Why did people fight for the Axis powers?

Discussion in 'General' started by Jeffersong808, Feb 22, 2013.

  1. i like to tell as many people as i can when the subject comes up that the phoenix zoo was the site of a japanese camp in the 40s. then after it was taken down the owner (Maytag, from the appliances) sold it back to the state.

    another thing they dont teach you. even here in AZ. but they are certainly more than happy to take a 1st grade class on a field trip there. but lets not burden them with trivial matters
     
  2. #22 marsdude89, Feb 22, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2013
    Because life was better than it used to be? Or perhaps they were forced to fight, or they would have to kill their family and join the SS anyway?

    Believe it or not, but following World War I, the Treaty of Versailles royally fucked Germany and the German people. They were disillusioned, poor, and living in a police state controlled by the French military. Guess who managed to hold on to their wealth? You guessed it-- the Jews, with all their diamond, gold, and jewelry shops. Hitler found his perfect scapegoat: someone he could place blame on; someone that was different from the ethnic Germans; someone that even practiced a different religion.

    Blame the propaganda of the Nazis. Blame the emotionally-charged financial rape of Germany following World War I. Just be sure to blame both sides.
     

  3. Yup, you read all about Anne frank in your HS history book(not to say she wasn't signifagant, or to downplay her/her struggle) but you never read about the fact that America rounded up IT'S OWN PEOPLE, and put them into a pseudo-jail.
     
  4. If you want to know why people fought for the Axis powers, the figure to study is not so much Hitler, but his Propaganda Minister - Dr. Joseph Goebbels - a brilliant but very evil man.

    Either way, "Hitler lost WWII. Fascism won" -George Carlin

    He was right. And Americans/Allies were far from perfect - holding hundreds of thousands of Japanese Americans against their will with no trial, in 'internment camps'; and killing a plethora of citizens in Japan with the deadliest weapon on Planet Earth, instead of letting soldiers dog it out at the end of the War :smoking:
     
  5. bombs are the best way to win a war, so long as they are strategically placed. they wont the war didn't they? had the war continued in the pacific more american soldiers would have died. the purpose is to kill as many of the enemy as possible while sustaining the fewest of your own casualties.

    its a simple escalation of force. first you start with fists, then because the enemy may have more range you go to sticks, then rocks for a ranged attack. then you combine them and you can bows and arrows. still you have many soldiers dying so you develop war tactics and strategies. then you build better weapons that are more efficient like swords and cross bows. followed by cannons and firearms, which evolve into closed casing projectiles. and then bombs.

    im sure wars will be fought over the phone.

    USA- hey russia,
    Russia- hey whats up, i was just about to call you
    USA- not much, just thought id let you know you are dead.
    Russia- aw fuck, good game bro
    USA- yeah, so now im gonna have to ask you to stop being a douche, and change your name again
    Russia- dang we were just getting used to this one, how about SSH
    USA- whats that mean?
    Russia- Soviet Shit Hole
    USA- oh man we were thinking that too.
    SSH- its settled then.
     
  6. I am going to say this though the us was much less guilty than the Germans or the Japanese the internment camps for the Japanese were horrible but compared to a German concentration camp or Japanese POW camp they were like a 5 star hotel also when it comes to the nukes they killed less people than the firebombing of Tokyo and we didn't want to do it but the Japanese gave us no choice they wouldn't surrender had we not nuked them we would of had to fight them island to island resulting in a lot more death on both sides did you know we made more Purple Heart metals for those battles than we've given the us haven't made any new Purple Hearts in years and just use stockpiles from the pacific theater that's how many people would of died
     
  7. once again more ignorance being spread on here... the goal of war is not to kill as many people as possible. the goal of war is TO END THE WAR and get whatever you were trying to accomplish. Killing civilians in my opinion is one of the most immoral things a military can do and no country should stoop that low. Want to "sustain the fewest casualties"? Then STAY THE FUCK OUT of the war. Defending imperialistic territories in the Pacific was not worth it.
     

  8. see at least this is an argument that makes sense. I would just counter this by saying dead bodies are a lot less harmful than poisoning our soil and oceans with radioactivity
     
  9. A lot of them had no choice. By war's end, there weren't exactly a lot of eager recruits since the Germans were getting gashed on the Eastern and Western fronts. So the Nazis drafted young men and threatened em with death if they refused.
     

  10. Good point, but the lesser of two evils is still evil. I bet their actual homes were 5 star hotels compared to an internment camp. Just because it was better than a concentration camp, doesn't mean they should've been there. (not trying to be a dick by the way:))
     
  11. You can't really justify using nukes just because there's "less american casualties"

    That insinuates that american lives are somehow "more valuable" than other people's lives. Which I think we can all agree is complete bullshit.

    Not only that, but like others have said we were bombing INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Mothers and daughters just sitting at home cooking/chilling. Killed hundreds of thousands of them.

    Not only that, left many many people deformed from radiation, ruined a lot of their land/soil, and left an impact on the earth that is still present today. Shit was messed up and completely uncalled for, like 99% of things in war.
     

  12. This.
     
  13. I don't think anyone was trying to say the Americans somehow topped the Nazi's or the Japanese in awfulness with treatment of prisoners or it's own citizens.

    What is it exactly is the point you're trying to make though? It's okay to strip our citizens of their rights and herd them into prison because of their race, so long as the accommodations are nice?

    I really don't care if more purple hearts had to be made. Men sign up to fight in war, civilians don't. We could have choked the Japanese off through military and economic means with the Russians and UK without vaporizing several cities of innocent people. Soldiers die in war; women and children shouldn't.
     
  14. I'm not saying what we did was ok I'm simply stating the internment camps could of been much worse and it's sad but dehumanization of the enemy is a nessasary part of war and if we had not dropped the nuke there would of been much more death on both sides including Japanese civilians no matter what civilians are going to die during war it's unavoidable and had the war gone on longer more Korean and Chinese and south eastern Asians would of died the things Japan did to them was horrible Japanese solders would rip baby's out of their mothers arms and catch them with their bayonets they had camps too and at those camps they commented acts so horrific the nazis thought they went too far read this it's estimated the Japanese killed between 3-10 million civilians suddenly the 200,000 deaths from the bombs doesn't seem that high and we begged them to surrender and Japan refused
     

Share This Page