|
Wasn't it McArthur who arrogantly quoted he knew THE ASIAN MINDSET or was this is a Vietnam Cold War era general? forgive me for bringing up populist quoting of supposed historical dickbags and all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:03 |
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Japanese sexuality has been it's weird thing way before some white dude showed up. That and he gets blamed for Japanese prudishness and censored porn by Weebs, when the laws that affected that kind of stuff go back to something like 1906.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I just used America as an example since I'm more confident saying it didn't have any coups. Is there a reason modern European states have also been fairly immune to it? I'd be inclined to say because they keep nicking wealth from everywhere else so people don't get desperate enough for it to seem like a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Wasn't he responsible for the Japanese taking up whaling as a way to resolve food shortages?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
MacArthur also wanted to push the Korean war further into China and he even tried to get some nukes ready for the attack. When he was ordered to not start World War 3, he went public with his criticism of Truman, which is a thing you're not supposed to do. the military aren't supposed to go against the civilian government. It's all part of that "not having a coup" thing. So he got fired.President Truman posted:I fired him because he wouldn't respect the authority of the President. I didn't fire him because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three-quarters of them would be in jail. After that, he tried going on a speaking tour criticizing Truman, but it turned out that nobody was much interested in what he had to say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Wasn't he responsible for the Japanese taking up whaling as a way to resolve food shortages? He lifted the ban on it to help with the food shortage, but Japan's history with whaling goes back long before him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Yes, they're concentration camp inmates. The Germans put them in a tank to test out their newest tanks against the real deal, the plot of the movie is how the T-34 crew is making a break for it. That sounds like a really bad idea on the part of the Nazis. Although it's not like the Nazis didn't have all sorts of terrible ideas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I just used America as an example since I'm more confident saying it didn't have any coups. Is there a reason modern European states have also been fairly immune to it? A strong parliament seems to do the trick. Not even democracy or actual representation, mind you, but a system of government where there's a clear tendency away from dictatorship and a clear idea of how state power is properly used (Cyrano might have a different opinion here). No Nordic country had a military coup happen, for instance. The last one happened in the UK during the Civil Wars, France saw one attempt in the last hundred years or so. The European military coups and coup attempts mostly happen in countries that didn't really have a working democracy going on. Crazycryodude posted:It really depends on A) what you define as a military coup, B) what's a "Western" country (South/Central America in particular would like a word), and C) how far back you're looking. You can replace western with first world, I guess. And for how far back, I've mostly considered the end of the Napoleonic Wars and from that point onwards, when we get the creation of the modern states in Europe and North America that still mostly exist today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Don't forget taking massive payments from the Philippines treasury. I would love to see the Monty, Patton and MacArthur "dream team" go up against Bradley, Ike and Marshall and get creamed Oh and I almost forgot on the USA coup front: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:That sounds like a myth of American exceptionalism, though. Most western countries have not been subject to military coups. Kemper Boyd posted:You can replace western with first world, I guess. And for how far back, I've mostly considered the end of the Napoleonic Wars and from that point onwards, when we get the creation of the modern states in Europe and North America that still mostly exist today. Taking Cold War NATO: Belgium Canada Denmark France Germany Greece Iceland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Turkey United Kingdom USA Belgium: formed in 1830 through a revolution, post-Napoleonic Wars. Canada: nothing (dominion during most of the period). Denmark: forced into a constitutional monarchy in 1849. France: last coup 1958, last coup attempt 1961. Germany: either the Machtergreifung of 1933 or the post-WW2 installation of West Germany. Iceland: nothing (lesser partner in personal unions during much of the period). Italy: Mussolini coup 1922, anti-Mussolini coup 1943, last coup attempt 1970. Luxembourg: nothing. Netherlands: nothing (last coup attempt 1918). Norway: nothing (lesser partner in personal unions during much of the period). Portugal: last coup 1974. Spain: last coup 1936 (Spanish Civil War), last coup attempt 1985. Turkey: last coup 1980, last coup attempt 2016. United Kingdom: nothing. United States of America: American Civil War. So in your time period, about half the countries had coups or full-on civil wars, and several of the others weren't really independent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
Coups are going to happen in countries that are weak and/or unstable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Relevant, the UK was *extremely* worried about a socialist revolution in the years before WWI and deployed troops to the streets on several occasions to quash mass protests.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Hunt11 posted:Coups are going to happen in countries that are weak and/or unstable. A large military proportional to the civilian population also seems to be a consistent factor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 18:53
