use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
詳しくは検索FAQを参照
高度な検索: 投稿者や、subredditで……
974 人のユーザーが現在閲覧しています
Click here to get a countryball.
POLANDBALL IS OF REDDIT
Wiggly mouse-drawn comics where balls represent different countries. They poke fun at national stereotypes and the "international drama" of their diplomatic relations. Polandball combines history, geography, Engrish, and an inferiority complex. The comic series first became popular on a well known German image board int ze internetz.
Polandball is unique and it should remain so. It's clearly distinguished from rage comics and memes. Read the Official Polandball Tutorial. To keep the quality of the content high, all comics have to comply to it.
Why can't I submit comics?
How you get submission rights is described here.
WHAT'S GOING ON?
TREASURES
Official Polandball Tutorial - The Book of Börk - Wording Problems Solving Chart
Académie Polandballaise - LatvianJokes the politbüro for jokes - Rules for reposts
Our Comment Policy - Vexillology a subreddit for flags - Game: Polandball Multiplayer Shooter
HONOUR TO WHOM HONOUR IS OF
berndmade this comic was made by someone who most probably goes by the nick bernd somewhere else int ze internetz.
redditormade if you made a comic yourself you can click on flair in the post and apply this label. It looks weird first but that's fixed with a page reload.
Hussar Wings only a select company of Honorary Polish Winged Hussars is allowed to bear this sign of splendour. Visit their Hall Of Fame.
HATERS OF BE HATING
Polandball went mainstream. Polandball can into Reddit, but cannot into space.
JOKE LIFE PRESERVE
Some jokes need of protection season: look here to see which are:
LINKINGS
YOU OF HELP
Animations Animations
redditormadeRelationship Issues (i.imgur.com)
ActamisImperial Sultanate of Japan が 8時間 前 投稿
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]protohomBharat 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント 7時間 前 (180子コメント)
Yep, Pearl Harbour was the justification for nuking cities and refusing them treatment for 'unconditional' surrender.
[–]CurlyNippleHairs 107ポイント108ポイント109ポイント 5時間 前 (179子コメント)
No I think World War 2 was justification for that. Human rights went out the window a long time before the nukes dropped.
[–]protohomBharat -36ポイント-35ポイント-34ポイント 5時間 前* (178子コメント)
Not really.
Edit : Wow, -6 in half an hour in Polandball? Looks like angry Muricans began to downvote historical fact that goes against their nationalistic narrative.
Edit2 : Japan wanted to surrender conditionally, relinquishing their Asian possessions by conquest, by July 1945. For this, they extended diplomatic offers to United States through Soviet Union. Source : 1 and 2. Now, if the reason was to end the war, United States could have accepted the offer, but they wanted unconditional surrender from Japan. For this, nukes were dropped, killing about 200,000 and condemning about the same for a far worse fate as the Hibakusha. If you think such a price in human life and misery was required for 'unconditional' surrender, then move on.
[–]DrdresSweden 48ポイント49ポイント50ポイント 5時間 前 (103子コメント)
What
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 43ポイント44ポイント45ポイント 4時間 前 (10子コメント)
The only people opposed to the idea that America is a sadistic mass murderer and who are willing to downvote the notion must be butthurt Americans, duh.
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 26ポイント27ポイント28ポイント 3時間 前 (9子コメント)
Well no, the thing is that it's true that human rights were not a thing during the war. All sides committed horrible war crimes.
For some reason this guy seems to be implying only the US committed crimes. That's bullshit.
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 3時間 前 (0子コメント)
I'm sorry, I must have layered the sarcasm on my statement too thinly.
[–]protohomBharat -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 3時間 前 (7子コメント)
I'm not implying only the US committed war-crimes. I don't know where you got that notion, and I'm not so naive as to do that.
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 3時間 前 (6子コメント)
No I think World War 2 was justification for that. Human rights went out the window a long time before the nukes dropped. not really (your comment)
not really (your comment)
[–]zeniizJapan 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間 前 (2子コメント)
How in the hell does that imply only America committed war crimes?
[–]Unsub_LeftyPennsylvania 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 45分 前 (1子コメント)
It implies that the only violation of human rights was the dropping of the atomic bombs, which was done by the Americans. It disregards the previous violations (Rape of Nanking) in which Japan also committed human rights atrocities
[–]protohomBharat -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 3時間 前 (2子コメント)
Not really meant what I wrote as the detailed response later.
[–]zeniizJapan 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 1時間 前 (1子コメント)
I think logic and reading comprehension is beyond the reach of some people here. "OMG he said something bad about MURICA, burn a cross on his lawn!!!"
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-28ポイント-27ポイント-26ポイント 5時間 前 (91子コメント)
Ending the war was not the important reason for dropping the nukes.
