One of the Lies Behind fdr's Concentration Camps

[Unkotare]

Japanese Americans are taught the same history that every other AMERICAN is taught in school, moron.

Japanese in Japan are not. ...

Have you ever set foot in a school in Japan? Ever talk to a History teacher in Japan?

No, I rely on the news reports, including the one I provided from the Japanese school teacher.

Try finding out what you are talking about first.

Does it require me going to Japan?

You might actually understand something if you did, but I don't expect you to. If you really care to inform yourself (which I doubt), contact the International Journal of Social Education and request a copy of the document "How WWII is Taught in Japanese Classrooms."

 

[westwall]

SO what?

Here's the thing. The Germans and Italians, besides being much larger ethnic groups, weren't the ones who bombed Pearl Harbor.

The very fact Trump can propel himself to the top of the GOP heap playing on fears of Mexicans and Muslims today gives you an idea of what FDR was dealing with in 1942. People were damned scared. the looked out at that big Pacific Ocean and for all they knew, a Japanese Battleship could show up off the coast and start shelling them.

We didn't slaughter the Japanese. We relocated them out of a possible war zone, and most of them were released within a year.

Y'all need to quit whining about it. Other ethnicities have much more valid complaints.

So what? The facts are there were 5 socialist experiments run in the 1930's. Germany, Italy, The Soviet Union, Japan, and the USA. Other than the Japanese who simply murdered anyone they didn't like, they ALL resorted to the use of concentration camps. All of them. A thinking person would ask themselves why progressives resort to camps and mass murder to further their goals if their goals were so damned good.

 

[Camp]

SO what?

Here's the thing. The Germans and Italians, besides being much larger ethnic groups, weren't the ones who bombed Pearl Harbor.

The very fact Trump can propel himself to the top of the GOP heap playing on fears of Mexicans and Muslims today gives you an idea of what FDR was dealing with in 1942. People were damned scared. the looked out at that big Pacific Ocean and for all they knew, a Japanese Battleship could show up off the coast and start shelling them.

We didn't slaughter the Japanese. We relocated them out of a possible war zone, and most of them were released within a year.

Y'all need to quit whining about it. Other ethnicities have much more valid complaints.

So what? The facts are there were 5 socialist experiments run in the 1930's. Germany, Italy, The Soviet Union, Japan, and the USA. Other than the Japanese who simply murdered anyone they didn't like, they ALL resorted to the use of concentration camps. All of them. A thinking person would ask themselves why progressives resort to camps and mass murder to further their goals if their goals were so damned good.

You are comparing US internment camps to Nazi death camps and the Soviet Gulag. You are actually making the assertion that American internment camps committed mass murders.

 

[Unkotare]

......
You are comparing US internment camps to Nazi death camps and the Soviet Gulag. You are actually making the assertion that American internment camps committed mass murders.

They were all CONCENTRATION CAMPS. The fact that fdr killed far, far fewer in his CONCENTRATION CAMPS doesn't change what they were, nor does it in any way excuse his violation of everything America is supposed to stand for.

 

[Syriusly]

Are you saying that the military did not expand and that the draft was not proposed under FDR's administration?

Are you saying that would not have happened during wartime if someone else were President?

We don't know what would have happened if anyone else was President......

Bullshit. Do you really think ANYONE else would not have expanded military spending and instituted a draft while we were at war with Germany and Japan? Now YOU are being as irrational as you are trying to accuse others of being.

Anyone else might not have been resulted in the United States being at war with Germany and Japan.

And anyone else might not have acted like FDR when war did happen.

You want to blame FDR for both his real faults(Japanese detention camps) and his imagined faults(Tuskegee)- and want to ignore his actual successes.

You think the Tuskegee experiments were imaginary?

No- as I pointed out- you are imagining that FDR was responsible for Tuskagee- which he was no more responsible for than was Eisenhower.

 

[Syriusly]

Apologists are shameless and irrational.

The anti-FDR nut jobs are shameless and irrational.

