uberfoop
~=Admiral Stukov=~
- Reaction score
- 177
Let me see if I can follow your argument from start to finish:But that's Germany, not the 'righteous' America.
Premise A: America has historically claimed to hold to a solid moral code.
Premise B: During WWII, America jailed a large portion of its population due to unreasonable racial suspicions.
Conclusion 1: America "completely tipped" its morals and "changed itself forever" during WWII.
Premise C: Germany murdered millions of civilians in WWII.
Premise D: Germany is not morally "righteous"
Conclusion 2: Therefore, Germany did not tip their own morals by murdering millions of civilians in WWII.
Both of these arguments seem flawed.
In the case of the first one, it assumes that America has ever historically had a reasonable moral righteousness stance. The only thing that perhaps made the Japanese internment a greater violation of our moral values than earlier US offenses against people was that the people being subjugated were our own citizens. There had been earlier atrocious acts on the part of our country which Americans with open eyes had been able to identify as totally morally messed up despite the stupid justifications we gave (ie White Man's Burden), such as the backstabbing of the First Phillipine Republic.
As for the second argument, for it to be taken seriously, you must believe that traditional German morality says that slaughtering millions of civilians for the purpose of benefiting a specific racial group is completely acceptable. If you do NOT believe the above, then it must be admitted that the Germans DID completely tip their morals during WWII.
...Which it seems Germans tend agree with.