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 32ポイント33ポイント34ポイント 5時間 前 (90子コメント)
of course it was, less casualties for US and fortunately less casualties for japan (that time the prediction of japanese civilian casualties by US was up to 10 millions, by japan was up to 20 millions)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 17ポイント18ポイント19ポイント 4時間 前 (0子コメント)
Of the 500,000 Purple Hearts made that the Americans felt would be needed once a land invasion was given the green light, only a fraction have been issued in all of its subsequent wars and conflicts.
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 3時間 前 (2子コメント)
That, and a reason often forgotten which for some reason is never mentioned in threads about this.
The Soviets were already invading Japanese Korea, after which they'd move to the Japanese mainland. The US didn't want Japan to fall to the Soviets.
That the nukes saved millions of lives was the justification used, but not the main reason behind them. Ending the war quickly was a clever strategic move, not a humanitarian one per se.
Losing even more of the world to the Soviets and the huge costs an extended war would bring were far more important towards using the nukes than saving lives of individual civilians and soldiers. Let's not be naive here.
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 3時間 前 (0子コメント)
well, I don't think we know much about MAIN reason, but we can be sure it was considered among other thing
and I agree with your statement humanitarian isn't main reason, but pressured japan to surrender already was probably main reason
and if we talk about justification
[+][削除されました] 1時間 前 (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]ItsJustACorpse 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間 前 (0子コメント)
...except that both cities had military significance. Hiroshima was where the divisions responsible for the defense of all of southern Japan were located, along with large weapon stockpiles. Nagasaki was an industrial seaport, responsible for the manufacture of many of Japan's wartime necessities. Was the use of the atomic bombs a terrible thing? Yeah it was, and I hope nuclear weapons are never used again. But we were limited for options, and those bombs ended the war with Japan faster and with fewer casualties than any other options available.
[–]DiplomjodlerGermany World Champion -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 4時間 前 (45子コメント)
There was never any necessity to invade Japan. They could have blockaded them indefinitely and they would have had to surrender sooner rather than later.
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント 4時間 前 (28子コメント)
And I'm sure that would have led to LESS Japanese deaths due to starvation, right?
[+]DiplomjodlerGermany World Champion スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント 4時間 前 (27子コメント)
I don't know. But there is a difference between actively killing people and standing by while they're being killed by their own government.
[–]safarispiffHong Kong 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 4時間 前 (11子コメント)
And in this case, one of them would have ultimately resulted in fewer deaths, gruesome as it may be. It's the nukes.
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 4時間 前 (13子コメント)
You get to keep your conscience clear and your hands clean while blaming them for their own deaths? I suppose so.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 4時間 前 (5子コメント)
Why would we do that with Japan and not Germany? Or any war in fact?
[–]DiplomjodlerGermany World Champion 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4時間 前* (3子コメント)
The reason for not invading mainland Japan was fear of very high US casualties. They certainly didn't give a shit about how many Japanese starved to death.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4時間 前 (1子コメント)
Because there were no casualties in capturing Germany. It's war, you end it sooner rather than later. Why is your second point relevant? Who said they cared.
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4時間 前 (0子コメント)
hey, if japanese government was dominated by civil instead of military, that would be great, and worked
okinawa was an example
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間 前 (7子コメント)
The Soviets were about to invade them. The Americans could wait it out, nuke the Japanese to surrender or do a second invasion in a race with the Soviets.
Nuking them was the best option, both strategically and in a humanitarian way.
I don't want to justify nuclear weapons, but in the grand scheme it was the best outcome.
[–]protohomBharat -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 3時間 前 (5子コメント)
Or they could have accepted the conditional surrender, by which Japan would relinquish all its conquests, and would have agreed to something similar to the treaty of Versailles.
[–]TheHatGod 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 3時間 前 (4子コメント)
Because we all know how well the treaty of Versailles went...
[–]protohomBharat -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 5時間 前 (37子コメント)
http://www.reddit.com/r/polandball/comments/376ka8/relationship_issues/crk6o1n
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 5時間 前 (36子コメント)
implying all of japanese military leaders ready to surrender
this link is useful btw
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2c1qzy/why_was_an_invasion_of_japan_or_the_dropping_of/
[–]Grappindemen 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4時間 前 (4子コメント)
The top response there states that Japan had already been defeated. It supports protohom's point.
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4時間 前 (3子コメント)
see my other comment that linking /r/badhistory
also
it is worth keeping in mind that defeat is not the same thing as surrender.
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10ポイント-9ポイント-8ポイント 5時間 前 (30子コメント)
All of a nation's military leaders need not be ready to surrender for it to do so. Also, I gave you the diplomatic documents as source and you replies with an AskHistorians thread?
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 4時間 前 (21子コメント)
dude, the military was the one who controlling government
some people considered surrender, but the military did not (i.e most military leaders, if not all)
[–]safarispiffHong Kong 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 4時間 前 (7子コメント)
But the ones in power did. Emperor Hirohito literally had to overrule the General Staff, and even then the military almost had a coup just to keep on fighting. The Japanese were still rejecting surrender and broadcasting messages to fight to the last after the Hiroshima bombing and the Soviet declaration of war. Also, the AH response was not nuked by mods, that usually means the history typically follows the general historical consensus. And while wikipedia isn't the best source, it is still fairly reliable and its leaders all had stated intentions of fighting until a breeding population of Japanese no longer existed. "Surrender of Japan" on @Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan?wprov=sfti1 You can argue hindsight all you want but based on everything the Allies knew the nukes were the less deadly option, less deadly than starving the population out and far less deadly than an invasion.
