And behind her the japanese survivors are quite irritated with this and point to their own list of nearly 100% casulties.
And why do you think they would be more angry than compassionate? THey went through the same war, on opposing sides but it's not like veterans on US side and Japanese side can't be friends after the war. There are actual example of such relationships. War might be dark and grim, but it also shines with good deeds and hope. You really shouldn't brand things just because you don't think it through.
Probably gonna be an unpopular comment, but why is Saratoga listed? She wasn't sunk until AFTER the war (1 year after, if memory serves) in the Baker tests.
And behind her the japanese survivors are quite irritated with this and point to their own list of nearly 100% casulties.
They got what they deserve for sucker punching someone while under the flag of peace talks.
And picking a fight with said someone who has more factories than they do in an area less than their entire land mass. While also having a far larger landmass to make even more. With basically three times the population...
Plus not taking the Surrender offers when given the chance. People often forget that the US gave an offer of surrender every month following October of 43 with it being a 'FUCK YOU GAJIN' everytime til the Nukes drop. And a few times after til a minicoup happened...
Yeah no... Imperial Japan was a Rabid animal worse then the fucking Nazies in some ways,(Nazies you can somewhat reason with and had some redeeming features) that needed 45cc of lead injection.
Probably gonna be an unpopular comment, but why is Saratoga listed? She wasn't sunk until AFTER the war (1 year after, if memory serves) in the Baker tests.
Intrepid and Iowa are the only current KC ships who are currently not sunk/not scrapped, or in Iowa's case, not nuked.
Plus this is based on Intrepid in the Vietnam War.
They got what they deserve for sucker punching someone while under the flag of peace talks.
And picking a fight with said someone who has more factories than they do in an area less than their entire land mass. While also having a far larger landmass to make even more. With basically three times the population...
Plus not taking the Surrender offers when given the chance. People often forget that the US gave an offer of surrender every month following October of 43 with it being a 'FUCK YOU GAJIN' everytime til the Nukes drop. And a few times after til a minicoup happened...
Yeah no... Imperial Japan was a Rabid animal worse then the fucking Nazies in some ways,(Nazies you can somewhat reason with and had some redeeming features) that needed 45cc of lead injection.
Since when did the Nazi actually have "redeeming features"? Other than the fact a bunch of war criminals sold their services in exchange for not being trialed?
Yeah no... Imperial Japan was a Rabid animal worse then the fucking Nazies in some ways,(Nazies you can somewhat reason with and had some redeeming features) that needed 45cc of lead injection.
Yeah the Nazis were so reasonable they blitzed Britain, fucked up two invasions into the Soviet Union, killed all the jews they could, killed all the slavs they could, had awful taste in coffee, and all in all were delusional to the point of believing they could negotiate with the western allies for a peace while they continue to fight the Soviet Union. Not to mention their invasion of Poland, Belgium, Holland, Norway, when all were Neutral countries.
My grandmother was sent to a work camp as forced labor since Belgium was occupied and viewed as a lesser class of citizen.
Yeah no... Imperial Japan was a Rabid animal worse then the fucking Nazies in some ways,(Nazies you can somewhat reason with and had some redeeming features)
... Yeah, no. Both where pretty fucked up on their own ways, japan with the Nanking massacre and Germany with the Holocaust. Both sides made horrible things and favoring one over the other in all honesty makes you sound like a run of the mill white supremacist.
... Yeah, no. Both where pretty fucked up on their own ways, japan with the Nanking massacre and Germany with the Holocaust. Both sides made horrible things and favoring one over the other in all honesty makes you sound like a run of the mill white supremacist.
It's totally right to despise a Nazi atrocity denier.They are delusional, and probably have a few screws loose. However, if you dare to despise a Imperial Japanese Army atrocity denier, especially those who can give you titillating arts, ooooooboy, you're in deep fucking shit. I know. I've been there. Story of my life. EDIT: Aww, someone didn't like what I said. I wonder what button did I push here. Or rather, is there really a button here to start with? Someone is seriously offended by this statement, that certain people choose to defend Japanese war atrocity denying artists because they draw nice girls with huge boobies? Food for thought, eh?
