yet some people in the west want to continually bring up the same few years as a stick to beat them with. It's a convenient Orwellian two minutes of hate.



The "population" didn't really have that much of a choice did they? When you're living under a military dictatorship, fudal system, junta, absolutist monarchy, totalitarian state, etc...you don't get to vote out the guys you don't like.

In addition, the war was carried out many, many miles from the home islands. As far as the Japanese at home were concerned, it could well have been on the moon, for all they knew.

Facbook and Twitter didn't exist in 1940's.



You clearly know nothing about the situation.



There are many reasons why Japan went to war. Perhaps you should read about some of them before spouting any more.

You really have a bug up your arse about the Japanese.

I use the Japanese as an example because earlier a poster stated he believed only white people could perpetuate racism. This is nonsense of course and the Japanese were the first example to pop into my head.

Not everything is the fault of evil old whitey. I reject labels like 'white privilege' 'male privilege' as pc nonsense.

And if I'm wrong about the atomic bomb then let me hear you opinion. How should the Americans have concluded the war? An invasion of the Japanese home islands would have resulted in catastrophic losses on both sides.

chopper6

[QUOTE=old hippy;87521606]I'm tired of dealing with people slamming the Japanese. I'm tired of having to explain why the term you used is racist. I've been doing it for far too many years. I guess the ignorance is in part due to isolation because only an isolated and wilfully ignorant person would use the term & then try to justify his or her ignorance with a potted history lesson.

The US were not justified in using the A bombs. It was one of their experiments, just like Agent Orange and napalm some years later not so far away from Japan. And I say this as someone who's grandad fought in the Pacific War against Imperial Japan.

Now, "mate", since you won't apologise for using that offensive term earlier, I'm going to leave you to your myopic views and head off before I say something that will result in one of us being banned.[/QUOTE]


You have no problem slamming the Irish though..If people want to dislike a country or it's inhabitants it's thier choice..it is NOT racism though....racism is prejudice against a race *NOT* a country.

Maltese people hate Italians...are they being racist?

English and French people profess to hate each other...is it racism?

No it's not,it's the sort of thing that's being going on for millenia...a mutual distrust of "foreigners" and a common delusion about thier own importance.

You need to get off your high horse and stop insulting people..in my opinion you're the one with myopic views and you've been fighting dirty in defense of them.

Xeyn

chopper6 wrote: »

You have no problem slamming the Irish though..If people want to dislike a country or it's inhabitants it's thier choice..it is NOT racism though....racism is prejudice against a race *NOT* a country.

Maltese people hate Italians...are they being racist?

English and French people profess to hate each other...is it racism?

No it's not,it's the sort of thing that's being going on for millenia...a mutual distrust of "foreigners" and a common delusion about thier own importance.

You need to get off your high horse and stop insulting people..in my opinion you're the one with myopic views and you've been fighting dirty in defense of them.

Bigotry is not any better than racism - you sound like youre attempting to justify bigotry.

chopper6

Xeyn wrote: »

Bigotry is not any better than racism - you sound like youre attempting to justify bigotry.

No,i'm not trying to justify anything,i'm saying is it possible to have a discussion without certain sorts of people wildly casting about with accuasations of racism,bigotry and hatred?

I have a theory...the sorts of (white) people who pitch in with this sort of thing actually feel superior to the people they're "defending"...like they're The Great White Bossman speaking up for the poor,slightly stupid foreigners.

It's a way of purging thier own guilty soul..."If i accuse people of racism it'll assuage my own guilt and superiority".

And knowing that irish people dislike being perceived as racist they equally know there's no real come back to such an accusation.

Although i've heard some *truely* racist,bigoted people rant and rave and foam at the mouth in real life,the meek Hippies walk on by with thier heads bowed in shame and fear.

Xeyn

When someone calls someone out for essentially using bigot terminology and you then go to efforts stating how they are not racists but fail to address how its bigoted instead it does come across as you trying to justify the earlier bigoted ideology.

Thats an interesting theory by the way. Its not really based in reality or any reality I know, but its interesting none the less.

BillyMitchel

Is it coz I is black?

chopper6

Xeyn wrote: »

When someone calls someone out for essentially using bigot terminology and you then go to efforts stating how they are not racists but fail to address how its bigoted instead it does come across as you trying to justify the earlier bigoted ideology.

.

Do you want a loan of a thesaurus?

Tony EH

Davelarson wrote: »

I use the Japanese as an example because earlier a poster stated he believed only white people could perpetuate racism. This is nonsense of course and the Japanese were the first example to pop into my head.

Not everything is the fault of evil old whitey. I reject labels like 'white privilege' 'male privilege' as pc nonsense.

And if I'm wrong about the atomic bomb then let me hear you opinion. How should the Americans have concluded the war? An invasion of the Japanese home islands would have resulted in catastrophic losses on both sides.

Unfortunately, you're using all the old hoary cliches re: Japan and they aren't coming across too well.

