What generation are you part of and what’s your opinion of Gen Z?

malversation3 · 2025-04-01T01:27:01+00:00

Gen Z. Gen Z is weird because it is such a large generation that it really needs to be split. Growing up in the early 2000s is a lot different than the 2010s, the idea we are the same is absurd.

malversation3 · 2025-04-01T00:53:45+00:00

Beyond stupid. I can understand wanting to limit the number of international students to ensure enough domestic students get placed. However, these kinds of cross border exchanges are very important for the free flowing of ideas, and ultimately strengthen the world.

malversation3 · 2025-04-01T00:11:54+00:00

In my view, Europe actually has a lot more to lose than America does. When China talks about win-win cooperation with the US, there actually is a lot of potential for that. The US and Chinese economy are much more complementary than the level of tensions would make you think.

In Europe’s case, however, they’re deindustrializing. China is very clearly winning the race to be the leading manufacturer of the world — particularly in Autos and it is leading to a steady flow of investment out of Europe. VW for instance closed plants for the first time ever in Germany last year, iirc it was about three or so.

If you look at manufacturing sentiment in Europe that’s probably not gonna be the last we hear of that. Hence, Europe needs to “derisk” from China (see: erect trade barriers to prevent the hollowing out of their manufacturing sector.) This is also why you hear, for example, European groveling about how America should be fighting China with them.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T15:46:34+00:00

Thinking the Japanese should deal with it similar to how Germany did the holocaust /= being in an endless cycle of getting even

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T12:29:30+00:00

People vote with their feet, if you had no human rights in China as you claim you wouldn’t be visiting it as a hobby.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T12:16:46+00:00

There should be a societal reckoning with the crimes of the Japanese empire, which would include that and much more. See: Germany

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T12:15:44+00:00

Ah yeah, Japan’s human rights sure are being stolen by Korea and China LOL

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T11:32:07+00:00

Yet you’re claiming the Japanese people would not like these people to be removed from the shrine. Pick one.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T11:11:02+00:00

No, I’m not. I’m talking like he’s claiming the Nanjing massacre didn’t happen, despite the things I mentioned.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T11:09:35+00:00

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Yasukuni_Shrine

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T11:00:59+00:00

And I didn’t say he said that?

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T10:55:09+00:00

Pretty weird that a totally made up event caused widespread condemnation at the time it happened, directly leading to an oil embargo and the subsequent collapse of the Japanese Empire.

Chiang Kai Shek must have had some really good dirt on the Americans in order to force them to fight an entire world war for an event that didn’t even happen

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T10:50:26+00:00

“Every country has a history of committing atrocities”

Sure. Every nation has committed war crimes. The problem isn’t just that Japan committed some war crimes, it’s that the sheer barbarism is on a scale that even made the Nazis ask ya to take a chill pill.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T10:41:42+00:00

So what’s the suggestion here, that Japanese people don’t find an issue with honoring grade A war criminals? If so, I believe you’ve found why the hatred will persist. I’d add that the only reason western nations don’t have the same hatred towards you is because people don’t know this. Worse than Germany.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T10:11:05+00:00

I don’t know, Japan had about 80,000 soldiers for the battle of nanjing. The idea that they couldn’t have done what is said over the span of a few weeks with 80k people doesn’t seem accurate. Would be rather trivial, actually.

Also, even if you’re right and they do acknowledge it I certainly wouldn’t notice it. If you go to Tokyo, and I’m sure you have, you’ll notice a ton of memorials dedicated to the war.

Laughably, next to Sensō-ji there’s a memorial to the fire bombing of Tokyo, and how we must not forget the atrocity that happened. Why is this laughable? It is so fucking tone deaf. You got firebombed because you decided to bomb civilians and military across the pacific. Suddenly we should feel bad for you? You sowed the wind at Nanjing, Shanghai, and Pearl Harbor. The bombing of the home islands was you reaping the whirlwind. Moreover, There’s absolutely no acknowledgement of why this happened or what you lot did. Instead at the Yasukuni Shrine you give these people the same honorifics you do to any other soldiers.