 

[Unkotare]

Are you saying that would not have happened during wartime if someone else were President?

We don't know what would have happened if anyone else was President......

Bullshit. Do you really think ANYONE else would not have expanded military spending and instituted a draft while we were at war with Germany and Japan? Now YOU are being as irrational as you are trying to accuse others of being.

Anyone else might not have been resulted in the United States being at war with Germany and Japan.

And anyone else might not have acted like FDR when war did happen.

You want to blame FDR for both his real faults(Japanese detention camps) and his imagined faults(Tuskegee)- and want to ignore his actual successes.

You think the Tuskegee experiments were imaginary?

No- as I pointed out- you are imagining that FDR was responsible for Tuskagee- which he was no more responsible for than was Eisenhower.

You are imagining he was responsible for winning the war (or responding to it at all).

 

[Syriusly]

....

FDR took office- unemployment was about 30%
FDR died- unemployment was virtually zero......

Because we were at war, not because of his irresponsible economic policies.

And those 'irresponsible economic policies'?

Oh lets see- massive government spending on buying stuff- which led to employment, and massive government spending on giving Americans government paid for jobs.

Yep- ended the Depression.

 

[Syriusly]

We don't know what would have happened if anyone else was President......

Bullshit. Do you really think ANYONE else would not have expanded military spending and instituted a draft while we were at war with Germany and Japan? Now YOU are being as irrational as you are trying to accuse others of being.

Anyone else might not have been resulted in the United States being at war with Germany and Japan.

And anyone else might not have acted like FDR when war did happen.

You want to blame FDR for both his real faults(Japanese detention camps) and his imagined faults(Tuskegee)- and want to ignore his actual successes.

You think the Tuskegee experiments were imaginary?

No- as I pointed out- you are imagining that FDR was responsible for Tuskagee- which he was no more responsible for than was Eisenhower.

You are imagining he was responsible for winning the war.

No- I am pointing out that he was directly responsible for American policy and strategy which in turn led to the United States winning the war.

In contrast to Tuskagee where he didn't even know about it.

 

[Unkotare]

....

FDR took office- unemployment was about 30%
FDR died- unemployment was virtually zero......

Because we were at war, not because of his irresponsible economic policies.

And those 'irresponsible economic policies'?

Oh lets see- massive government spending on buying stuff- which led to employment, and massive government spending on giving Americans government paid for jobs.

Yep- ended the Depression.

The wartime spending was a necessity, beyond the scumbag's choice one way or another. The irresponsible policies were his 'spaghetti on the wall' bullshitting attempts at fucking with the economy in bumbling ignorance during the years before the war that prolonged the depression.

 

[Unkotare]

... Tuskagee where he didn't even know about it.

How do you know that?

 

[rightwinger]

...

Politically and socially....he had little choice

That is complete and utter apologist bullshit.

Not at all

The world of 1942 was not tolerant of any perceived enemies

 

[Syriusly]

Fact remains FDR left our military unprepared for a war that was obviously coming.
And except for a lot of lucky breaks, would have lost both the Pacific and European Theaters.

Actually, we were remarkably well prepared, considering the isolationist stance of the United States. War just came about 1 year too early.

The United States had already started the draft, had one of the largest navies in the World, and most of the aircraft and equipment we fought with in WW2 had either been put into production(the B-17) or had been designed and would be in production(P-51).

FDR dragged the United States rather unwillingly into preparing for WW2 at a time when the country was firmly isolationist.

There is no chance we would have lost in the Pacific- even if we had lost our carriers at Pearl or at Midway, our building program was already churning out ships and planes that the Japanese could not hope to keep up with.

And by 1945 we would have had the atomic bomb.

We didn't succeed because of lucky breaks- we won some key battles with some lucky breaks- but the war we won because of our troops and our industrial war production- led by FDR.

In 1940 the entire US military consisted of 450,000 men. By 1945 it was at the required 12 million man level required to defeat the enemy.

