Quantcast

U.S.A.: Pissing on immigrants for centuries

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,037
7,554
white people were placed in the USA by Jesus duh
Don't forget all the different distinctions of white. WASPs in Virginia, Brahmins in Boston, the Scots Irish in the hill country (direct ancestors of our modern rednecks), and then the later shades of white pissed upon by those already in the country (Irish, eastern European +/- Jews)...
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
85,573
24,191
media blackout
Don't forget all the different distinctions of white. WASPs in Virginia, Brahmins in Boston, the Scots Irish in the hill country (direct ancestors of our modern rednecks), and then the later shades of white pissed upon by those already in the country (Irish, eastern European +/- Jews)...
wrong. pure. jesus. white.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,241
20,022
Sleazattle
Historically we always let in immigrants we didn't like so we could exploit them, like Mexicans.

Barring populations fleeing warzones that we triggered by the destabilization of a region by a war started with alternative facts is a new concept
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,145
16,539
Riding the baggage carousel.
^^^^
Either way, the end result is the same. We were complicit in destabilizing a large portion of Europe for at least the next generation. So call it even on us dragging GB and France into Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc? Everything is fucked again.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,241
20,022
Sleazattle
^^^^
Either way, the end result is the same. We were complicit in destabilizing a large portion of Europe for at least the next generation. So call it even on us dragging GB and France into Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc? Everything is fucked again.
Genuine question, how did the US help destabilize Europe post WWI? I thought we were pretty avoided involvement.

Looking at the long game, lots could be said about British chopping up the former Ottoman for sake of colonial efforts contributing significantly to today's mess in the middle East. All exasperated by our support of hard line dictators for the sake of cold war alliances.
 

StiHacka

Compensating for something
Jan 4, 2013
21,560
12,504
In hell. Welcome!
Looking at the long game, lots could be said about British chopping up the former Ottoman for sake of colonial efforts contributing significantly to today's mess in the middle East. All exasperated by our support of hard line dictators for the sake of cold war alliances.
Don't forget oil. But true, the Brits effed up royally.
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
13,430
1,949
Front Range, dude...
Almost every overseas misadventure we have embarked on has been driven by money or oil lust, or cleaning up colonial messes left by teh Brits or French.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,145
16,539
Riding the baggage carousel.
Genuine question, how did the US help destabilize Europe post WWI?
Well, I think history has shown that it didn't really matter. I understand that it's still a matter of some debate, but in the opinions of lots of people who do it for a living, the Treaty of Versailles pretty much guaranteed a second WW. It was never stable to begin with, intervention was not required. It was recognized at the time, there are several quotes floating around to this effect.

“I cannot conceive any greater cause of war than that the German people, who have certainly proved themselves one of the most vigorous and powerful races in the world, should be surrounded by a number of small States, many of them consisting of people who have never previously set up a stable system of government for themselves, but each of them containing large masses of Germans clamouring for reunion with their native land. The proposal of the Polish commission that we should place 2,100,000 Germans under the control of a people which is of a different religion and which has never proved its capacity for stable self-government throughout its history must, in my judgment, lead to a new war in the East of Europe . . .”

Lloyd George, British Prime Minister
"This is not a peace. It is an armistice for twenty years"

Ferdinand Foch, French General and Supreme Allied Commander
The wiki I linked earlier has Keynes quote about "Carthaginian Peace".

And yes, post war the US was very hands off. We adopted a very isolationist policy prior to that little thing that happened with Japan in Hawaii.

Totally not about those shifty Jews.
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
13,430
1,949
Front Range, dude...
No one is ever pushed into war...that revisionist history is complete and utter bullshit. You go to war because you have foolish old men who are more than wiling to spend the blood of stupid young men in order to reach some kind of idiotic national objective. Only when the young men stand up and say NO! We will not die for your blood/oil/land/banana/sugar/invisible man in the sky lust will wars stop.

"Pushing" Japan into war because they needed oil to fuel their war machine is fanciful bullshit. We go to war to get oil for the war machine that we go to war to get oil for...

If only we lived in a vacuum in which a 'murikkka™ first policy was actually practical.
 
Last edited:

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
13,430
1,949
Front Range, dude...
...this is not to say that Roosevelt and his little cabal of idiots did not actively want a reason to get into the foolishness. That is well established. But the Samurai culture and the rampant racism and xenophobia of the time had much to do with it also. No one forced the Japanese to sack Nanking, or set up Unit 731 or to force thousands of women into forced sex slave labor...

Stupidstupidstupid...
 
Last edited:

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
38,037
7,554
So we are pushing North Korea and Russia to attack us with sanctions?
Other countries are rational actors, in at least some sense. We're not some god-country sitting atop Valhalla that dispenses justice with impunity. I'm not saying sanctions are the incorrect action in particular settings, but it's irresponsible to assume that the targets of such sanctions wouldn't respond on their own.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,241
20,022
Sleazattle
Other countries are rational actors, in at least some sense. We're not some god-country sitting atop Valhalla that dispenses justice with impunity. I'm not saying sanctions are the incorrect action in particular settings, but it's irresponsible to assume that the targets of such sanctions wouldn't respond on their own.
There was certainly a but of hubris involved in not better preparing for such an event. But even more so that such an attack wouldn't have disastrous results.
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
13,430
1,949
Front Range, dude...
No one was acting rationally in the 30s or 40s, and we can only hope that someone acts rationally these days. Its certainly not looking like we will, and you can rule Russia out too. When the Chinese are looking like rational actors your shit is getting pretty thin.

Response is fine...waging global war and oppressing millions of others simply because they oppose you is not. I dont care whothefuckyouare...