Since when did the Nazi actually have "redeeming features"? Other than the fact a bunch of war criminals sold their services in exchange for not being trialed?
Saladofstones said:
Yeah the Nazis were so reasonable they blitzed Britain, fucked up two invasions into the Soviet Union, killed all the jews they could, killed all the slavs they could, had awful taste in coffee, and all in all were delusional to the point of believing they could negotiate with the western allies for a peace while they continue to fight the Soviet Union. Not to mention their invasion of Poland, Belgium, Holland, Norway, when all were Neutral countries.
My grandmother was sent to a work camp as forced labor since Belgium was occupied and viewed as a lesser class of citizen.
Rimuru said:
... Yeah, no. Both where pretty fucked up on their own ways, japan with the Nanking massacre and Germany with the Holocaust. Both sides made horrible things and favoring one over the other in all honesty makes you sound like a run of the mill white supremacist.
By redeeming I mean the Nazi's at least follow the rules of War and had some common decency. You know why the US never took Japanese prisonors? The Japs will fucking fake surrender before stabbing or pulling a hidden grenade pin.
If you call for surrender the Nazis will come out with their hands up and not running with a live grenade or pistol. OR a FUCKING SWORD...
They will not shot the medics in the knee so they can headshot those who try to help them.
They also treated their POWS with respected and didn't kill them if the camp was almost over run.
Japan did all that and more. Hell even the war between the soviets and germans didn't get as fucking bad as the US/Chinese VS Japan front did...
That's not even bringing up how hard prewar they pushed shit like health care and cancer research. Even post war the Nazis did more than imperial japan ever did.
Heard of Wernher von Braun? You know the guy who is the father of NASA? He was a Nazi and he pushed the US space program to the moon which help make all the fun stuff we have today. He was actually called The Safety Nazi in the US Space program.
That is not even getting into every other idea that the Allies nicked and improved on or mixed with similar programs.
Sure they both were shit, but I know which I rather deal with if only because it smelled slightly better...
armory18 said: Hell even the war between the soviets and germans didn't get as fucking bad as the US/Chinese VS Japan front did...
Given the vast mistreatment of prisoners by both the Soviets and the Germans (most German prisoners perished in captivity, those that were released were only released after 1950). You can find letters written by German soldiers at Stalingrad that espouse the racial rhetoric of the Nazis,
Looking at things like Leningrad, the siege of Berlin, the treatment of Ukraine, Romania, Poland by both sides shows a strong tendency towards brutality and retaliation.
armory 18 said: By redeeming I mean the Nazi's at least follow the rules of War and had some common decency.
Only against the West, when it came to Partisans, occupied populations, Soviets, and others they did not show this. Take Belgium, for instance, which had a lot of resistance activity: The Gestapo made regular raids, which included children and families of suspected resistance members, and put them through pretty cruel (if ultimately ineffective) torture and interrogation. You had people who simply vanished, others who were publicly executed or The Germans also were fond of reprisals for any causalities as a result of partisan activity. Most Soviet Commissars and Officers were executed on site if they surrendered or were otherwise captured, as they detested the presence of Jews and Bolsheviks in the Officer class.
Not that this stopped the Germans from conducting raids on urban centers, launching the V-1 and V-2 rockets which were explicitly terror weapons. You had the Volksturm, their suicide interceptors (they claimed to promote the pilot bailing, but realistically, this was no the case), the Waffen-SS, various SS field units, Forced Labor, Indiscriminate U-boat attacks, etc.
armory18 said: Heard of Wernher von Braun? You know the guy who is the father of NASA? He was a Nazi and he pushed the US space program to the moon which help make all the fun stuff we have today. He was actually called The Safety Nazi in the US Space program.
Ironically the Nazis had the same feeling about him: He was viewed as a liability (he expressed 'defeatist' notions, had suspected Communist ties, and was perceived as a risk should he escape) but he was too useful to liquidate. That someone proved useful is not an argument that they are moral.
armory18 said: That's not even bringing up how hard prewar they pushed shit like health care and cancer research. Even post war the Nazis did more than imperial japan ever did.
