>"The history of the world from the 15th century was one of aggression of white people towards the rest of the world,"

Yep, and we fucking pwned the shit out of everyone. Even ourselves. Badass.

lulz japs

The US needs to cut the cooperative and accepting stance it has taken for the past fifty years and become massively expansionist/imperialist again.

Did anyone hear China and both Koreas cocking their guns?

And yet they still deny Nanking and Unit 731.

>>67910
lol Japan

>Japan should consider developing nuclear weapons, the former head of the Japanese air force has said.

They would only be useful against South Korea or North Korea; China is too big.

>And if the country had atomic weapons in 1945, it should have used them against the Allies, General Toshio Tamogami added.

What are you going to do?

>claimed Japan was tricked into the war
>According to Gen Tamogami, Washington was aware that an attack was planned against Pearl Harbor in December 1941 but no warning was given to the forces there in order to win over public opinion in the US for a war.

So? Whatever the case, Japan was the aggressor. Their decision to embark on empire building without an alternative source of oil was a mistake. The US had every right to place an embargo.

If the Japanese were smart, they would not have tried to follow the European example by establishing colonies. Instead, they should have made business deals with the warlords in China to manufacture quality goods that the Chinese peasantry could not produce, in exchange for raw materials such as fuel and metal.

All in all, Japan shouldn't complain. They are still tops in Asia, even at 1/10th of the Chinese population.

Does the US give advance warnings of its attack knowing it'll cost lives of American servicemen? Of course not. One man's sneak attack is another's pre-emptive strike.

>>67918
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war

i dunno..

>>67914
How the fuck was Japan "tricked" into the war? Fuckers wanted to have colonies but didn't have enough oil to keep expanding so they had to invade the Dutch East Indies to get ahold of the oil wells, but knew that America would declare war if they did because it would mean also taking the Philippines so they attempted to crush the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor. They estimated that it would take atleast afew years for America to rebuild its Pacific Fleet, giving them enough time to swoop in and take the Dutch East Indies and then bring America to the negotiation tables. Japan could not win the war and they knew it, they could only attempt to negotiate, however when they failed to sink the carriers they were basically fucked and within about a year America had rebuilt its Pacific fleet, even raising and repairing most of the battleships sunk at Pearl.

It's just like a woman who got raped thinking about buying a strap-on dildo

>>Does the US give advance warnings of its attack knowing it'll cost lives of American servicemen?

Actually, yeah. They did. That's how white people did war for hundreds of years.

>>67931
They also tried to avoid cities and towns, because fighting in open fields was easier, and according to knights, more noble.

>>67934
>They also tried to avoid cities and towns, because fighting in open fields was easier, and according to knights, more noble.

Right, the white knights of yore and present are sooooo honorable (pic related). Fuck you.

Anyway, I don't see why Japan shouldn't build nuclear weapons for themselves. America has 'em, China has 'em, it seems just about everyone has 'em these days.

Besides, Japan defending themselves means they are defending also US.

What do you mean, you ask?

Well, do you like Japanese cars? Japanese anime and manga? Japanese porn (/t/)? Japanese cell phones? Japanese.... image boards (/n/)?

Japan brought all these things and many to the world, and it would sadden me deeply if any country decides they want to nuke Japan for any reason.

>>67943
Then again, Japan getting nuked would release a torrent of weeaboo baaawing the likes of which the world has never seen, which would be so incredibly hilarious that we'd die of laughter as they wept.

>>67943
YES, ALL COUNTRIES SHOULD HAVE NUKES! WHY SHOULD THE IMPORTANT COUNTRIES HAVE NUKES? NORTH KOREA SHOULD HAVE NUKES! IRAN SHOULD HAVE NUKES! SYRIA SHOULD HAVE NUKES! SWEDEN SHOULD HAVE NUKES! GERMANY SHOULD HAVE NUKES! PERU SHOULD HAVE NUKES! CHRISTMAS ISLAND SHOULD HAVE NUKES! EVERYBODY SHOULD HAVE NUKES! SO THEN WHEN ONE COUNTRY GETS TIRED OF ANOTHER HE'D JUST SHOOT HIS NUKE AND BLOW UP THAT COUNTRY, SETTING OFF A CHAIN REACTION OF WORLD-WIDE MUTUAL DESTRUCTION ALL ACROSS THE GLOBE!