As for how the Americans should have concluded the war. How about peacefully? The Home islands were completely blockaded, no shipping got in or out with Allied interference. Production on everything was down to an absolute minimum. Every single piece of radio traffic was monitored, to such an extent that the Americans knew, through the Purple decrypts, that the Japanese were looking for a way to sue for peace. The only bone of contention was how the Emperor was going to be treated after the war had ended. As it was, the Allies had no intention of doing anything with Hirohito, or even doing anything with the home islands, which the Japanese would have found very favourable indeed, as there was no illusions amongst the Japanese cabinet on where the war was going.

Yet, there was no indication of these intentions clarified to the Japanese at Potsdam or any time there after.

The reason being, of course, that the war would end without recourse to the bomb.

The Americans used their new weapon on an untested target, during a wartime situation, knowing full well that the war was at an end and the results yielded from such a target would be (and was) indispensable in the post war period.

In addition, it sent out a very strong message to the Russians, who the Americans were lining up in their sights. Their usefulness as allies had run it's course and it was back to old status of enemy for them.

Regardless of where one stands on the use of the Atomic bomb in 1945, I can guarantee you this...if the Japanese or the Germans had used the weapon, no matter at what time-frame or how desperate they were, it most definitely would have been classed as a "war crime."

After the war the Americans admitted that Nation was finished and in all probability, could have held out to November at best.

There was no need to use the weapon at all and certainly no "justification".

Xeyn

chopper6 wrote: »

Do you want a loan of a thesaurus?

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Davelarson

Tony EH wrote: »

Unfortunately, you're using all the old hoary cliches re: Japan and they aren't coming across too well.

As for how the Americans should have concluded the war. How about peacefully? The Home islands were completely blockaded, no shipping got in or out with Allied interference. Production on everything was down to an absolute minimum. Every single piece of radio traffic was monitored, to such an extent that the Americans knew, through the Purple decrypts, that the Japanese were looking for a way to sue for peace. The only bone of contention was how the Emperor was going to be treated after the war had ended. As it was, the Allies had no intention of doing anything with Hirohito, or even doing anything with the home islands, which the Japanese would have found very favourable indeed, as there was no illusions amongst the Japanese cabinet on where the war was going.

Yet, there was no indication of these intentions clarified to the Japanese at Potsdam or any time there after.

The reason being, of course, that the war would end without recourse to the bomb.

The Americans used their new weapon on an untested target, during a wartime situation, knowing full well that the war was at an end and the results yielded from such a target would be (and was) indispensable in the post war period.

In addition, it sent out a very strong message to the Russians, who the Americans were lining up in their sights. Their usefulness as allies had run it's course and it was back to old status of enemy for them.

Regardless of where one stands on the use of the Atomic bomb in 1945, I can guarantee you this...if the Japanese or the Germans had used the weapon, no matter at what time-frame or how desperate they were, it most definitely would have been classed as a "war crime."

After the war the Americans admitted that Nation was finished and in all probability, could have held out to November at best.

There was no need to use the weapon at all and certainly no "justification".

And you think the Japanese would just have surrendered? Your analysis of 'guys war is bad, why didn't the Americans just make the Japanese surrender peacefully? is pretty infantile. Here's a tip: you have to analysis historical events in context of the times. Do you think the American people would have been happy to allow the enemy to come to peaceful terms? After Pearl Harbour, losing thousands of men, and spending billions of dollars on the war? And if the Japanese or Nazis used the bomb it would have been a war crime for two very important reasons: they were evil regimes and they started the war.

Tony EH

No, what you have just written is infantile.

Davelarson

Tony EH wrote: »

No, what you have just written is infantile.

How so?

Davelarson

old hippy wrote: »

I'm tired of dealing with people slamming the Japanese. I'm tired of having to explain why the term you used is racist. I've been doing it for far too many years. I guess the ignorance is in part due to isolation because only an isolated and wilfully ignorant person would use the term & then try to justify his or her ignorance with a potted history lesson.

The US were not justified in using the A bombs. It was one of their experiments, just like Agent Orange and napalm some years later not so far away from Japan. And I say this as someone who's grandad fought in the Pacific War against Imperial Japan.

Now, "mate", since you won't apologise for using that offensive term earlier, I'm going to leave you to your myopic views and head off before I say something that will result in one of us being banned.

One last thing. I saw your post on the abortion thread where you dismissed Christianity as 'a load of old fairy tales.' So its ok to insult Christians? I can imagine your outrage if I said something similar about Islam or Buddhism. What if I dismiss Shinto as a load of nonsense? Despite all your moralising you're no better than the rest of us.

Congratulations on exposing yourself as a hypocrite mate.

Reekwind

Davelarson wrote: »

How so?

Arguing that a war crime only becomes a war crime when an "evil regime" does it is playground logic of the most ridiculous order

And that's one example from your posts. I could have picked many more

Nodin

Davelarson wrote: »

One last thing. I saw your post on the abortion thread where you dismissed Christianity as 'a load of old fairy tales.' So its ok to insult Christians? .......

He didn't insult Christians, he dismissed their beliefs. Rather a different thing.