Posted on 12/28/2004 7:55:25 AM PST by forty_years
In fact, it is as bad as interning all japs just because 1 or 2 might be spies.
I think you completely misunderstood my post.
I was pointing out that some palaeoconservatives feel as negatively towards the internment of Japanese as do liberals because it was done by FDR and Earl Warren. It was in that context (sympathy for the interned Japanese) that I mentioned palaeo sympathy for the Axis.
And if the very one or ones that will cost American lives gets past the judge? Which out of all those not brought before the judgewere sleepers? How many would have lost their lives to Americans who will just decide to bypass Due process, whaddafugginconcept?
Doubtless, the internment camps save the lives of some few. Would you have those Japanese loose their lives to prove you're not a "racist"?
Your thinking is not clear on this topic. And this being your position, you must apply it to Muslims, also, or be hypocrite.
How much freedom are you personally willing to forfeit in return for a government promise of security?
Depends on the level of clear and present danger, and if the measures have a post crisis sunset. America was in a war with the Japanese at the time, a duly declared war under 1-8-11.
How much damage to the country and citizens are you personally willing to endure for political correctness?
I asked, "How many American lives would you be willing to give up before you could think about internment?"
You didn't answer.
You're using the liberal "if it saves only ONE life, then it's worth the cost" argument.
And I asked an equally valid question: How many rapes (and concomitant murders) are you willing to accept before you could think about imprisoning interning all men in concentration detention camps?
Isn't that shoe starting to pinch a wee bit?
BTW, that argument can be applied to the "imprison all men as potential rapists" argument.
It can also be applied to the "imprison all conservatives at potential Timothy McVeighs" argument.
You would surrender your freedom for a little security.
"Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." -- Samuel Adams.
A rapist trespasses on one life, for his own edification, making him a criminal. A terrorists or alien belligerent/spy trespass on many lives, for a general ideal, making him an enemy.
How is it that you can't tell the difference?
That's nice. And this justifies the argument for detaining Americans of a minority group you dislike because...?
(Cue "Final Jeopardy" music)
How is it that you can't tell the difference?
How is it that you can't tell how the government will (not may, will) cheerfully abuse the power you seek to give it? How is it that you do not dread the prospect of President Hillary Clinton being able to indefinitely detain any American she deems a "terrorist" and an "enemy of the state?"
If Bubba Clinton had taken the tack you argue on April 19th, 1995, we'd both still be in "temporary detention for the duration of the emergency."
What's your point? The vast majority of Americans are citizens because they were born in this country.
Neither did the vast majority of Japanese-Americans.
Hawaii was pretty much the extent of how far the Japanese Navy could get without refueling facilities. Logistically, hitting Pearl Harbor was pure genius on the part of the Japanese Admiralty. Doing the same to San Francisco would have been next to impossible.
There was NO US navy to stop them and next to NO ground troops immediately present to protect these facilities.
Protect the facilities from what, an invasion? No way that was even in the realm of possibility.
Also, Hawaii was not a state in 1941.
Good article. Pipes shows that the idea that the Japanese were interned solely because of their race is typical liberal BS. Liberal girly-men will whine and complain about this but never about the internment of Germans and Italians. The internment of white people never concerns them, after all, only white people can be racist.
Absolutely right. To even consider interning American citizens simply because they are Muslim is hysteria at its worst.
Wow! Where did you get this strange data? I never read anything like it in the dozens of books I have read about the affair. The latest book is "The New Dealer's War'" in which the forced removal of the Japanese from California was the result of racist hostility and jealousy. Even J. Edgar Hoover was opposed to the incarceration of the Japanese/American citizens. FDR forced the issue, however and it was done.
My uncle was a camp commander and he never once mentioned any anti-Americans in the camps. Quite the contrary, he came to admire them and they liked him. There were camps here in Utah and they flew the flag and celebrated the 4th of July as fervently as anyone else. There were even more Japanese in Hawaii, but they were not removed. Futhermore, how come so many young Japanese in the camps joined the army and fought extremely well, winning more medals per unit than any other in WW II?
The internment of anyone without some probable cause is wrong. I don't know the subject well, but my guess is the japanese internment was widespread, systemic and without any attempt at finding probably cause, while the internment of others was not widespread and I suspect the few who were interned was because of probable cause.
What the jap internment has to do with profiling is beyond me. Profiling is where you give a person a more rigorous investigation as opposed to someone else. Internment is profiling to the point of being judge jury and jailman all in on swoop.
To be exact, they attacked us because FDR cut off all oil and steel supplies to Japan. They depended upon the oil we supplied for 50% of their needs. They wanted to assure new oil supplies from Dutch refineries and oil fields in Indonesia and they wasted little time in doing just that.
Ok, so some patriotic as hell jap citizen is strolling down the street minding his own business but then is put into an internment camp. Tell me why that this is liberal BS.
By the way, here is a great clinton quote for you "I never made policy SOLELY because of a campaign contribution."
I agree, but I do think it is okay to watch them a little more closely than you would watch grandma jones.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.