In the first week of the war Japan had sunk every Allied capital ship in the Pacific by air.

In the first week of the war the entire US Army Air Corp in the Philippines lay in smoldering ruins.

Hardly what I call prepared for war.

And yes, America would have negotiated a treaty with Japan had we lost at Midway.

Well lets take a look at those numbers- shall we?

The United States Army had 1.5 million troops by the middle of 1941- months before the war started.
By the end of 1942- the Army had 5.4 million troops.

The American capital ships- the 8 battleships sunk or damaged at Pearl- were battleships- and what won the war in the Pacific were carriers.

The Japanese and Allied aircraft carrier fleets were fairly balanced at the start of the war. The Japanese had ten aircraft carriers, but only six were first-line carriers capable of operating large air groups. The Americans had seven aircraft carriers, one of which (the Ranger) never served in the Pacific because of its design flaws. The other six were comparable to their Japanese counterparts, but they were committed piecemeal to the Pacific theater because of the priority given to the European war. The British did not have a single carrier in the Far East when war broke out, but had deployed four carriers to Ceylon by 1943 that were roughly equivalent in fighting power to the four Japanese light carriers.

Both sides completed additional carriers during the war, but the Allies had a tremendous advantage in new naval construction. The Japanese completed six fleet carriers, four light carriers, and approximately seven escort carriers during the war. The United States completed seventeen fleet carriers of the Essex class, eleven light carriers of the Independence class, and 77 escort carriers, while the British were able to complete a total of thirteen fleet carriers and 41 escort carriers during the time span of the Pacific War. The Japanese would have been overwhelmed even if they had been able to maintain a unit-for-unit quality advantage.
The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: Aircraft Carriers

In 1941- the United States built more military planes than Germany and Japan combined-
The National WWII Museum | New Orleans: Learn: For Students: WWII by the Numbers: Wartime Production

By 1943 the United States was building 85,000 planes a year- more than Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union combined.

The United States was an industrial juggernaut. Admiral Yamamoto knew this and warned the Japanese government against attacking the United States.


Why am I not surprised by anyone who is so blind to FDR's accomplishments also believes that the United States would have surrendered so quickly after being attacked?

 

[Syriusly]

... Tuskagee where he didn't even know about it.

How do you know that?

Because you haven't produced a single piece of evidence that he did.

 

[rightwinger]

SO what?

Here's the thing. The Germans and Italians, besides being much larger ethnic groups, weren't the ones who bombed Pearl Harbor.

The very fact Trump can propel himself to the top of the GOP heap playing on fears of Mexicans and Muslims today gives you an idea of what FDR was dealing with in 1942. People were damned scared. the looked out at that big Pacific Ocean and for all they knew, a Japanese Battleship could show up off the coast and start shelling them.

We didn't slaughter the Japanese. We relocated them out of a possible war zone, and most of them were released within a year.

Y'all need to quit whining about it. Other ethnicities have much more valid complaints.

This was racist Jim Crow America
Germans and Italians looked like regular Americans should

Japanese did not....guess who got sent away?

In 1942 America, very few citizens complained, Congress supported it and the Supreme Court didn't care

6500 German citizens were still held in 1946. Remind me how many Japanese were held that long?

My grandmother was a German citizen during WWII. She was investigated by the FBI but never locked up. The German butcher she used belonged to the Nazi Bundt and spouted pro-Hitler rhetoric. He spent the duration of the war in a camp.

 

[browsing deer]

Some people still parrot the "for national security!" lie behind one of the several fallacious excuses for the CONCENTRATION CAMPS that vile scumbag fdr ran IN THE UNITED STATES, violating the most basic rights of US CITIZENS during WWII.

The criminal roosevelt administration knew damn well the population targeted for fdr's CONCENTRATION CAMPS did NOT represent a threat to the nation.

