This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Kim Jong Il Dead
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
Like I said, depends on your definition. "Concentration camps" can also refer to "internment camps;" in fact, prior to WW2, they were the same thing.
Modern understanding and usage of the term 'concentration camp' makes applying it to the American camps misleading. Although I don't really know if you are accurate with your definition or not, I think you should exercise a little more caution. At least, I would.
Post by
Adamsm
Like I said, depends on your definition. "Concentration camps" can also refer to "internment camps;" in fact, prior to WW2, they were the same thing.
Modern understanding and usage of the term 'concentration camp' makes applying it to the American camps misleading. Although I don't really know if you are accurate with your definition or not, I think you should exercise a little more caution. At least, I would.
Locked up, not allowed to leave, unable to work at their original jobs.....only difference is, there wasn't the brutality(for the most part) that was happening over seas.
Edit: Of course, that happened on both sides of the border during World War 2.
Post by
Pwntiff
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment
Polish historian Władysław Konopczyński has suggested the first concentration camps were created in Poland in the 18th century, during the Bar Confederation rebellion, when the Russian Empire established three concentration camps for Polish rebel captives awaiting deportation to Siberia.
The earliest of these camps may have been those set up in the United States for Cherokee and other Native Americans in the 1830s; however, the term originated in the reconcentrados (reconcentration camps) set up by the Spanish military in Cuba during the Ten Years' War (1868–1878) and by the United States during the Philippine–American War (1899–1902).
Yes, the connotation has changed, but I was addressing the denotation, as I don't exclusive associate the term "concentration camp" with Auschwitz and its ilk.
How did a thread about the death of Dear Leader turn into a conversation about internment?
Post by
Adamsm
Facesmasher.
Post by
MyTie
Locked up, not allowed to leave, unable to work at their original jobs.....only difference is, there wasn't the brutality(for the most part) that was happening over seas.
Edit: Of course, that happened on both sides of the border during World War 2.
...
Picture of children in American Internment camp for Japaneese during WW2
Picture of children in Nazi concentration camp for Jew during WW2
(graphic)
When you say "only difference is, there wasn't the brutality", you are making a summary of something so profound, the summary of which makes me wonder if you are drunk, trolling, or mentally inept.
Post by
166779
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Guantanamo anyone? People detained indefinitely without trial, with no guarantee of trial, and mistreated to boot. I'd say the US has outdone itself.
Indeed! There needs to be some legislation in place to prevent this in the future.
Post by
Adamsm
Locked up, not allowed to leave, unable to work at their original jobs.....only difference is, there wasn't the brutality(for the most part) that was happening over seas.
Edit: Of course, that happened on both sides of the border during World War 2.
...
Picture of children in American Internment camp for Japaneese during WW2
Picture of children in Nazi concentration camp for Jew during WW2
(graphic)
When you say "only difference is, there wasn't the brutality", you are making a summary of something so profound, the summary of which makes me wonder if you are drunk, trolling, or mentally inept.
Hence the brutality comment; the Jewish communities and others went through hell over there....and the Japanese Americans were detained for almost 5 years, put in those camps because of the fact of their ancestry; it didn't matter if they were born in America or not, they were all treated as spies and potential traitors, who were removed from their regular lives during that time and were not allowed to go back to their original jobs while they were detained: Look up the stats for those who had to start over their new lives after being let out of the camp. Also, fun fact? On both sides of the border: No one in the camps were ever actually brought up on charges for being spies/traitors....so for 5 years, they were just dropped into warehouse like buildings, and treated like dirt for no real reason.
Post by
MyTie
Hence the brutality comment; the Jewish communities and others went through hell over there....and the Japanese Americans were detained for almost 5 years, put in those camps because of the fact of their ancestry; it didn't matter if they were born in America or not, they were all treated as spies and potential traitors, who were removed from their regular lives during that time and were not allowed to go back to their original jobs while they were detained: Look up the stats for those who had to start over their new lives after being let out of the camp. Also, fun fact? On both sides of the border: No one in the camps were ever actually brought up on charges for being spies/traitors....so for 5 years, they were just dropped into warehouse like buildings, and treated like dirt for no real reason.
Don't get me wrong. I think the internment of the Japanese people was wrong. That much we agree on. I'm just in a bit of shock over you saying that they are the same thing as the Nazi camps, except the whole brutality thing, when the whole 'brutality thing' is a really really big huge massively very large enormous deal. You gloss it over like it's not much at all. You want to be critical of the American internment camps, do it. You're right to. You don't need to compare them to the Auschwitz at all. They aren't comparable. It's the difference between being forced to eat an omelet, and being forced to eat an omelet while watching your children be murdered. It's not acceptable to say they are the same thing, minus the brutality thing. They aren't the same thing. It's horrible of you to say they are.
Post by
Adamsm
However, that goes back to what Pwntiff was saying: The fact that back then, both of the camps were called the same thing, it was only after the war that the Nazi Death camps had the name change to signify that there was a difference between them; that the whole story about Jewish families, and other non-German descent people, didn't come to light until the camps started to be liberated by the Allied forces, could mean that those who heard of it later without hearing the truth from survivors could have thought they were just like the ones being put up all the along the coast of North America. And yes atrocities happened in the Nazi camps....but that doesn't mean the people in the North American camps were there on vacation either.
And MyTie, it has nothing to do with the American version of the camps; we had the same things here in Canada, and the same problems afterward that they had down your way as those in the camps tried to pick up their shattered lives.
Post by
MyTie
And yes atrocities happened in the Nazi camps....but that doesn't mean the people in the North American camps were there on vacation either.
If you don't understand that you are trivializing the holocaust... then I give up.
Post by
Adamsm
I'm not trivializing it; I know that the Holocaust was the worst atrocity of the war(so kindly stop putting words I don't say in my mouth alright?). All I've been saying is that it goes back to the way the word was used during World War 2; both terms were used to describe both situations back then, as Pwntiff said in the first place.
Of course, we are massively off-topic at this point, since there hasn't been any sign of North Korea creating their own camps for the unwanted and unpure.
Post by
166779
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Okay guys, let's get back on track. The presence (or lack thereof) of North Korean concentration camps (however they are defined) isn't really relevant to the topic.
There was an article today in the Sydney Morning Herald on
the man behind the dictatorship
- Jang Song-taek. Any thoughts on him?
Post by
Cambo
K.J Un was educated in Switzerland, and his peers at the time recall him as not very scholarly (preferring to play sport rather than sit exams). There are reports by his Japanese tutor as saying the youngster is similar in character to his father - just as strong-willed and stubborn etc.
This doesn't give us much hope for improved diplomatic relations, nor a reprieve for the North Korean citizens.
Post by
Hunger
K.J Un was educated in Switzerland, and his peers at the time recall him as not very scholarly (preferring to play sport rather than sit exams). There are reports by his Japanese tutor as saying the youngster is similar in character to his father - just as strong-willed and stubborn etc.
This doesn't give us much hope for improved diplomatic relations, nor a reprieve for the North Korean citizens.
It'll be interesting to see if he actually ends up being completely in power–he's still young and there's a lot of powerful people supporting him, like Squish said about Jang. He could end up as a figurehead unless he's stubborn and strong-willed enough to take power for himself.
Not sure if that'd be a good or a bad thing either way.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.