You are truly a faggot. Seriously, why the fuck does Japan need their own nukes when they have America to protect them? There's a reason why we have fucking bases in Japan.

>>67945

I thought we only built those to rape Japanese women and fuel their xenophobia.

>>67946
That's what the Japs would like you to think, but if they weren't there China would would be raping the shit out of Japan.

Also lol Japan complaining about rape.

>>They also tried to avoid cities and towns, because fighting in open fields was easier, and according to knights, more noble.

And because peasants had value. Medieval Europe wasn't like Asia, where a lord could go around chopping off heads because a million other chicks/nips/gooks would replace them and do the farm work.

>>67948
You'd think that but the chinks are smart enough to not do it or it could destroy their entire economy.

South Korea got the same shit going for it right now. You always see them complaining with EXTREME levels of anti-americanism but nobody gives a shit and never will ever. Them Nips and gooks are our economic slave bithes.

>>67948
I heard it's like saying "hello" over there.

>>67943
Better reason why Japan having nukes is defending America: Who's Japan going to be pointing them at, America or China/North Korea/Russia?
The day Japan gets nukes is the day America frees up 100,000 soldiers in Japan (and probably more in Korea) because we have an ally to counterbalance China in the region, rather then a dependency to worry about.
>>They would only be useful against South Korea or North Korea; China is too big.
Not as a deterrent. America and Russia are bigger then China. They Still don't mess with nuke threats. And Japan wouldn't have a pussy barely there programs like Pakistan either.
Japan would have no problem building a Multiple Warhead ICBM.

>>67995
Japan with nukes would be scary... how can we be sure they don't want payback for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

>>67995
>as a deterrent.
>America and Russia are bigger then China.
>bigger than China.

I can already tell you're a fucking retarded uneducated faggot.

Stop talking shit you know nothing about and fuck off, kid.

>>68000
>>I can already tell you're a fucking retarded uneducated faggot.
I'm uneducated because I know that Russia is the largest nation on the planet, and nearly twice the size of China?
I will admit I was wrong about the U.S. Being larger then China. China is larger by 153,000 sq kilometers, making it a whopping 1.6% larger then the United States. Clearly I should have noticed such a clear distinction in size.

>>68003
Ummm... population is more important that actual size of the territory. Canada is the second largest country in the world but nobody cares much about what happens up there because it has a small population.

China being "smaller" than Russia has no bearing on the fact that they would survive a nuclear attack better because there's 1.4 billion of them.

>>68004
Actually the most important thing is how resiliant the infrastructure is.

>>68006
No, population is more important as it determines your capacity to fight back or not after the bombings.

>>68004
>>68003
Going by the number of nukes America and Russia each have, neither size of territory nor size of population mean a damn thing. Both countries could hit every single large-medium sized city in any given country on Earth, whether it's China, India, Japan, America or Russia.

That being said, there's more of a chance for the rural populations in Russia and America to survive than China, since even their rural population is much more concentrated.

Just look at this map. Lots of China's land is inhabitable. Their size of occupied land is tiny in comparison.

>And if the country had atomic weapons in 1945, it should have used them against the Allies, General Toshio Tamogami added.

What the fuck?! If any German leader said something like that about Germany they'd be executed.

>>68049
meant to say uninhabitable.

>>68052
It's called double standards. The Japanese got off easily from the fucked up shit they did in WWII.

>Many historian estimates put the number of murdered from nearly 3,000,000 to over 10,000,000 people, most probably 6,000,000 Chinese, Indonesians, Koreans, Filipinos, and Indochinese, among others, including Western prisoners of war. According to Rummel, in China alone, during 1937-45, approximately 3.9 million Chinese were killed, mostly civilians, as a direct result of the Japanese operations and 10.2 millions in the course of the war.

These figures would place the Japanese death toll in East Asia on equal or even worse terms than that of the Nazis in Europe.

>>68052
Speaking objectively, if the Germans or Japanese did have nuclear weapons in '45, they SHOULD have used them.