They also supported eugenics, forced sterilization and racial purity testing. As far as Imperial Japan, they shared the same sort of ideology and were allies and shared technology and other information. The Japanese studied with the Germans in the 1930s and the Germans supported Japan's "Asia for Asians" philosophy where Japan would take over other territories and colonies for their own.
I've read one of the manuals they handed out to party officers when it came to towing the line. Its both implicit and explicit that the main goal is to ensure the purity of the population and the power of the Nazi Party. Tabs were kept on people, there was a clear hierarchy of people and races, the anti-Semitic feelings was casual and commonly stated, with multiple warnings and guidelines when it came to dealing with the Jewish/Bolshevik race.
Did you forget how cynically the SA were purged in 1932, despite being made up of loyalists, due to internal politics? Or how the Night of Long Knives also eliminated scores of other political threats, with mob violence and extrajudicial killings.
There was also Kristallnacht, which saw the murder of dozens (if not more) Jews and other undesirables and the transfer of Jews and others into Ghettos, would lead to the formalization of the Nazi State's response towards the Jews: Extermination of the people, confiscation of the property. Kristallnacht was also saw things like the destruction of synagogues and most pointedly, the desecration and digging up Jewish Graveyards and Cemeteries. To me this speaks to a level of personal and racial hatred rather than political violence.
This isn't to comment on or downplay anything the Japanese did before or during the war, only that its impossible to claim any relative level of morality that the Nazis could have had when it came to their conduct. Both willfully and knowingly committed crimes against humanity as part of their belief system, especially against those that were considered to be inferior.
By redeeming I mean the Nazi's at least follow the rules of War and had some common decency.
To add onto what Saladofstones said, you're missing out on basically the entire Eastern Front.
Keep in mind, that while Jews are the most publicized, the Nazis created an entire hierarchy of races with Northern Germanic ("Aryan") peoples as the "Master Race", and all other races as below them. Romani ("Gypsies") were also sent to the concentration camps for extermination, as were gays, those with birth defects, mental disabilities, or anything else deemed unsuited to their Eugenics program, as well as any political dissenters. There was also no such thing as a "White Race" until the 1960s Civil Rights era, and the Nazis would categorize the Slavs (read: Poles, Russians, and other Eastern Europeans) as nearly as low as the Jews and Romani, fit only for enslavement or extermination. (Incidentally, this means they seem to have technically rated "Black" Africans as a 'superior race' to the "White" Slavs. Just something for any Neo-Nazi who reads this to chew on.) Their system was basically the same as Apartheid, which was instituted in 1948 by straight-up self-avowed Fascists using Nazi ideology.
The ("pure-blooded") English, being partly descended from Norman and Saxon invaders, were given higher ranking, while the Irish, Scots, and Welsh, for example, were slave-races, and the Franks fell somewhere between.
You might claim the fact that, unlike the Nazis, the Japanese instituted a policy of indiscriminate rape against the Chinese as a means of "hardening" their soldiers as proof that the Japanese were more barbaric. Well, that's only because the Nazis preferred highly discriminatory rape, as in all other things. You know those kidnapped "genetically valuable" children that passed the racial tests I just mentioned? Well, if they were girls, they were used as sex slaves in military brothels to produce more Aryan children. The Nazis set up a highly organized brothel system filled with women they kidnapped from occupied territories to be sex slaves. This included non-'Aryan' women, as well.
They were used in their prison-like brothels until they inevitably contracted an STD (they were tested daily), at which point they were executed immediately and replaced with a new kidnapping victim. This was instituted as a means of keeping the rates of debilitating STDs among soldiers down as compared to indiscriminate raping sprees.
As for the warfare, the Eastern Front was essentially the most genocidal form of Total War ever conducted. Not only was neither side particularly interested in taking POWs, they weren't terribly concerned with taking the civilians alive, either. There's a reason why German and Russian war dead so utterly dwarf all other nations, and it's not because other nations weren't sending every able-bodied boy to the front, or because Germany or Russia had so much more people to lose, because they didn't. It's because that's civilian dead thrown in the tally.
