[Z]

Originally Posted by lostalex

well i disagree with you, I think Japan did some ****ty things, and US was more than compassionate to Japan during that war. I think the USA did was we thought was the best for Japan and the world, and i think history has proved the USA's actions were the right actions.

Japan is a strong and free nation today. The USA could have turned Japan into a waste land if we wanted, but instead we supported them after the war, and did everything we could to make them a stronger, better, free'er country. I don't think you can fault the USA in our treatment of Japan post ww2. and i think you could say the same for Germany and all of western Europe.

The USA could have been like the Soviet Union after the war, and just proclaimed countries to be our territory like Russia did to eastern Europe (and if not for the bomb, i think russia would also have started to move to Asia), but we didn't. Instead we helped them rebuild themselves and encouraged them to be free democratic countries. i really don't think you can fault the USA after WW2. I think we did things very right.

I agree with you about the post war stuff; but the USA financially gained from those situations let us not forget, this wasn't an exercise in charity, it was about making profits and creating a sphere of influence - the difference between the USA and the USSR in their approach is that the USA was all about positive encouragement and growth whereas the USSR treated its sphere of influence with negative oppression and drastic 5 year plans that pushed its people to the limit. This is not a criticism of the USA, it's just that that's how the USA partly managed to consolidate its position as a global superpower.

Clearly we'll never agree on the issue of the rights and wrongs of using nuclear technology in a weaponised form so there's not much point going back and forth on it anymore with you.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by Zee

I agree with you about the post war stuff; but the USA financially gained from those situations let us not forget, this wasn't an exercise in charity, it was about making profits and creating a sphere of influence - the difference between the USA and the USSR in their approach is that the USA was all about positive encouragement and growth whereas the USSR treated its sphere of influence with negative oppression and drastic 5 year plans that pushed its people to the limit. This is not a criticism of the USA, it's just that that's how the USA partly managed to consolidate its position as a global superpower.

Clearly we'll never agree on the issue of the rights and wrongs of using nuclear technology in a weaponised form so there's not much point going back and forth on it anymore with you.

America paid in blood with thousands of young boy's lives. Our children. That blood was absolutely charity. How dare you imply that we lost our sons for profit.

You have such a cynical and twisted view of things, and i can't help but notice it's against the US mostly. It's still upsetting to me how Europeans need to justify America saving you by thinking America only did it for profit. It's so twisted and unfair. Shame on you.

Europe is still not properly grateful to America for what we did to save you.