You said: "The was no sabotage by slash-Americans in WW2 like there was on 9-11. So I'd say internment was the right thing to do."
First of all I think you got that backwards there buddy. But if you didn't, then why have internment if there was no sabotage? If you did get it wrong, then what do you call the anthrax letters sent after 9-11? Second of all unless you are a Native American (you know Indian) then you are a slash american.
There it is again,"Results suggest otherwise"
That kills me. It has to be the stupidest thing I have ever seen posted. What makes it better is you keep repeating it like it is your catch phrase or something. HAHA!!
The trick is to intern before sabotage.
If you did get it wrong, then what do you call the anthrax letters sent after 9-11?
No internment, therefore sabotage.
Second of all unless you are a Native American (you know Indian) then you are a slash american.
It's done when practical. 50% of Americans are descended from the British, so it's not practical. In WW2, it wasn't practical to intern all the Germans, and there was German sabotage.
There it is again,"Results suggest otherwise" That kills me. It has to be the stupidest thing I have ever seen posted. What makes it better is you keep repeating it like it is your catch phrase or something. HAHA!!
You're not results orientated? You keep doing something the same way 100 times over even though it doesn't work?