>>67934
>They also tried to avoid cities and towns, because fighting in open fields was easier, and according to knights, more noble.

I hope you're not suggesting this is how fighting was done in medieval Europe. Otherwise, you must not be familiar with the campaign of Edward the Black Prince.

>>68057
>The Japanese got off easily from the fucked up shit they did in WWII.

As did the British after their empire collapsed. Whole publishing industries exist in London whose only purpose is to try to whitewash that period.

>>68075
Are you suggesting the British engaged in massive rape of enslaved women (confort women), took thousands of civilians and massacred them on the beach (Singapore massacre), performed biological weapon experiments or vivisections on captured civilians (Unit 731), or had competitions on who could kill the most natives with a katana?

I don't think so, Tim.
There were atrocities, surely, but anything the European powers did during the 19th century pales in comparison to what the Japanese did in a few years of WW2.

>>68078
Seconded. I know that all wars have atrocities, with WW2 standing out as one of the most vicious wars in history. Both Axis and Allied powers exhibited tremendous cruelty to their foes in an all out war. But Japan stands out even against the Nazis for their barbarity against their enemies. The Nazis atleast attempted to treat their POWs well, the Japanese could care less.

>>68057
>got off easily
I really don't get this mentality. Are we supposed to be happy Japan got nuked? They had it coming? Save the excuses for heads of state, there are few things more pathetic than a nationalist zealot defending their country's crimes.

>>68078
The British commited horrendous acts in the name of their empire. Look it up.
And as for you and >>68079
There never should have been an attempt to make any set of rules for warfare. There can never be such a thing.
No side in the history of the world in any war has NOT committed atrocities. The difference is, the winners get to erase theirs.

>>68057
>>The Japanese got off easily from the fucked up shit they did in WWII.
Millions dead and a country devastated. Two cities destroyed with nuclear weapons. No, they got beat quite hard. What it seems you want to do is a common but terrible misconception that we should punish the sons for the sins of the father. It's the same mentality that brought forward white guilt.

>>68081

A land invasion of Japan would have created an casualties estimated into the millions. The Japanese people, as told by their leaders, jumped off of cliffs instead of living as US troops entered their villages. Why? The Japanese government said that the US troops would rape and burn them alive. So tens of thousands of Japanese, mostly women and children, fell to their deaths.

>>68081
I never justified the nukes, in fact my post does not have the words "nuclear weapons" on it. Enjoy your strawman.

>>68083
>The British commited horrendous acts in the name of their empire. Look it up.
Again, I never said they didn't. All I said is that they paled in comparison to those of the Japanese.

>There never should have been an attempt to make any set of rules for warfare. There can never be such a thing.
Such a thing exists and it's called the Geneva Convention.

>>68086
"They got off" means the murderers and the overall nationalist mentality of the Japanese nation, which remains largely unchanged.

You can see this with the naive declarations made by the OP general, full of nationalist amnesia.

Or by the simple fact that Japan is the only nation to have elected a WWII fascist war criminal (Class A) as a peacetime leader, Tojo cabinet minister Nobusuke Kishi became Prime Minister in 1957, eight years after his release from prison.

Compare this with Germany, a nation where most war criminals were executed, yet they are constantly reminded of the Holocaust and being guilt tripped about it even though the nation's mentality has changed a lot during the last decades.

These two extremes show you that Japan, as a nation, "got off easily" from what they did, particularly when you consider the United States rebuilt their country into a First World power in a couple of decades.

And spare me the sentimentality, the 600k deaths from the nuclear weapons were an atrocity but pale in comparison to the casualties other countries suffered. Some argue that a land invasion of Japan would have costed *much* more lives.

>>68092
>>Again, I never said they didn't. All I said is that they paled in comparison to those of the Japanese.
No, they really don't. Opium wars, rape, oppression, and murder abound.

>>Such a thing exists and it's called the Geneva Convention.
Hah, you believe in the Geneva convention. You missed the point, you CAN NOT put a set of rules to war, you can try, but they will be violated. It's the nature of war to not follow the rules.

>>68092
You need to stop assuming things and start reading what other people are writing here.
Now, how exactly is it that you want Japan to be punished today?

