From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 01:59:35 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Further costs of war (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <199711271414.IAA26461@einstein.ssz.com>
Message-ID: <2XZVge35w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> writes:

> > Subject: Re: Further costs of war (fwd)
> > From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
> > Date: Wed, 26 Nov 97 23:55:33 EST
>
> > This has no crypto relevance.
>
> Actualy it does, it's just that the reason for this discussion has escaped
> your blipvert mentality. The reason this is relevant was the claim made by
> others that had the US *not* entered WWII then the situation would be
> significantly different than now. In particular it would be a more positive
> results. I draw exception to this and am willing to debate the point.

This STILL has no crypto relevance.  Moreover you can't read, don't know
any history, and resort to personal attacks when your ignorance is exposed.

> > The japs didn't join the axis out fo the blue. The US was picking on the Ja
> > back at the Washington conference in 1921/2,
>
> It's interesting that as a direct results of this conference the Japanese
> took the time to put down their plans to secure (ie take over) the western
> Pacific. It relied on their typical "Great All-out Battle" strategy. An
> important point in this strategy was luring the US fleet into Japanese
> waters and defeating it.

Not true. Japs had been trying to expand ever since the meiji revolution:
grabbed hokkaido from russia in 1875 (without a fight), taiwan et al from
china in 1895, more land from russia in 1905, annexed Korea in 1910, attacked
germany and took most of german possessions in the pacitic uring ww1. Their
strategy did not change in 1922.

The only thing that happened at the washington conference of 1921/2 was that
the US turned around and instead of praising the japs as their ww1 ally, it
suddenly started demonizing the japs, just like Noriega or Saddam Hussein
suddenly went from US allies to Ultimate Evil. The US also forced GB to
renounce their 20-year-old alliance with the japs.

It would be reasonable for the japs to revise their strategy to be more
anti-US after 1922, but I actually see no eviedence of this.

> > he bulding up the navy, building new bases on Hawaii, Guam, Midway, Samoa,
> > etc, (in violation of the Washington conference), grabbing small pacific
> > islands that no one claimed before (jervis, Howland, Phoebe, Palmira).
>
> Actualy most of these islands were originaly Dutch, German, or Spanish.
> For example, the Philipines were Spanish.

You can't read, can you? A typical product of US education system.

1. The US specifically promised in 1922 not to build naval bases on Guam,
Wake, Phillippines, etc. FDR renounced that promise and built huge bases and a
huge navy, while whining about japs violating the various arms limitation
treaties (which the japs did only after the US violated theirs).

2. Palmira et al were no-man's-island, not claimed by anyone. FDR sweeped up
the unclaimed islands as part of his stated anti-jap strategy.

3. The closest Dutch poseesssions were Indonesia - totally irrelevant.

4. Philippines used to belong to Spain; the locals pretty much overthrew
the Spanish with little US help; the US then waged a bloody war suppressing
the locals and turning Philippines into its colony.

The uniformed shit that rots at the arlington national cemetary are the bloody
murderers who massacred hundreds of unarmed phillippine civilians to provide
the us with another colony in the pacific. I virtually piss on their graves;
let Stick Willy sell all the burial sites he wants there.

> Vulis, this hasn't dawned on you yet but none the less, you are actualy
> agreeing with my position that it isn't possible for the US to have kept
> out of the war. The other participants simply didn't have the resources or
> the system to organize them with otherwise.

Your position is with your head up your ass, since you clearly don't know
what you're talking about. FDR was pulling stunts designed to pull the US
into the war in Europe, like seizing German and italian ships in US ports,
but he succeeded in proviking the japs faster. The US would have stayed out
of the war in Europe much longer under a republican administration, and
probably never would have had a war with Japan.

Since the US contribution to the European war effort was about the same in
1940/41 and 1942/44 (up until the invasion of Normandy), it would not have
changed the outcome of the war, but domestically the US would have been
less of a polica state than it became under FDR.

> > > period. Can't say that I've ever seen this issue in anything I've read.
> >
> > According to my books, the US stopped all Jap immigration into US and its
> > possession (i.e. Hawaii, Philippines, ec) as of May 1, 1925.
>
> Which books Vulis, books you have access to or books that you wrote? I made
> a request for more specificity. Which books in particular are you refering
> to?

References he wants. :-) Very good: _Spravochnik Soedinennyje Shtaty Ameriki_
Moscow: Ogiz, 1946, p. 284:

"Poskol'ku odnoj iz form japonskoj `ekspansii javljalas' usilennaja
immigratzija japontzev v SSHA i ikh kolonial'nyje vladenija - Gavaji,
Filippiny i dr., pravitel'stvo SSHA stalo prinimat' mery k ogranicheniju
`toj immigratzii, a 1/V 1925 g. vovse zapretilo ejo."

(Oops! You can't read languages other than English, can you? :-)

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps