US foolish isolation Xenophobic attiude

[LAstryAGAIN]

The US general Public attidute toward the Axis Foolish and Xenopobic
one is the fictional stories "Address Unknown" and John Steinbeck story of germans defy Hitler and surrender
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=257015&p=2337343&h ... n#p2337343

Xenopobic fear of Japanese communities in californa.....when not one ever spied for Imperial Japan empire against the USA

[LineDoggie]

Societies do that when they feel threatened

Japanese Societies fear of the Korean, the Chinese, etc.

Israeli fear of the Arab, Arab fear of the Israeli

and so it goes

we had Jonathon Pollard spying on us for Israel but we have learned not to blame the entire group since Executive Order 9066

[OpanaPointer]

I would point out that the Committee to Defend America First never blocked any legislation it opposed and never passed any legislation it supported. Isolationism was not a majority position in the US. Review the Gallup Polls for 1939-1941.

[wm]

The US general Public attidute toward the Axis Foolish and Xenopobic

Was the desire to protect young American from dying by hundreds of thousands in foreign wars (as it happened during ww1) foolish?

And why only toward the Axis?
Germany, by 1939 killed maybe a few thousand, sent tens of thousands to concentration camps (where living conditions were excellent in comparison with Gulags).
Should really the US have fought the Nazis for that?
What about the fully genocidal Soviet Union? Weren't the millions killed there (by 1939) humans?
Nobody called the pro-Soviet attitude foolish and xenophobic.

Xenopobic fear of Japanese communities in californa.....when not one ever spied for Imperial Japan empire against the USA

Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Did Japanese intelligence really try to recruit spies from them?
They weren't spies because nobody asked them to be.
Judging by what happened in occupied Europe in places where a German minority lived (other minorities, let's say the Bulgarians in Greece or Yugoslavia, behaved no differently) - a majority of them would collaborate with Japanese security forces during Japanese occupation.

[pugsville]

The US general Public attidute toward the Axis Foolish and Xenopobic

Was the desire to protect young American from dying by hundreds of thousands in foreign wars (as it happened during ww1) foolish?

Hundreds of thousands of Americans did not die in ww1, just over 100,00 did 53,000 combat detahs and 63,000 non combat

Nor was it a foreign war, it was fought for US reasons of state.

[LineDoggie]

Nor was it a foreign war, it was fought for US reasons of state.

It was fought to assuage Wilsonian pride


US entry into ww1 was also goaded by Wellington house propaganda among other things, Evil Huns tossing Belgian babies into the air and catching them on Bayonets, rubbish

The Zimmermann telegram which was laughably unrealistic. we were supposed to believe a German fleet would break the RN blockade, sail across the Atlantic unmolested by the RN, and unload arms leisurely in Mexico and the USN /RN do nothing?
Not to mention the Mexican Army GHQ wanted nothing to do with invading the USA, as they didn't want to deal with the inevitable guerrilla war of the Yanquis in town after town

unrestricted submarine warfare?

US ships carrying war material demanded an unfettered trip to Germanies enemies ports? hardly Neutral acts

US nationals sailing aboard ships of a combatant nation through a war zone naively thinking no one would dare do anything while Americans aboard, harumpf...

Meanwhile the RN using actual false flags against U Boats Ex- HMS Baralong





We had as many Irish Americans and German Americans who would rather we sided with Germany than the British

[Tom from Cornwall]

It was fought to assuage Wilsonian pride

Strange, I always thought the US joined the First World War despite "Wilsonian pride" - the opposing views from either side of the Atlantic perhaps?

Don't forget the financial factor as well - there are some who would suggest that the immense US war loans to the Allies also played a factor. If Germany had won, those debts would never have been repaid.

Regards

Tom

[LineDoggie]

It was fought to assuage Wilsonian pride

Strange, I always thought the US joined the First World War despite "Wilsonian pride" - the opposing views from either side of the Atlantic perhaps?

Don't forget the financial factor as well - there are some who would suggest that the immense US war loans to the Allies also played a factor. If Germany had won, those debts would never have been repaid.