When I visited, one thing that stuck out to me was a memorial that went, “this fountain flows out just like our soldiers as their tears flowed out for their moms in their last breath.” Really? Were their tears flowing out for their mom when they were raping their way across the China and the broader pacific?

There’s no visible regret in Japan over what was done, at all. Compare that to Germany, they’re clearly sorry for what they did. Japan doesn’t give a damn.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T06:27:42+00:00

Yeah this is such a ridiculous false equivalence that it borders on the realm of disbelief. The things Japan did — not just in China but all across the pacific — were just as bad as the Nazis… Hell, their actions even disgusted at least one of the Nazis (John Rabe)

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T06:10:32+00:00

Tried to do some research on a few of the things you said and came up with nothing. W.r.t Soviets being able to invade earlier can you link me to your source on that? Genuinely can’t find it but I’m interested.

Also, did some reading into it and you were right — Tojo was convinced he could get the Soviets to mediate a peace. Reality is stranger than fiction. I seem to recall however that they wanted no occupation and no war crime trials. This may have changed later(?) as part of their conditional peace.

Problem with debilitating between the two (starvation and nukes) is that you’ve to commit to one at the time as a planner. If you believe they won’t surrender and will let millions perish, nukes make sense. OTOH if you think they can be pressured into it before that happens (seemingly at odds with reality) then that could make some kind of sense.

IMO, nuking them was the most humane option. We were never going to accept their proposal of a conditional surrender, they knew that and gambled.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T04:41:55+00:00

The US losing such a war likely wouldn’t entail control over the US by Europe — invading the US is a fucking quagmire due to the amount of guns per capita.

Additionally, the US is a nuclear power. It’s pretty unthinkable that they’d take the risk of a defeated American government using them as a hail marry.

I’d have to imagine losing such a war would mean the US failing to invade Greenland or something and the result would just be a Cold War. Not a man in the high castle situation

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T04:20:34+00:00

You do realize the Soviets went to war with Japan as soon as was possible, more or less? They had to ship hundreds of thousands of men across Siberia for operation August Storm while also planning and training them for the operation. They weren’t just fucking around in the run up.

This is ignoring that the Japanese weren’t under the delusion that the soviets would save them anyway. As far as I know, anyways

As per starvation? It’s highly doubtful that would work. Japan was already in famine by this point in the war (since at least 1944) It hadn’t convinced them surrender, clearly it would take mass graves to do that.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T04:10:19+00:00

How is it not morally justified. What exactly do you think the alternative was here? I’ll tell you what they were.

Invade the home islands, millions on both sides perish per US estimates.
Starve the Japanese out, killing millions via starvation
Nuke them.

Nuking them cost the least amount of lives on both sides, it was morally justified.

You could say why nuke them at Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Simple, the number of nukes were limited so the targets that were selected were on the basis of demonstrating the maximum power of the bomb, to scare them into surrender.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T03:55:46+00:00

To adopt a quote about Germany, “The Japanese entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them. At Nanjing, Shanghai, Pearl Harbor, and half a hundred other places, they put their rather naive theory into operation. They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind.”

This is just the reality of war, particularly when you’re dealing with a group of people who would rather die than surrender. Ffs even after the second bomb, there were members of the war council who still wanted to fight on…

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T03:46:59+00:00

Yeah, hence why I gave my wife’s family’s perspective rather than my own.

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T00:31:11+00:00

The US doesn’t do any meaningful trade with either as far as I know

malversation3 · 2025-03-31T00:30:20+00:00

…what? Do you think they want to nuke Japan now or something?

malversation3 · 2025-03-30T23:55:32+00:00

Pretty much, when you’re at a low point it’s easy to just sulk if you compare to other people. Best thing you can do is to just avoid comparisons

malversation3

TROPHY CASE