The Soviets famously started off needing "blocker units" to stop fleeing Russian soldiers, but that was only for the first year or two of the fighting, before what was happening in the lands occupied by the Nazis was known. The eastern half of Poland didn't mind Germany "liberating" them from the Soviets until they found out what the Nazis had planned for them. The "Great Patriotic War" was an existential threat to anyone deemed "Slavic", and they became very much aware of that, and it's for that reason that the Soviets retaliated with their own utter disregard for the humanity of their enemies and functionally stopped taking prisoners.
Now, as said before, that's not to diminish the indiscriminate rape brigades of the IJA, either, but no. It doesn't matter how you try, there's basically no way that the Nazis were "not as bad" as pretty much anyone you try to think of. That's not to say that the Nazi's massive legacy doesn't overshadow the evils committed by groups whose heinous deeds are certainly comparable to the Nazi's, but you're basically trying to argue whether The Son of Sam was "worse than" Jeffery Dahmer or not, and when you do that, the entire notion of "not so bad" is completely missing the point.
I pretty much put Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany on the same level, and the communists easily being worse than the two of them combined (although that might just be the consequence of "learning" from the previous regimes and industrializing tyranny to a higher level). I don't think any of the countries were totally unreasonable and could not be negotiated with, as we were able to do so with all of those regimes eventually.
Japan did some pretty terrible things in China as well as to prisoners that are extremely understated in historical records, but at the same time they also were kind of shafted by FDR who wanted an excuse for involvement in the war. People have this whole romanticized view of Imperial Japan even though they did a lot of things equal to the Nazis.
Nazis were the outcome of countries like England and France trying to get revenge on Germany for WWI. People seem to forget they wouldn't have been able to get into power so easily if the German people as a whole were not backed into a corner. Radicalism is the natural response to that kind of dire situation. If the roles were reversed and it was Germany pushing debts on the allied countries I bet our countries would have fell to equally heinous radicalism too. It should also be understood that a great majority of Germany's armed forces were not members of the Nazi Party. So while many who served under Nazi Germany were honorable, it doesn't necessarily mean members of the Nazi party in general were honorable. People say those who served under Nazi Germany must have been sympathetic to the Nazi cause, and I suppose that is reasonable. When you have the choice to either let your country fall to economic ruin or survive and expand but under the leadership of a corrupt "worker people's party" I think most people would tolerate the evil that comes with survival. As twisted as it is, the Nazis kind of did save Germany to an extent even though they eventually had to be destroyed just like the Imperial Japanese and the USSR.
Nazi Germany's technology was undoubtedly amazing which is why the US and USSR rushed to seize it but I wouldn't say that is necessarily a product of the Nazi party as wartime causes the contracts of all kinds of advancements regardless of a regimes political stature. Which again is the whole deal that Nazi Germany as a country doesn't necessarily reflect the Nazi party. Just like how many US veterans weren't globalists like FDR was, even though they fought under him.
The Nazis definitely get this whole popular to hate thing in part by a lot of people who don't understand why they were able to rise to power in the first place. I don't find your comments that unreasonable as you aren't defending the Nazi Party's actions but stating your preference if the choice was between Germany or Japan. But judging by the downvotes people get triggered at any mention that there may have been good people or consequences in the Nazi Party along with the bad even though most don't bat an eye to someone talking about good people or culture from Imperial Japan or among the communist parties. Then again, we are on a Japanese oriented fanart database so I guess the former part is to be expected as barefeetchaser mentioned. Doesn't help either with the current political correctness trend and the inclination of some to use the Nazi label on others and the fear of others to be afraid of being labeled. Godwin's law and all that.
I had ideas that they treated Slavs like shit, which isn't really surprising given how hated Slavs are in general, but the Lebensborn part is a new one, and a new low for these svastika defilers. Gonna have to start looking into that "Japanese soldiers raped Chinese to toughen them", though. I know about unit 731, about Nankin, but not about that part. I'm not looking forward to learning about new atrocities.
Nazis were the outcome of countries like England and France trying to get revenge on Germany for WWI. People seem to forget they wouldn't have been able to get into power so easily if the German people as a whole were not backed into a corner.