Ringle Report on Japanese Internment


"(h) That, in short, the entire "Japanese Problem" has been magnified out of its true proportion, largely because of the physical characteristics of the people; that it is no more serious that the problems of the German, Italian, and Communistic portions of the United States population, and, finally that it should be handled on the basis of the individual, regardless of citizenship, and not on a racial basis."


The only other US President to operate CONCENTRATION CAMPS in the US was also a democrat, but nowhere near the scale of the criminal fdr's unconstitutional outrage. Leaving aside his economic irresponsibility; personal immorality, dishonesty, and racism, there is nothing the mindless roosevelt nuthuggers can point to that could possibly mitigate a fundamentally unAmerican crime like that committed by the worst villain to ever sully our White House.

People try to justify FDR (Michelle Malkin put in yeoman work ) but FDR had a history of anti oriental prejudice going back to the Wilson administration. If he had survived the war he would have shipped the Japanese all back

 

[Unkotare]

... Tuskagee where he didn't even know about it.

How do you know that?

Because you haven't produced a single piece of evidence that he did.

That's not how it works. You made a claim.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Fact remains FDR left our military unprepared for a war that was obviously coming.
And except for a lot of lucky breaks, would have lost both the Pacific and European Theaters.

Actually, we were remarkably well prepared, considering the isolationist stance of the United States. War just came about 1 year too early.

The United States had already started the draft, had one of the largest navies in the World, and most of the aircraft and equipment we fought with in WW2 had either been put into production(the B-17) or had been designed and would be in production(P-51).

FDR dragged the United States rather unwillingly into preparing for WW2 at a time when the country was firmly isolationist.

There is no chance we would have lost in the Pacific- even if we had lost our carriers at Pearl or at Midway, our building program was already churning out ships and planes that the Japanese could not hope to keep up with.

And by 1945 we would have had the atomic bomb.

We didn't succeed because of lucky breaks- we won some key battles with some lucky breaks- but the war we won because of our troops and our industrial war production- led by FDR.

In 1940 the entire US military consisted of 450,000 men. By 1945 it was at the required 12 million man level required to defeat the enemy.

In the first week of the war Japan had sunk every Allied capital ship in the Pacific by air.

In the first week of the war the entire US Army Air Corp in the Philippines lay in smoldering ruins.

Hardly what I call prepared for war.

And yes, America would have negotiated a treaty with Japan had we lost at Midway.

Well lets take a look at those numbers- shall we?

The United States Army had 1.5 million troops by the middle of 1941- months before the war started.
By the end of 1942- the Army had 5.4 million troops.

The American capital ships- the 8 battleships sunk or damaged at Pearl- were battleships- and what won the war in the Pacific were carriers.

The Japanese and Allied aircraft carrier fleets were fairly balanced at the start of the war. The Japanese had ten aircraft carriers, but only six were first-line carriers capable of operating large air groups. The Americans had seven aircraft carriers, one of which (the Ranger) never served in the Pacific because of its design flaws. The other six were comparable to their Japanese counterparts, but they were committed piecemeal to the Pacific theater because of the priority given to the European war. The British did not have a single carrier in the Far East when war broke out, but had deployed four carriers to Ceylon by 1943 that were roughly equivalent in fighting power to the four Japanese light carriers.

Both sides completed additional carriers during the war, but the Allies had a tremendous advantage in new naval construction. The Japanese completed six fleet carriers, four light carriers, and approximately seven escort carriers during the war. The United States completed seventeen fleet carriers of the Essex class, eleven light carriers of the Independence class, and 77 escort carriers, while the British were able to complete a total of thirteen fleet carriers and 41 escort carriers during the time span of the Pacific War. The Japanese would have been overwhelmed even if they had been able to maintain a unit-for-unit quality advantage.
The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: Aircraft Carriers

In 1941- the United States built more military planes than Germany and Japan combined-
The National WWII Museum | New Orleans: Learn: For Students: WWII by the Numbers: Wartime Production

By 1943 the United States was building 85,000 planes a year- more than Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union combined.

