U.S. Soldiers Mercenaries?

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

You’re kidding, right?

I asked you for a source regarding Japanese plans for expansion into the Philippines at the beginning of the century. I don’t joke about academic matters. Do you have an author and title I might look up for myself?

That’s your interpretation – funny how no one else had a better solution at the time.

I wasn’t offering a solution, just an interpretation, which isn’t only my own. Just as you do in your posts.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

I asked you for a source regarding Japanese plans for expansion into the Philippines at the beginning of the century. I don’t joke about academic matters. Do you have an author and title I might look up for myself?

I gave you a short synopsis of Japanese expansionism from 1895 to 1910.

Japan had been building a world-class Navy since 1870, with an Army to match. They used those armaments freely – including two major wars, the Sino-Japanese war of 1894-5 and the Russo-Japanese war of 1905. No statesmen of any caliber in 1898 would fail to understand that if the Philippines were left on their own, they would soon fall to Japan.

From; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Japan#Wars_with_China_and_Russia

Japanese intellectuals of the late-Meiji period espoused the concept of a “line of advantage,” an idea that would help to justify Japanese foreign policy at the turn of the century. According to this principle, embodied in the slogan fukoku kyōhei , Japan would be vulnerable to aggressive Western imperialism unless it extended a line of advantage beyond its borders which would help to repel foreign incursions and strengthen the Japanese economy. Emphasis was especially placed on Japan’s “preeminent interests” in the Korean Peninsula, once famously described as a “dagger pointed at the heart of Japan.” It was tensions over Korea and Manchuria, respectively, that led Japan to become involved in the first Sino-Japanese War with China in 1894-1895 and the Russo-Japanese War with Russia in 1904-1905. The war with China made Japan the world’s first non-Western imperial power. It established Japan’s dominant interest in Korea, while giving it the Pescadores Islands, Formosa (now Taiwan), and the Liaodong Peninsula in Manchuria

In other words, by the 1890s, Japan was clearly embarked on its militaristic expansion. For the United States to fail to understand this we would have to be led by men who were deaf and blind.

I wasn’t offering a solution, just an interpretation, which isn’t only my own. Just as you do in your posts.

Since there was no alternative solution, your interpretation fails.

 

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

I gave you a short synopsis of Japanese expansionism from 1895 to 1910.

I was looking for a hard source about the Japanese and the Philippines, but thanks anyway.

Since there was no alternative solution, your interpretation fails.

My interpretation? You flatter me, Sir.

My own interpretations don’t amount to any more than your interpretations do. The penchant for U.S. governments to install and support dictators in the region, however, has been a topic addressed by more than a few historians.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

My own interpretations don’t amount to any more than your interpretations do. The penchant for U.S. governments to install and support dictators in the region, however, has been a topic addressed by more than a few historians.

Your interpretations are based on the unspoken (and now implicitly stated) assumption that there was an alternative.

There wasn’t, and therefore the interpretation fails.

 

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

Your interpretations are based on the unspoken (and now implicitly stated) assumption that there was an alternative.

I interpreted nothing, but repeated what most historians hold about U.S. actions in the region. You are free to believe that the U.S. always acts correctly wherever it acts, and I know that there are those who agree with you, but there is also a body of historical opinion that holds otherwise.

There wasn’t, and therefore the interpretation fails.

Read the above.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

I interpreted nothing, but repeated what most historians hold about U.S. actions in the region. You are free to believe that the U.S. always acts correctly wherever it acts, and I know that there are those who agree with you, but there is also a body of historical opinion that holds otherwise.

I don’t see any of those historians posting here. I see your posts. And I see you advancing an interpretation. You type the words, you must stand behind them.

And since we both agree there was no alternative, your interpretation fails.

 

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

I don’t see any of those historians posting here. I see your posts.

If we were to rely on original research on this Forum to support the opinions we express, there’d be very few posts on any thread. I have no problem repeating what reputable historians have said. Sorry that you do.

And I see you advancing an interpretation. You type the words, you must stand behind them.

**If **I advanced them as my own interpretation, not simply as “an interpretation.”

And since we both agree there was no alternative, your interpretation fails.

Where did I agree that there was no alternative?

 

[wabrams]

vern humphrey:

Your interpretations are based on the unspoken (and now implicitly stated) assumption that there was an alternative.

There wasn’t, and therefore the interpretation fails.

There is always another solution: leave them alone.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

If we were to rely on original research on this Forum to support the opinions we express, there’d be very few posts on any thread. I have no problem repeating what reputable historians have said. Sorry that you do.

Which reputable historian were you quoting when you said this?

Save lives and maintain order, yes, so that the operations of the great American fruit companies in Central America would not be jeopardized. Like the civilian goon squads employed by automakers back in that era, the Marines served, to their disgrace IMO, as the goons of the American banana and pineapple cartels in the region.

**If **I advanced them as my own interpretation, not simply as “an interpretation.”

So which historian said US Marines were “like the civilian goon squads employed by automakers back in that era?”
Arba Sicula:

Where did I agree that there was no alternative?

When I asked you what it was, and you declined, of course!

 

[vern_humphrey]

wabrams:

There is always another solution: leave them alone.

Sort of like leaving Rwanda alone?

You really favor refusing to aid nations that have descended into genocide and famine?

 

[wabrams]

vern humphrey:

Sort of like leaving Rwanda alone?

I thought we were discussing the historical time frame from the 1890’s thru the 1930’s. Why bring up the 1990’s?
vern humphrey:

You really favor refusing to aid nations that have descended into genocide and famine?

So Haiti and Nicaragua were falling into genocide?

 

[vern_humphrey]

wabrams:

I thought we were discussing the historical time frame from the 1890’s thru the 1930’s. Why bring up the 1990’s?

Is it your theory then, that what is right today would have been wrong in the 1890s through the 1930s?

Do moral standards change with the seasons?

wabrams:

So Haiti and Nicaragua were falling into genocide?

In both countries there was social or tribal warfare on-going. If you noticed, we intervened again in Haiti within the last decade.

 

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

Do moral standards change with the seasons?

If you’re speaking about our government, yes.

 

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

When I asked you what it was, and you declined, of course!

Failure to give an alternative doesn’t equate to agreeing with you.

 

[wabrams]

vern humphrey:

Is it your theory then, that what is right today would have been wrong in the 1890s through the 1930s?

You’re talking about apples and oranges here, and I didn’t imply that what is good today wasn’t yesterday.
vern humphrey:

In both countries there was social or tribal warfare on-going. If you noticed, we intervened again in Haiti within the last decade.

Then maybe that ought to be an indicator that we stink at nation building on our own.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

If you’re speaking about our government, yes.

Really? You believe there are no absolute moral standards?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

Failure to give an alternative doesn’t equate to agreeing with you.

If you disagree, feel free to write your alternative in the space below.

 

[vern_humphrey]

wabrams:

You’re talking about apples and oranges here, and I didn’t imply that what is good today wasn’t yesterday.

Then what did you mean when you objected to me discussing problems in Third World nations of the 1990s?

wabrams:

Then maybe that ought to be an indicator that we stink at nation building on our own.

Who’s better at it?

 

[Arba_Sicula]

vern humphrey:

Really? You believe there are no absolute moral standards?

If you are speaking about our government, yes. They certainly don’t act as if there were such.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arba Sicula:

If you are speaking about our government, yes. They certainly don’t act as if there were such.

Which reputable historian are you quoting now?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon12.gif