>>68094
>Opium wars
The wars against China by the UK at the end of the 19th century largely involved naval battles, I'm not sure what particularly notorious atrocities are associated with them.

>>68094
>No, they really don't. Opium wars, rape, oppression, and murder abound.
Yet you haven't given one single example.

Britain didn't kill 6-10 million Chinese civilians, didn't rape thousands of women, didn't experiment biological weapons and "the effects of frostbite" with live victims, and didn't massacre entire populations for the sake of it.

Britain's 19th century policy was the brutal colonization of helpless natives, the imposition of white minority rule, and the implementation of free trade and the building of infraestructure by force to gain new markets from where to obtain raw materials and sell their products. But this policy never involved actual genocide.

In contrast, Japan's official doctrine endorsed by Emperor Hirohito was "Kill all, Burn all, Loot all", and the results are plain to see.

>You missed the point, you CAN NOT put a set of rules to war, you can try, but they will be violated. It's the nature of war to not follow the rules.
A lot of modern wars, if not all, were fought respecting the terms of the Geneva Convention. I agree it doesn't work for TOTAL WAR, but for limited wars between gentlemany powers seems to be good enough.

>Now, how exactly is it that you want Japan to be punished today?
Another strawman! Stop putting words in my mouth! I don't want "Japan punished", I'm just saying that their crimes should be more remembered in Japan itself because they have been whitewashed too much and that leads to naive nationalist opinions like the OP general.

>>68094

The other guy is on the ball here. You are assuming too much from the discussion. He is giving a layout of factual information to show that your general argument has been invalidated.

>>68092
Now, as for Britain vs. Japan on atrocities, are you thinking of the acts themselves or just the numbers involved?

>>68097
You should look into the role Britian had in the devastating famines in India under their rule.

>>68103
And what they did in Nova Scotia as well.

>The Nazis atleast attempted to treat their POWs well, the Japanese could care less.

facepalm.png

Are you aware that about 2/3rds of Soviet POWs were killed by the Nazis? 3.5 million murdered in cold blood.

Compare that to the allies, where only about 5% died in Nazi POW camps. It was genocide plain and simple.

>>68114
There was a huge gap between how prisoners on the Western and Eastern front were treated.

>>68114
The Nazis treated their POWs differently depending on their nationality, and the general that was in charge.

For example, Rommel in Africa was extremely gentlemany, he treated all his POWs with respect, rejecting direct orders by Hitler to send all the captured Jewish soldiers to the mainland, and even demanding that captured French workers be paid for the construction of the Atlantic Wall.

In contrast, most of the SS generals in the Eastern Front were fucking animals, proud of the torture, rape or forced labour they subjected their POWs to.

Overall, the Nazis were fucking brutal, but yeah, there were some exceptions depending on the general in charge and who the victims were. Slavs were considered "inferior" by the Nazis, and SS generals treated them as such, while the generals fighting Allied troops in other fronts were usually more mild.

>>68115
No kidding, that had to do with Hitlers belief that Slavs were inferior etc..

But to say that the Nazi's tried to treat their POWs well is beyond comprehension.

>According to the estimate by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM), some 3.3 million Soviet POWs died in the Nazi custody out of 5.7 million.

>The prisoners were stripped of their supplies and clothing by ill-equipped German troops. When the cold weather set in, this resulted in fatal consequences for the prisoners. The camps established specially for the Soviets were called Russenlager; in others, the Soviets were kept separated from the prisoners from other countries. The Allied regulars kept by Germany were usually treated in accordance with the 1929 Geneva Convention (signed by Germany but not by the Soviet Union).

>In the case of the Soviet POWs, most of the camps were simply open areas fenced off with barbed wire and watchtowers with no housing. These meager conditions forced the crowded prisoners to live in holes they had dug for themselves, which were exposed to the elements. Beatings and other abuse by the guards were common, and prisoners were malnourished, often consuming only a few hundred calories. Medical treatment was nonexistent and a Red Cross offer to help in 1941 was rejected by Adolf Hitler. Some of these conditions were actually worse than those of the prisoners in the German concentration camps.

No matter what way you look at it, the Nazis were just as brutal. After all, the vast majority of their prisoners were from the Soviet Union so this is how they treated the vast majority of their POWs during the war. The number of allied POWs (of whom 3-5% died) is insignificant.