Regards

Tom

It is strange what you thought

funny you ignore Wellington house and the British Governments sly maneuverings to get us into the war (and then attempted to have us hand our Soldiers over to you as replacements in your army tried to refuse to transport the AEF to france unless you had control of them)

[wm]

Nor was it a foreign war, it was fought for US reasons of state.

If so then the fact leaders trying to represent the American people (and not the abstract state) emerged should have been a surprise and held against them.

[pugsville]

US entry into ww1 was also goaded by Wellington house propaganda among other things, Evil Huns tossing Belgian babies into the air and catching them on Bayonets, rubbish

No it was not, that stuff was debunked at the time. The US had journalists in Belgium he accurately reported what was going on. And they repudiated these claims, but faithfully reported that many actual German war crimes that occurred,

The Zimmermann telegram which was laughably unrealistic. we were supposed to believe a German fleet would break the RN blockade, sail across the Atlantic unmolested by the RN, and unload arms leisurely in Mexico and the USN /RN do nothing?
Not to mention the Mexican Army GHQ wanted nothing to do with invading the USA, as they didn't want to deal with the inevitable guerrilla war of the Yanquis in town after town

The Zimmerman telegram was genuine., and the Germans said so at the time. It was a breathtaking bad piece of diplomacy that had no chance of working, showing no understanding of the situation in Mexico. But pretty par for the course in German diplomacy, they were bad at it.

What was even worse it was sent on US diplomatic cables (as the British had cut German ones) which the white house had allowed the Germans to use solely for possible peace negotiations, it was total betrayakl of trust to them use them to plot against the USA.

unrestricted submarine warfare?

US ships carrying war material demanded an unfettered trip to Germanies enemies ports? hardly Neutral acts

Not according to the rules of war.Neutrals were perfectly entitled to sell stuff to belligerents.

US nationals sailing aboard ships of a combatant nation through a war zone naively thinking no one would dare do anything while Americans aboard, harumpf...

Well American exceptionalism unrealistic or not it was the American attitude, and the sinking were illegal according to the rules of war and treayies the Germans had freely signed,

The Germans well knew it would lead to war sooner or later,

Meanwhile the RN using actual false flags against U Boats Ex- HMS Baralong

Perfectly legal under the rule sof Naval warfare, long standard naval practice,

We had as many Irish Americans and German Americans who would rather we sided with Germany than the British

Not true.

[Tom from Cornwall]

It is strange what you thought

funny you ignore Wellington house and the British Governments sly maneuverings to get us into the war (and then attempted to have us hand our Soldiers over to you as replacements in your army tried to refuse to transport the AEF to france unless you had control of them)

I often have strange thoughts!

Yes, the British (and all the other allies too) were keen to secure American military support in WW1 and WW2 - I wonder why? Nations at war often seek support from other nations so I don’t think you can necessarily hold that against British leaders. Didn’t the French support the revolutionary Americans at one point!

I don’t know enough about WW1 to comment on the British suggestions for the employment of the first American troops as they slowly began to appear in France - I think I’ve read that all the tanks that the US operated in WW1 were made in France - not sure about the artillery though.

By the way, I’m not sure what you mean by “you had control of them” - which “you”? The British or me personally? It’s over a century ago, do you still bear a grudge?

Regards

Tom

[LineDoggie]

The Zimmerman telegram was genuine., and the Germans said so at the time. It was a breathtaking bad piece of diplomacy that had no chance of working, showing no understanding of the situation in Mexico. But pretty par for the course in German diplomacy, they were bad at it.

I know it was geniune, it also was never going to be a realistic option for the reasons I posted, but the British still played it for all the fear it could induce of Swarthy Mexicans invading the USA.[/quote]

What was even worse it was sent on US diplomatic cables (as the British had cut German ones) which the white house had allowed the Germans to use solely for possible peace negotiations, it was total betrayakl of trust to them use them to plot against the USA.

And as said a wholly unrealistic plan, unless you believe the Royal navy was so Incompetent they would let Germans ships through the blockade, Sail the Atlantic and heave to off Mexico to unload war material with no response from either the USN or RN

Meanwhile the RN using actual false flags against U Boats Ex- HMS Baralong

Perfectly legal under the rule sof Naval warfare, long standard naval practice,

Please chapter and verse where it is legal to fly a neutral nations flag, while murdering unarmed sailors in the water attempting to surrender?

Specifically where in the Geneva Convention or Hague convention is that allowed, give sources

US witnesses were-

1. J. M. Garrett, of Kiln, in the county of Hancock, Mississippi.
2. Charles D. Hightower, of Crystal City, Texas.
3. Bud Emerson Palen, of Detroit, Michigan.
4. Edward Clark, of Detroit, Michigan.
5. R. H. Cosby, of Crystal City, Texas.
6. James J. Curran, of Chicago, Illinois.

By the Way the British tried to pressgang the US Citizen horse minders / muleteers aboard Nicosian aboard into "Volunteering" for the British forces to silence them after the murders.

http://www.vlib.us/wwi/resources/archiv ... along.html


[/quote]

Not true.

you say

[pugsville]

know it was geniune, it also was never going to be a realistic option for the reasons I posted, but the British still played it for all the fear it could induce of Swarthy Mexicans invading the USA.

No real need the German stupidity spoke for itself,

And as said a wholly unrealistic plan, unless you believe the Royal navy was so Incompetent they would let Germans ships through the blockade, Sail the Atlantic and heave to off Mexico to unload war material with no response from either the USN or RN

Yes a complete own goal of stupidity all around of every aspect of the incident.

Please chapter and verse where it is legal to fly a neutral nations flag, while murdering unarmed sailors in the water attempting to surrender?

Specifically where in the Geneva Convention or Hague convention is that allowed, give sources

US witnesses were-

1. J. M. Garrett, of Kiln, in the county of Hancock, Mississippi.
2. Charles D. Hightower, of Crystal City, Texas.
3. Bud Emerson Palen, of Detroit, Michigan.
4. Edward Clark, of Detroit, Michigan.
5. R. H. Cosby, of Crystal City, Texas.
6. James J. Curran, of Chicago, Illinois.

By the Way the British tried to pressgang the US Citizen horse minders / muleteers aboard Nicosian aboard into "Volunteering" for the British forces to silence them after the murders.

http://www.vlib.us/wwi/resources/archiv ... along.html

One incident and only one witness claimed the flag was US flag was still flying when the shooting started, The Baralong was out of view and had plenty of time to run the flag up before shooting started. You only have to have teh flag up for a split second before shooting, It takes less time to swap flags than to drop the screens and ready the guns which also give the game away. There's bno logical reason to continue to display the US flag once you clear for action, The Baraloong may have have but on evidence probably unlikely.

Yes the British shot men trying to surrender. It was a war crime,. Happened with U Boat commanders too,.

One incident of an over zealous officer exceeding the rules of war. Compared to a long extended campaign founded ion illegally sinking merchant ships without warning as a matter of policy costing many many lives, plenty of them neutral,

you say

Well produce evidence to support your claim.

[LineDoggie]

Well produce evidence to support your claim.

YOU declared it legal YOU support your claim or admit to inventing stuff

Here I will even help you

enjoy

Geneva Conventions-
https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/tre ... onventions

Hague Conventions-

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-t ... nv-ii-1899


Law of Naval Warfare-

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/l ... s-1-6.html

https://www.history.navy.mil/content/hi ... rfare.html

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/v ... ontext=ils


https://casebook.icrc.org/law/naval-warfare

[pugsville]

YOU declared it legal YOU support your claim or admit to inventing stuff

Pay attention i was responding to your claim about German.Irish Americans
Your claim, you onus of proof..

As for legality of Barralong incident,.

I declared that using false flags was legal as long as you did not fire when displaying them. (and the majority of witnesses in your own source support the clam that this was NOT so) The Practice was legal.


The Baralong incidnet included massacre of survivors which was a war crime., but that is one incident of one an officer ordering a wr crime. That was not policy. I never said that was legal,

The Germans rounding up entirely innocent civilian hostages in Belgium was German policy ads well as a war crime,
Torpedoing civilian and neutral vessels without warning was illegal and German policy,
Deliberately attacking Hospital ships was a war crime and German policy,