Koreans Demand Anime Cancellation Over Breast Touching

FUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU HATERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you guys apparently haven't seen Narcissist talk before.

LOL indeed kareal, they have not, or they would have expected no less from him.

What are you left-wing people crying about? I hope you do not have anything to say regarding what I said about South and North Korea, because it couldn't be more true.

And regarding Yamato, it is all a matter of opinion. Personally I do not have much over for South Korea even though it has become a somewhat acceptable country.
I wish that Japan would increase its military power (and show it off), too much worthless countries these days and WWIII could break out any day. Japan needs to be ready to crush North Korea and probably China too when the day comes.

My blood boils when I think about how idiotically the Americans acted pre-WWII. They should not have interfered with Japans military takeover of China. Japan had one-third, the nationalists one-third and and the communists one-third. Thanks to the U.S. supporting the nationalists Japan lost their advantage, the nationalists had to flee to Taiwan and China is since then communists...
And then during the Korea war the U.S. once again had the chance to crush communist China once and for all after they had taken control of entire Korea, but no no instead of listning to the advice of war-hero and the Korea-war commander General MacArthur (who has forced to leave his position of general because Truman demanded it), President Truman insisted that they would leave China alone which later resulted in that North Korea was once again lost and the south Koreans together with the Americans had to pull back to South Korea, keeping the Demilitarized Zone status quo even today...

So it pretty much means that it is ex-president Trumans (one of the most hated presidents ever, mind you) and the Americans fault that China and North Korea are the fucked up countries they are today...

If I had proof that Narcissist is a Japanese or Japanese decent, I would have copied this and pasted it on every relevant website I know. Since I have no proof, I will refrain from doing so.

Meh. Japan's harmless really. They swore to never utilize nuclear weaponry since the war and I've no doubt they will keep that promise. They have a defense force but what of it? The nation's about the size of California. I doubt they would be so brazen as to try and invade another country again less they want to ruin the relations they have established with the US since the end of the war. If that weren't enough, America's placed a ludicrous amount of bases all over the country for reasons I've yet to understand.

@Narcissist: Riiiiight, the US would have no problem steamrolling North Korea and China. Not like pre-communism schism USSR would care about the decimation of a friendly (in the early 50s) Soviet nation. Sure, let's do as MacArthur said and start dumping bombs all the way to Beijing. It's not like the Soviets had nukes by then. Oh, wait, they had nuclear weapons? Nah, not a big deal.

And for your information, before the war, it was the northern part of Korea that was the more industrialized and modern part of Korea. Only after decades of isolation and stagnation did that region become the hellhole it is today. By the way, I'll continue to use Korea, thank you, as the only reason there is a North and South Korea is because the US didn't act fast enough to prevent strong Soviet influence in the northern part of the peninsula.

Before I forget: What the hell is that red flag with stars there, and where is the flag of the Republic of China?

The really scary thing here to be honest is that people really don't seem to know what me and Artefact are talking about.
There are many very respected people who has expressed regret that the U.S. didn't act when they could.

Haven't you studied the Cold War and the Korea War (which are very related) in school? Or at home at least?

History and Society studies is really interesting you know.

@Artefact: Setting aside the fact that the United States was not in any condition to take on the Soviets during the non-nuclear Soviet period (post-Great War isolationism anybody? Great Depression? weak military?), are you seriously suggesting that the United States should have taken out the Soviets in the four years between when Americans had proven their design worked (mid 1945) and the Soviets performed their own test (mid 1949), which was more of an engineering task than a theoretical one, since their designs were stolen wholesale from the Manhattan Project? Then there was that little problem of, you know, rebuilding devastated Europe (Marshall Plan?), and the fact that the United States would have had to go it alone.

