Originally posted by zeeblebotLOL. In administraion? You obviously don't really know what the term "collaboration" means and what it encompasses! And you may need to gin up on what Japanese colonial rule was like - and French for that matter - before you stoop to dismissing those who having traitors in their midst for years and years and then, finally, justice could be served.
in a population of 600K-1M what percentage would you expect to be in administration?
I am happy for those that got away as I do not support capital punishment.
As for the Austria thing...? 🙄
You think France, having been defeated by the Vietnamese faction who had offerered the only credible resistence to the Japanaese, had some sort of right to carve out and contrive some little pliant "nation" in "French Indochine" (complete with strutting, preening, embezzling indigenous Generals) in order to cling on to their place at the imperial trough?
1 edit
Originally posted by zeeblebotTrying to detect the topic-related humorous angle to this.
and what the hey! the irish speak english, and the scots speak english! the scots would be well within their rights to take over ireland by force! after all, the british once owned both ireland and scotland.
1 edit
Originally posted by zeeblebotYou seem to have got lost in a swirl of your own enthusiasm. What is the parallel between Viet Nam and Indonesia, apart from they the obvious much-of-a-muchness that they seem to present to a lot of Westerners who lament the passing of Empire and everyone's rightful place being so obvious.
if a million refugees trekked out of indonesia, would you suppose that they had a high percentage of quislings, and sing the praises of Suharto / Sukarno?
Your support for continuing Imperial Power A exploitation of the Vietnamese after the Vietnamese had liberated themselves from the Imperial Power B is noted. And understandable when we remember that your country, Imperial Power C, has to justify its slaughter of 3,000,000 Vietnamese - all in the cause of preventing national self-determination in that Much-Of-A-Muchness part of the world. Eh?
Originally posted by FMFfrance was gone. did you not read the OP?
LOL. In administraion? You obviously don't really know what the term "collaboration" means and what it encompasses! And you may need to gin up on what Japanese colonial rule was like - and French for that matter - before you stoop to dismissing those who having traitors in their midst for years and years and then, finally, justice could be served.
I am happy ...[text shortened]... g indigenous Generals) in order to cling on to their place at the imperial trough?
Originally posted by FMFfrance was gone.
You seem to have got lost in a swirl of your own enthusiasm. What is the parallel between Viet Nam and Indonesia, apart from they the obvious much-of-a-muchness that they seem to present to a lot of Westerners who lament the passing of Empire and everyone's rightful place being so obvious.
Your support for continuing Imperial Power A exploitation of th ...[text shortened]... use of preventing national self-determination in that Much-Of-A-Muchness part of the world. Eh?
Originally posted by zeeblebotYou display zero knowledge of Viet Nam and its history. Your analogy is daft. Try this one. Should the Vietnamese have intervened in Europe in 1945 to stop once Nazi occupied France reuniting with Vichy France?
yes or no, does scotland have the right to send guerillas and soldiers into ireland and take it over? like the right you seem to think the north vietnamese had?
Originally posted by FMFdon't have an answer?
You display zero knowledge of Viet Nam and its history. Your analogy is daft. Try this one. Should the Vietnamese have intervened in Europe in 1945 to stop once Nazi occupied France reuniting with Vichy France?
why not bring PeeWee Herman into it, while you're at it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"😉, and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1] [2]
Originally posted by zeeblebotYes, I gave you one. You display zero knowledge of Viet Nam and its history if you think you can analyze it with this analogy: "yes or no, does scotland have the right to send guerillas and soldiers into ireland and take it over?"
don't have an answer?
Should the Vietnamese have intervened in Europe in 1945 to stop once Nazi occupied France reuniting with Vichy France?
No answer?
Originally posted by zeeblebotAh so you admit that the French were not "gone" then. The real question is: how much backing could the U.S. provide? And the answer is: enough to end up slaughtering 3,000,000 Vietnamese while trying to impose its will on Viet Nam and prevent any moves towards national self-determination.
how much backing could they provide?
Originally posted by zeeblebotYour "position" was an entirely fatuous and politically illiterate analogy. I provided a better analogy - one not very convenient to what appears to be your pro-colonial position - which actually created a rples-reversed hypothetical involving France and Viet Nam. Your response to this was to bizarrely cite the "strawman" with a cut and paste from wikipedia.
A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.