>>68097

It is my judgement that this poster emerged victorious in this lively debate.

>>68119

I would say that the Nazi's were gigantic cunts but the Japs were even worse. Check out the chink civilian casualties (pic related).

lol japan

>>68119

>>The Allied regulars kept by Germany were usually treated in accordance with the 1929 Geneva Convention (signed by Germany but not by the Soviet Union).

This is a contradiction to the message you are trying to put out. The soviets were treated like shit because they did the same thing to the Germans, and because they had refused to acknowledge the treaties set up to protect POW rights. You have no room to complain about the way your captured soldiers are treated when you refuse to sign the treaties meant to protect them in the first place.

>This is a contradiction to the message you are trying to put out.

No, what it does is prove that the Nazis specifically set out to kill all those soldiers when they easily had the capacity to treat them better.

>The soviets were treated like shit because they did the same thing to the Germans

No they absolutely did not. POW conditions in the Soviet Union were bad (still not nearly AS bad), but this was as a result of having almost no spare food or supplies due to their country being invaded full force. There was no intentions by the Soviets to commit genocide against German POWs.

ITT Nazis vs. Stalinists internets fight lol

>>68135
I'm not a Stalinist, pick up any history book from any country and they will all agree with what I'm saying.

>>68133
>but this was as a result of having almost no spare food or supplies due to their country being invaded full force.

Which, of course, also accounts for a substantial number of Soviet POW deaths in Germans hands. The Germans barely had enough supplies for themselves and at times they would capture over a million Russian soldiers in a single operation. The the conditions of the Eastern Front GUARANTEED mass death for captured soldiers regardless of ideology.

>>68133
>No they absolutely did not. POW conditions in the Soviet Union were bad (still not nearly AS bad), but this was as a result of having almost no spare food or supplies due to their country being invaded full force.
Mmmm... massive rapes of German and Eastern European civilian women by Soviet troops were due to lack of supplies?
I don't think so. Same goes for the atrocities of the other side, most abuses were the result of deliberate cruelty.

>>68137
>Which, of course, also accounts for a substantial number of Soviet POW deaths in Germans hands. The Germans barely had enough supplies for themselves and at times they would capture over a million Russian soldiers in a single operation.

Once again that's simply not true, and I've already pointed out numerous times why. Look at the oallied POW death rates, they were about about 3-5% - contrasted to 60%. Further, the majority of Soviet POWs were captured during the initial invasion of the Soviet Union which was BEFORE Germany started to run out of supplies.

This isn't a matter of debate, read a history book or something. It's fact that the Germans set out to genocide the Soviet POWs and there's nothing out there aside from Neo-Nazi propaganda that would ever argue this fact.

Oh and your claim that they would capture a million Soviet POWs at a time is laughably stupid. That never happened, not even close.

>>68140
We're talking about wartime POWs here not post-war occupations.

>>68142
>and there's nothing out there aside from Neo-Nazi propaganda that would ever argue this fact.

Hint: You're arguing with a Nazi apologist, aka someone who believes "Neo-Nazi propaganda". He probably thinks the Holocaust never happened either.

>>68143
German POWs in Soviet hands were treated very bad, almost as bad as Nazis had treated Soviet POWs a few months earlier. There is little to no difference, both sides really acted like animals.

http://worldwar2database.com/html/germanpow.htm
>The conditions German POWs endured on the Eastern Front are beyond description. Shipped to separate camps in Siberia and elsewhere in the western Soviet Union, the German POWs were subjected to aggressive reeducation in communist ideology, as well as frequent beatings, torture, and execution. Food was always scarce.

>The result was a horrific rate of death among German POWs. Out of the 90,000 Germans who marched into Soviet captivity at Stalingrad, only 5,000 returned from Russia. Most German POWs were held for ten years after the war.

>When the war ended, the German POWs were shipped home — unless they were held by the Red Army. Germans were still being released from Soviet POW camps in 1955. Some probably were never released and spent their lives in captivity.

The rapes of Eastern European and German women by Soviet troops also happened and were a terrible atrocities. Why am I bringing this up? Because you seem to be eager to justify Soviet atrocities by saying there was a "lack of supplies", but that is really a meaningless fact that does not justify rape or torture.