The United States was an industrial juggernaut. Admiral Yamamoto knew this and warned the Japanese government against attacking the United States.


Why am I not surprised by anyone who is so blind to FDR's accomplishments also believes that the United States would have surrendered so quickly after being attacked?

Only 3 carriers were in the Pacific to counter Japanese aggression.
If you want to proclaim FDRs post war military build up yet remain blind to his keeping our military weak for the years prior, there is little debating you on the topic.
Nations do not attack nations who are stronger. Never happens.

 

[browsing deer]

The US historically had a miniscule army and a micro navy. The navy was kept small by treaty. This is the way politicians in both parties wanted it. FDR did what the the people wanted

After the World went crazy and the shooting started FDR knew soon or late the US would be involved. We were too rich and too tiny a military to stay out. FDR began a crash program of preparedness, but it was too little. People in the US didn't want to get involved in Europe, even less did we want to get involved in Asia.

The Japanese and German high command didn't realize how much economic capacity we had.

 

[Camp]

Fact remains FDR left our military unprepared for a war that was obviously coming.
And except for a lot of lucky breaks, would have lost both the Pacific and European Theaters.

Actually, we were remarkably well prepared, considering the isolationist stance of the United States. War just came about 1 year too early.

The United States had already started the draft, had one of the largest navies in the World, and most of the aircraft and equipment we fought with in WW2 had either been put into production(the B-17) or had been designed and would be in production(P-51).

FDR dragged the United States rather unwillingly into preparing for WW2 at a time when the country was firmly isolationist.

There is no chance we would have lost in the Pacific- even if we had lost our carriers at Pearl or at Midway, our building program was already churning out ships and planes that the Japanese could not hope to keep up with.

And by 1945 we would have had the atomic bomb.

We didn't succeed because of lucky breaks- we won some key battles with some lucky breaks- but the war we won because of our troops and our industrial war production- led by FDR.

In 1940 the entire US military consisted of 450,000 men. By 1945 it was at the required 12 million man level required to defeat the enemy.

In the first week of the war Japan had sunk every Allied capital ship in the Pacific by air.

In the first week of the war the entire US Army Air Corp in the Philippines lay in smoldering ruins.

Hardly what I call prepared for war.

And yes, America would have negotiated a treaty with Japan had we lost at Midway.

Fact remains FDR left our military unprepared for a war that was obviously coming.
And except for a lot of lucky breaks, would have lost both the Pacific and European Theaters.

Actually, we were remarkably well prepared, considering the isolationist stance of the United States. War just came about 1 year too early.

The United States had already started the draft, had one of the largest navies in the World, and most of the aircraft and equipment we fought with in WW2 had either been put into production(the B-17) or had been designed and would be in production(P-51).

FDR dragged the United States rather unwillingly into preparing for WW2 at a time when the country was firmly isolationist.

There is no chance we would have lost in the Pacific- even if we had lost our carriers at Pearl or at Midway, our building program was already churning out ships and planes that the Japanese could not hope to keep up with.

And by 1945 we would have had the atomic bomb.

We didn't succeed because of lucky breaks- we won some key battles with some lucky breaks- but the war we won because of our troops and our industrial war production- led by FDR.

In 1940 the entire US military consisted of 450,000 men. By 1945 it was at the required 12 million man level required to defeat the enemy.

In the first week of the war Japan had sunk every Allied capital ship in the Pacific by air.

In the first week of the war the entire US Army Air Corp in the Philippines lay in smoldering ruins.

Hardly what I call prepared for war.

And yes, America would have negotiated a treaty with Japan had we lost at Midway.

Nonsense. Not a single battleship was sunk at Pearl Harbor. Two were "lost in action" but the harbor was actually too shallow for them to sink. They only went down far enough for their hulks to rest on the bottom with their decks above water and able to be repaired. There were six other battleships there and while damaged, they were all repaired and returned to service. In addition, not a single carrier was even damaged.

Here is a link giving details.

historynewsnetwork.org/article/32489