What sort of action would you propose for removing the Soviets, short of total nuclear annihilation? Look up the Battle of Stalingrad and Leningrad, as well as the casualties suffered by the Soviet Army. At that time the Soviets fought with the mindset that a 10:1 death:kill ratio was acceptable, as long as they could drive out the Germans. What sort of non-nuclear force do you think America could bring to bear against that? And if you WOULD seriously suggest that the US should have thrown its entire nuclear arsenal at them (which wasn't even all that numerous at the time), even while knowing the effects of nuclear fallout and damning millions of innocent civilians to a grisly death by radiation poisoning (which they DIDN'T at the time)... well, I'm an atheist, but if I'm wrong and there is a Judeo-Christian God, may He have mercy on your soul, good sir.

@Narcissist: Why yes, I have. Have YOU studied any period of human history besides the Cold and Korean Wars, and in more than a purely military perspective? The internal affairs of countries are just as interesting you know.

First, please don't call those regimes "communist". They were totalitarian states hiding behind a facade of acting for the good of the people, nothing more, nothing less.

Second, you haven't answered my question yet, so I'll be flexible and rephrase my question per your reply: please define "confronting it more vigorously". At the very least, what strategic actions would that entail?

tl;dr: Those regimes weren't Communism because Real Communism is FAIL and unpossible in RL. That is because people on the whole are naturally greedy, ego-centric little shits, myself included. Also, what should the United States have done? Narcissist, you still around?

===
Barking up the wrong tree. I am a realist. I will readily agree that Real Communism will never succeed; Marx was a total hack and pulled that shitty copout by not describing what a Communist society would look like. Real Communism is nothing more than a curiosity or interesting thought experiment, and I will laugh hysterically in the face of anyone suggesting that Communism is a viable system of governance.

That is because real Communism will never work on a large scale. Communism is not compatible with human nature, namely individualism. People want stuff to be their own. People want to be able to control things. People want decision making abilities. Aha! you say, that's exactly the problem. No, it isn't. In a hypothetical Communist state, people would be willing to compromise and defer to the desires of others. Not completely submit, mind you; the others would agree to their wants on other occasions. That occurs everyday. Think of people voluntarily giving up their seats on the subway for the elderly or pregnant. Think of an apartment with three roommates, sharing groceries, utilities, and the like. Think of Quaker communities. These are nowhere near perfect examples, but I hope they illustrate what I'm getting at. With smaller units or groups, it is possible (not necessarily probable, but possible) to achieve a compromise on each issue with a talk or meeting. If someone disagrees, they are free to move out or leave the group. Should they decide to just stop paying rent or trash the apartment on the way out, there will be an external compulsion in the form of an enforceable contract (written or verbal) or the police. In normal situations, however, very little central authority is necessary. You don't nominate a head roommate to decide what meals to cook and jobs to apply for/work at, do you?

However, on the larger scale, it would be nearly impossible to keep society in order without some system for decision-making. And there will be people to fill these roles. And sometimes you have individuals who will perform quite selflessly and do a good job. But on other occasions you will have people who are out for their own gain who will abuse their power. And with the people not in positions of power, sometimes they will go along with decisions that they might not perhaps agree with, for some theoretical "greater good", or at least properly managed greed (You do this now by paying taxes to pay for police and fire departments). But other individuals will not. They will dissent, they will rebel. And if Authority were to simply let them go, then it becomes a matter of weakening the state, with people simply leaving whenever they don't agree with a decision. Theoretically this could work; let people leave and the true believers stay. This just comes back to my assertion that large-scale Communism would never work. The only other choice would be to compel them to go along, in the name of the "greater good". It is at THAT point where individual liberties are compromised. However, it is also at that point that we've left the framework of Real Communism.

But I digress. Again, what strategic actions should the United States have taken in the late 40s - hell, I'll give you the early 50s as well if you feel you really need them to come up with a good plan.

@Narcissist: Hey, we're having a dialogue of history and politics. Want to join in?

America had every right to kill japs. The japs are a brutal ignorant vicious group who committed war crimes just as bad as the Holocaust. I am thankful that the japs got nuked. oh, and Narcissist, you are a fucking bitch who has no respect for any other culture than your own. Death to japan, death to japanese culture, death to japanese arrogance.
Long live freedom
Long live democracy
Long Live Korea