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Relevant, the UK was *extremely* worried about a socialist revolution in the years before WWI and deployed troops to the streets on several occasions to quash mass protests. This was happening even before the 1st World War, the French Revolution began this suspicion with the traditional ruling classes and was constantly updated as time passed. The international Imperial version was also included in this after the Indian Mutiny/1st Independence War for India. When you think about the seeds of this were actually laid during the chaos of the era of the Civil Wars. A certain goon who posts in this thread can go into much more depth about the socialist history of the UK in this very thread. Just mention the name George.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I would love to see the Monty, Patton and MacArthur "dream team" go up against Bradley, Ike and Marshall and get creamed Eh, I think the Congressional investigation was pretty accurate when they dismissed it as a "cocktail putsch" that was never really going anywhere. The only successful coups in the US were by white supremacists, and I guess you could try to frame the Confederacy in that way if you had to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Wasn't it McArthur who arrogantly quoted he knew THE ASIAN MINDSET or was this is a Vietnam Cold War era general? forgive me for bringing up populist quoting of supposed historical dickbags and all. It was him. Which is why he ignored all the warnings about the initial attack in the Korean War and all the warnings about the Chinese buildups and threats to intervene. Because something something Asian mindset. It's almost too stupid to believe, except for all the evidence supporting that was the case. I'd almost suspect he was gunning for a Presidential run, I believe that the John Birch people tried to recruit him in 1952, but Ike steamrollered him in the run-up to the convention.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Wasn't it McArthur who arrogantly quoted he knew THE ASIAN MINDSET or was this is a Vietnam Cold War era general? forgive me for bringing up populist quoting of supposed historical dickbags and all. That was Westmoreland "The Oriental doesn't put the same high value on life as does a Westerner. We value life and human dignity." Famously the 1974 documentary Hearts and Minds juxtaposed this with an interview with a Vietnamese guy who was falling to poo poo and distraught as all gently caress because a B52 raid just vaporized his wife and kids. edit: sullat posted:It was him. Which is why he ignored all the warnings about the initial attack in the Korean War and all the warnings about the Chinese buildups and threats to intervene. Because something something Asian mindset. No, it was Westmoreland. This was his explanation for why killing the gently caress out of the Vietnamese didn't win the war. They are unfeeling Orientals who don't value life, hence why our flattening their country didn't bring them to their knees. Regarding coups and why you don't see many of them in the US / Europe in the 20th century (I'm charitably assuming this is what people mean when they say "no modern coups" in those places): There are three big issues: The first is stability. Put simply populations who are prosperous and generally speaking happy don't try to topple their governments. Even for a military coup you need a certain base line of discontent with the government. A bunch of generals can knock off the president and try to declare themselves in power, but if Joe MP doesn't stick with them they're kind of hosed. A LOT of failed coups fall to poo poo because the leaders don't gain enough support from the rest of the military and end up getting squashed. See: Turkey's recent events for a good example of that. Basically are things so hosed that the population is going to support the coup, or are they so mega-hosed that enough of your soldiers are going to be willing to fire on their fellow countrymen and/or fellow brothers in arms. This is also why places with a strong divide between the military and the rest of the population are more at risk for them. The second is the strength of institutions. If you have a 200+ year history of the military staying the gently caress out of politics and respecting civilian government that is a LOT of cultural intertia to overcome. Any individual general might be fine with knocking things over and taking power, but he has to get the support of other like minded individuals. This also feeds into the support of the population as a whole. The third is related to the second - a tradition of accepting the rule of civilian government. If you have a few centuries of democratic elections and the understanding that their results are a thing to be respected it is a lot harder to get support for reversing the will of the people. It also gives the average citizen a sense that they are invested in the status quo that you don't have under systems where the government exists very apart from the governed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:
I'm on holiday at the moment, but I'll bear it in mind. A good place to check out would be the Great Glasgow Riots and in particular the deployment of troops and tanks in George Square. Glasgow has a long history of starting almost-coups, in 1820 there was actually a formal revolutionary committee formed in the city . Apart from Maclean, the great and bold, and possibly Gallacher, the Red Clydeside men weren't really aiming for revolution though, though having said that they'd probably have gone for it if events spiralled out of control. edit: and thanks for the shoutout!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:
I assume he must have also believed this about British people to explain why they didn't surrender during the blitz, unless there was something different about them (but what?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
nah british people are motivated by a pure love of freedom and democracy