The Treaty of Versailles was far more lenient than say, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk imposed by the Germans towards the Russians, let alone Germany's own peace proposal they had made in case they won the war, the Septemberprogramm. The perpetuating idea that Germany-chan is an innocent flower turned yandere due to the bullying of Britain-kun and France-senpai needs to die already.
It really doesn't matter how lenient it is in comparison when in the end result people are burning money because it is worth more as paper than as currency. A prisoner doesn't care much if they are executed by hanging or lethal injection. Which exactly is my point that if the German powers won, countries like England and France (and US if it reached that far) would have radicalized evolved into the "Nazis" we hate today. If you push people into a corner, they will choose warfare to survive if they have to, and they will be sure to go after every single group they believe to have wronged them once they get into power, partially to avoid being put into that situation again, but mostly for revenge. People are shocked by Nazi Germany even though these horrors of warfare are not new to history and similar acts can be found in every culture's history. Warfare isn't as civil as people would like to think, and thinking that we are somehow different and immune to that kind of mindset is a grave error.
In my personal opinion WWII really did not have to happen at all (heck, neither did WWI). But it happened, so the least we can do is learn from the mistakes that lead to those wars.
Goddammit... the comments, yet I'm not surprised it would lead to this. Mostly thanks to the first comment.
Here we have Intrepid and Iowa being the sole survivors of their generation grieving their departed sisters in arms. I replied with the Admiral and the 3 of them saying their thoughts and moving forward to a better tomorrow for their sake. Expected someone would reply with maybe another dialogue or story, instead, it turned into a bloodsport.
I wouldn't say war is part of humanity as it is part of humanity's law of averages. It doesn't matter if everyone on God's green Earth is grown up happy and nurtured well, there will always be corrupt people, violent people, people who try to game the system, and psychopaths.
The Treaty of Versailles was far more lenient than say, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk imposed by the Germans towards the Russians, let alone Germany's own peace proposal they had made in case they won the war, the Septemberprogramm. The perpetuating idea that Germany-chan is an innocent flower turned yandere due to the bullying of Britain-kun and France-senpai needs to die already.
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk demanded 6 billion Marks, while the Treaty of Versailles demanded 20 billion. That's a huge amount of money.
The "idea" that the Nazis rose to power as a result of the Treaty of Versailles is perfectly reasonable. The Treaty lead to insane debt and hyperinflation, and when Hitler promised to get the German people out of their debt, that's all the people cared about. If that meant they had to go along with a regime that hated Communists (who are pretty terrible) and Jews, then that's what they did.
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk demanded 6 billion Marks, while the Treaty of Versailles demanded 20 billion. That's a huge amount of money.
The "idea" that the Nazis rose to power as a result of the Treaty of Versailles is perfectly reasonable. The Treaty lead to insane debt and hyperinflation, and when Hitler promised to get the German people out of their debt, that's all the people cared about. If that meant they had to go along with a regime that hated Communists (who are pretty terrible) and Jews, then that's what they did.
There were multiple German political parties rivaling the Nazis at that time, with them seen early on as fringe reactionary radicals. While Versailles certainly exacerbated tensions in post-WWI Germany, the NSDAP could at best claim just 5% of the votes in Bavaria, and often went under 1% at the time.
It wasn't until the *global* depression triggered by the Wall Street Crash of 1929 that they made their greatest gains. To tie Versailles to their rise is to ignore the actual context immediately surrounding them - though the treaty was punitive, it wasn't until all global support structures fell apart around Germany that reactionary panic allowed them to be more effectual than what UKIP currently is in the UK.
So, no, it isn't "perfectly" reasonable. You can claim it to be one of the many weights on the lever that eventually tipped over, and even one of the largest. But the formula isn't "big debt = flirting with fascism" so much as it is global panic allowing evil men to take advantage of weakened wills.
I wouldn't say war is part of humanity as it is part of humanity's law of averages. It doesn't matter if everyone on God's green Earth is grown up happy and nurtured well, there will always be corrupt people, violent people, people who try to game the system, and psychopaths.