All of it can be justified by a single fact though - Human cruelty and thirst for revenge. It may be hard to believe and one may want to look for excuses or explanations, but in the end the only explanation is that human beings can do some of the most cruel and fucked up things in a situation of stress like a war because after all, we are still animals. War is Hell and humans can be extremely cruel, and there's no possible justification or better explanation than that.

It is disgusting that we let eastern europe suffer under the yolk of the soviet union.

Especially when we had the nuke.

>>68149
It's like Risk. Make a temporary alliance with a player until it's just you two. Unlike Risk, we Cold Warred the hell out each other rather than a "bloody" back and forth.

>>68181

brb playing risk

ITT people cheerleading their favorite old world superpowers

>>67996
Because then they wouldn't have a market for their superior cars and electronics, genius.

FUNFACT: Imperial Japan was a hellhole. Sure, it was an "industrialized country", but the average income or GDP per capita of the average Japanese was extremely low. Much like China today, Japan's economic strenght came from its large population. But in per capita terms they were *very* far down the list.

Modern prosperous Westernized Japan is entirely an American invention. The American administration of the islands dismantled the corrupt Zaibatzu conglomerates, took care of all defense costs, and developed a more modern legal system and institutions, effectively allowing free market capitalism to take root.

If WWII had never taken place, the most likely outcome for Japan would have been a stagnating economy and similar living standards to the Philippines or perhaps Malaysia.

The post-war economic boom in Asia (South Korea, Singapore, Japan) was entirely a Western creation.

>>68212

>>68004
>>China being "smaller" than Russia has no bearing on the fact that they would survive a nuclear attack better because there's 1.4 billion of them.
First, the person in question was arguing that yes, the size of China is what makes it immune to attacks.
Second, it is size that determines how many nukes it would take to wipe out a target.
Bangladesh has a larger population then Russia. You would need many more warheads to knock out the major population centers of Russia then Bangladesh, because it doesn't matter how many people are in an area, if they're in the blast, they're dead.
>>68049
This guy gets it.

>>68212
...80 million.
>>68212
...South Korea's economic boom took place under a government deliberately modeled off of Japan's Pre-War government.
>>68149
Yeah! Thats exactly what everyone wanted and needed in 1945, another fucking war.

>>68213
>>1950
Gee, there sure wasn't anything that happened between 1941 and 1950 that would significantly have effected Japan's GDP.

Wow this guy would get along great with my grandfather in the old folks home.

>>68118
>>For example, Rommel in Africa was extremely gentlemany, he treated all his POWs with respect
Not his Italian POWs.

Well, I'll say this much: if the Japs had nukes, especially if they had them before they joined the Axis (big mistake), the Chinks wouldn't be a problem for us today.

>>68268
Maybe not but the Nips would.

With their take over of Asia and the United States too pussy to do anything about it because they have nukes and wouldn't risk it, Nips would rule the entire world and destroy the freedom of the entire western world. In fact, by the time the chinks and nips integrate together + unlimited resources + unlimited manpower + fucking huge and advance military and the greatest navy in the entire world for all time, they'll be so unstoppable that America wouldn't be a problem for the rest of the world today ;D.

>And if the country had atomic weapons in 1945, it should have used them against the Allies

Well shoot, there would be no western world period. Enjoy your destruction and execution for Christianity and I hope you like Shintoism, enjoy the same treatment the chinks got when nips RAMMED them with the highest level of inhumanity the world will ever know. Enjoy being a live specimen, oh wait. You wouldn't even exist by the time they got finished... pity

Oh shit, there goes the American economy with no made in China products.

FUCK, there goes the balance of power in the world.

Oh shit, 2ch wouldn't exist and 4chan wouldn't exist then +4chan wouldn't exist. Anime wouldn't exist (greatest thing ever) no weeaboos too GREATEST ACHIEVEMENT.

I guess you're right. If there were no chinks, the world would be a better place and they wouldn't even be a problem for us seeing as America will crumble after they invade the mainland and kill every American man, woman, and especially children.

Shit, America not existing? FUCK YEAH!