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Fangz posted:nah british people are motivated by a pure love of freedom and democracy But what about the Germans, Romanians, Japanese, and other people who didn't surrender after mass strategic bombing campaigns? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:No, it was Westmoreland. T It is possible for more than one US General to have weird Orientalist views that contributed to his mishandling of US military actions in Asia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
So, ugh, how did Patton and Monty got both so high up the totem pole and so lionized?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
sullat posted:It was him. Which is why he ignored all the warnings about the initial attack in the Korean War and all the warnings about the Chinese buildups and threats to intervene. Because something something Asian mindset. It's almost too stupid to believe, except for all the evidence supporting that was the case. I'd almost suspect he was gunning for a Presidential run, I believe that the John Birch people tried to recruit him in 1952, but Ike steamrollered him in the run-up to the convention. Oh he didn't just ignore them, he used them to get himself awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross and combat wings because he flew his personal airliner over the border on a heroic reconnaissance mission where he didn't see anybody on the ground so therefore the CIA was wrong. The day after this, the Chinese attacked. IIRC he also had a intel officer who was basically falsifying documents to prop up the myth that there were no Chinese in Korea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:05
|
|
JcDent posted:So, ugh, how did Patton and Monty got both so high up the totem pole and so lionized? Monty hosed up hard with Market Garden but aside from the eye rolling Anglo-American rivalry bullshit was a pretty okay general when matters of his ego weren't in play. Though the victories that made him famous during the African campaign were set up by the previous British and Commonwealth generals and being well liked by the common soldier of the Commonwealth forces helped boost his image quite a bit. I imagine he gets more praise than he should because the other generals of the British Army and Commonwealth forces during the 2nd World War are virtually unknown. Yes, weirdly enough even Slim. SeanBeansShako fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Dec 28, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
JcDent posted:So, ugh, how did Patton and Monty got both so high up the totem pole and so lionized? Patton was a character and so got written about a lot, he also got that biopic film made about him, Monty was at the helm when the first large victory of the war for Britain happened. There were other factors sure but those would be the two things i think that made them unique to be remembered in the way that they are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
McArthur retained his job throughout WW2 because Roosevelt was careful to try to keep some right-wing voices around and one of those was McArthur, so everything from him was tolerated. Truman was a lot more amenable to McArthur's politics, but I think Dugout Doug was really arrogant after serving a president he despised and not getting fired ever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
A friend just sent me this:
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Regarding coups and why you don't see many of them in the US / Europe in the 20th century (I'm charitably assuming this is what people mean when they say "no modern coups" in those places): France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Turkey* by that definition. That's a solid chunk of the non-microstates of Europe in the 20th century. I think the premise is flawed. *Multiple times, but arguably not Europe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
my dad posted:A friend just sent me this: Please tell me this is a parody of similar thinking and not an Actual Position People are Taking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Please tell me this is a parody of similar thinking and not an Actual Position People are Taking. I think it's not to be taken as an academic dissertation, I can tell from the use of Mercator's protection.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Please tell me this is a parody of similar thinking and not an Actual Position People are Taking. #FlatEarth
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
But in case anyone gets into an argument with a 12/7 denialist, ask them to prove that the Japanese planes didn't take the shortcut through Panama and Suez canals. Qogito ergo demonstratum!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Clearly the shortest route is to fly through the Pacific Ocean and come up through the Atlantic 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Truman was a lot more amenable to McArthur's politics, but I think Dugout Doug was really arrogant after serving a president he despised and not getting fired ever. Truman wasn't especially amenable to MacArthur, but by the time Truman took office MacArthur was virtually untouchable in American politics - MacArthur knew how to play the politics game and play up his own self-image (see the Philippines).
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
December 7th, 1931: The real date that lives in infamy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
my dad posted:A friend just sent me this: Do we have the same friend?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Do we have the same friend? Extremely unlikely. I imagine it got shared a lot, and they saw it at different places downstream.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
my dad posted:Extremely unlikely. Oh, I'm basically 100% sure we don't. Timing was just weirdly close - popped up in my FB chat within maybe +/- 15 mins of you posting it here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:03 |
|
|
Question related to Mac and Patton's lionization in the American pop consciousness: why didn't Ike or Bradley get a similar larger-than-life treatment? I mean, Eisenhower made it into the dang oval office and he still gets short shrift compared to George "Take that, bonus army" Patton.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2016 22:31
|
|