Well, wouldnt you say that such things are what makes humans, humans? Since just as there's violent people, corrupted people, people who try to cheat, and psychopaths there are people who are saints, people who are virtuous, people who are munificence, and people who are level headed. With all the things humans have a chance to arrive to, it could be said that no being is like a human.
Definitely the Great Depression was the pivotal opportunity for the Nazis to rise to power, but the fact still remains that the Treaty of Versailles is what allowed the Nazi's to be in position and motivated to seize that power in the first place. The Great Depression didn't trigger the rise of political power for radical groups in countries England and France to fight against each other, so why Germany? People undergoing severe hardships will band together to survive, which as you say amplifies existing tensions. The Treaty of Versailles missed the opportunity to avoid those tensions.
I'm all for the spoils of war going to the victors, but for that to happen without retribution you have to be able to control the conditions of your victory by either stabilizing the region as allied to your own or completely eliminate it from the face of the Earth. Allied powers were far too weak to be able to enforce the treaties they wrote and we should not have been shocked that the desire to avoid conflict would not be sufficient to end war. In that sense Woodrow Wilson kind of dropped the ball by being too seduced by the idea of globalism and a one world order for "peace".
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk demanded 6 billion Marks, while the Treaty of Versailles demanded 20 billion. That's a huge amount of money.
The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk also took away territory that included a quarter of the population and industry of the former Russian Empire and nine-tenths of its coal mines. For comparison, the Germans lost a mere 25,000 square miles (65,000 km2) of German territory in Versailles. So yes, the argument that the Germans were unfairly humiliated in Versailles is utterly hypocritical considering they have actually demanded AND exacted worse, in the fucking same year even.
79248cm/s said: The Great Depression didn't trigger the rise of political power for radical groups in countries England and France to fight against each other, so why Germany?
Umm, when the Depression finally hit France in 1932, it got bad for them too: massive unemployment, xenophobia, border closings, anti-semitism, the whole shebang. It avoided going down the Nazi Germany route because, when right-wing rallies in February 1934 turned into violent riots, the French Left and Center became afraid of a Fascist takeover and reluctantly compromised by creating a coalition. Unfortunately, the country remained politically unstable for years to come and France had to abandon its military promises...including the French-Czechoslovak alliance.
Allied powers were far too weak to be able to enforce the treaties they wrote and we should not have been shocked that the desire to avoid conflict would not be sufficient to end war.
Technically, the Allies had the strength to enforce it, just not the willpower. Britain wanted a buffer for Soviet Russia, America wanted to go isolationist again, and France didn't have the power to do it alone. Of course, for extra black comedy, the French originally wanted a more punitive treaty but couldn't get the others to agree with it...until WW2 happened, and this time the Allies went through with it.
BarefeetChaser said: It's totally right to despise a Nazi atrocity denier... However, if you dare to despise a Imperial Japanese Army atrocity denier,...
I was at a viewing of a Japanese-American interment camp documentary. During the Q&A an older audience member got up and gushed about how this film should be shown to all the school children in America. Japanese-American internment camps was mandatory in my US history class just before the Civil Rights chapter. (Japan ought to be teaching national ethical failures in school too)
Japan's willful ignorance about WW2 lets this glorification of imperial Japan flourish. In other nations terrible history is taught as a warning to new generations.
I listened to a polish holocaust survivor's talk in person: "You Americans made the Germany responsible for the holocaust in history. You don't understand that all of Europe was involved with the holocaust"
... or in other words, in addition to Japanese military, there were conscripts from Japan's colonies participating, and Chinese civil war factions were really brutal to each other.
WW2 is one segment of violent and brutal 20th century history that either imperial Japan idolizers, China Comunist Party minions, North/South Korean zealots, etc pick and choose to remember or forget.
If you can't handle how KanColle handles WW2, then don't. There's no need to get all butthurt (e.g Japan showed that they are not just some sushi-eaters and rice eaters like how the west perceived the asians). Besides, it was not a game for foreigners in the first place.
P.S Keep crying Intrepid, that's Karma for you and the whole U.S.A and don't worry you still have two towers crashing down, a raid at the Capitol becuase of a orange president and you and your heroes went home from Afghanistan empty handed.