Also, with the Japanese government full of these guys at the very top of political power and their fingers on the button, who knows the infinite possibilities! You don't need to be educated and learn the right things that was historically correct to push a button to destroy millions in a seconds! No sir, not at all. Ahhh... I can see it now, millions of Amerikunts screaming in horror and were then suddenly silenced.

Holy shit, if you think about it the current chinks are like the old Nips. THE IRONY WOULD BE SO DELICIOUS trading somewhat responsible intelligent chinks of today who can keep their month shut for loud mouth crazy nip nationalists that are allowed into the highest seats of power available for tomorrow. WAVE OF THE FUTURE, BITCH. Good thing awesome Europeans don't have to put up with your shit when your grandparents lives are ended in the most horrible way imaginable later on.

Brilliant!

Gift nips money and nukes plissssssss, no jews and chinks = win for the entire world.

Nips are pretty shitty in the concept of war too, there's no such country who would first strike with a nuke today but enjoy the mushroom cloud above pearl harbor.

>>68212
>and developed a more modern legal system

Wasn't it the Americans who introduced the genital censorship policy in porn?

Also, the UN is apparently trying to ban hentai in Japan.

>>68212
>and developed a more modern legal system

Wasn't it the Americans who introduced the genital censorship policy in porn?

Also, the UN is apparently trying to ban hentai in Japan.

>>68292

Yeah, consider it a going-away present for you Japs!

>>67886
>Japan's occupation and colonisation of the Korean peninsula, China and Taiwan were beneficial to the people of those countries

>>68292
>>Also, the UN is apparently trying to ban hentai in Japan.

That'd be like trying to ban rap music in the U.S.

>>68389
CHINKOS HAD IT COMING

>>68397
By doing what? Getting assraped by drug peddling Brits?

>>According to Gen Tamogami, Washington was aware that an attack was planned against Pearl Harbor in December 1941 but no warning was given to the forces there in order to win over public opinion in the US for a war.

This is what revisionists really believe. Protip: Even if America did know and had told the troops in Hawaii about an incoming attack, Japan is still the aggressor and therefore in the wrong.

>>68423
No actually it's a fact. Like wilson, roosevelt was a fascist interventionalist who wanted to get the US involved in a large war that wasn't any of our business.

So of course he needed a causa belli. Ergo, japans attack.

>>68438
>Like wilson, roosevelt was a fascist interventionalist

XD

>>So of course he needed a causa belli. Ergo, japans attack.

Yes he did, yes they did. That still makes it Japan's fault, not Roosevelt's or Americas. What exactly are you trying to argue? That it's not Japan's fault for attacking because some American Brass correctly assumed that the one of the ways to get public support for the war was for the usa to be attacked? That's illogical nonsense.

>>68438
Also. Considering the Nazis and Japan were out for world domination, I think we would have had to fight a war against them eventually anyway.

>>68278
Shinto is the religion of the Land of the Gods. Us inferior round-eyeds are not "of the Gods" so Shinto wouldn't mean shit for us.

Sorry "Shinto" weeaboos. You don't belong to the favored ethnicity of the powers that be.

>>68503
They'll force you to kiss and suck the tiny REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY SHORT god emperor's cock and you will like it. Did I mention how short he was? LOLINBREEDINGINFERIORNIPS

Let the Japs have their nukes.

>>68520
Make that 1. I don't think there's enough room on those islands for more than one.

>>68513
Please gtfo. Come back when your words actually have coherence.

>>68546
Shut the hell up, bitch.


Go suck more Jap cock and genuflect to their god-emperor

If we were to go to war with Japan again, I would gladly join my country's armed forces and use my Japanese language skills to aid the glorious nation where I was born.

Rule Britania

>>68571

BRITANNIA RULES THE WORLD

>>68582
Which is another word for America.

>>68406
>By doing what? Getting assraped by drug peddling Brits?

LOL SUPERIOR (?) CHINA

>>68587
What, are you crazy? I see Britain's name there, not America.

>>68630
He's referencing a shitty anime called "Code Geass" where there's a regime based in North American called Britannia.

>>68632

That LOLFUCKING anime really is the incarnation of the South Park episode of Chinpokomon. Life imitates art :l