Frankly, it was hindsight that the Allies were operating on when they demanded unconditional surrender. The end of WWI with Versailles failed to do anything to curb German expansionism, and Field Marshal Foch even said that the treaty only had enough punch to delay the Germans for 20 years. An unconditional surrender was absolutely necessary to both be able to ensure no resurgence of militarism and to conclusively demonstrate to the population that the war had been lost.
[–]Sadnot 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 3時間 前 (2子コメント)
Oooor, you got downvoted for writing a two word dismissive response, maybe.
[–]protohomBharat -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 3時間 前 (1子コメント)
I've edited my response.
[–]Sadnot 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間 前 (0子コメント)
Thanks, that was informative.
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 2時間 前 (18子コメント)
Japan wanted to surrender conditionally
Wrong. Togo had sounded out the Soviets with a conditional peace offer, but the Japanese cabinet could not surrender without unanimous approval, and such approval was not present. The Supreme War Council was divided - the military hawks wanted to offer a surrender that let them keep the Emperor as well as Korea and Taiwan, and deal with demobilization and war criminals themselves, whilst the civilian doves wanted to offer one that just kept the Emperor. In any case there was no possibility of Japan surrendering without the approval of the Supreme War Council - and the Army had an effective veto over SWC policy anyway. So Japan didn't "want to surrender"; some of them wanted to make a delusional offer for a peace they didn't deserve, which wasn't even communicated to the Allies in any significant detail, whilst others wanted a more reasonable peace, which they couldn't get through the SWC in any case.
"Their Asian possessions by conquest" was understood to include only those territories gained since the outbreak of war in Asia in 1936 - so this conditional "surrender" would have let the Japanese keep exploiting their captive populations in Korea and Taiwan, as well as allowed the old militarists to continue to rule.
The atom bomb was a perfectly reasonable response to such a "peace offer".
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間 前 (17子コメント)
I'd agree with Korea being captive, but not Taiwan. My point was, dropping nukes was not about ending the war. It was about obtaining an unconditional surrender, in favour of the US, guaranteeing American hegemony in Japan.
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 2時間 前 (10子コメント)
You speak as though those objectives can be separated.
The Americans wanted to avoid having to launch an invasion of the Home Islands that was projected to result in 1 million American casualties. So its true that their concern was primarily the welfare of Americans, not Japanese, but that doesn't change the fact that a continuation of the war would have resulted in greater Japanese casualties too. There's nothing wrong with that either; the Americans were at war, and placing the lives of their own men over those of the enemy was a perfectly legitimate calculation.
America had every right to claim hegemony in postwar Japan. Japan was a totalitarian rogue state, that had, without provocation, attacked the United States, which had done the lion's share of the heavy lifting in defeating it.
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間 前 (9子コメント)
US did not do the lion's share of defeating it. British India did their fair share too. The largest Japanese military defeat was the Battle of Imphal. US need not resort to an invasion if they agreed to a negotiated surrender.
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 2時間 前* (8子コメント)
A negotiated surrender would have left those responsible for the war in power and Japanese forces in Korea and Formosa. It would have been a betrayal of the Chinese and Koreans and a violation of guarantees already given to the Soviets. Moreover, as I showed you in my previous comments, a negotiated surrender was never possible. The Japanese never agreed on surrender terms, and refused to open surrender discussions with the Americans.
Without the assistance of the US, we would have lost many thousands more men in Burma and India, which were only ever marginal theatres. The British and India forces that drove the Japanese out of the Raj did so using mainly American equipment, and with American reinforcement, and with Japan unable to commit more men due to the American navy and the American-equipped Chinese army sitting on top of their lines of communication. The main effect of the campaign was that Britain could abandon Asia as victors.
Imphal was the largest Japanese defeat up to that point. Japanese casualties were greater at Okinawa and in Manchuria during the Soviet operation there.
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間 前 (7子コメント)
A negotiated surrender would have left those responsible for the war in power and Japanese forces in Korea and Formosa.
And would have saved the lives of 200,000 innocents and another 200,000 from becoming Hibakusha. Is justice preferred to such an overwhelming human cost? Or is it applicable only to the Japanese, and not to the European colonists?
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 2時間 前* (6子コメント)
And how many would have died when Formosa and Korea inevitably began struggling for their independence? How many might have died when the Japanese military began round 2, or when democratic forces in Japan began agitating for the fascist government that had lead them to ruin and humiliation to leave power?
The terms the Japanese offered were delusional. Utterly delusional. It was not on the Allies, victims of Japanese aggression, to accommodate the Japanese militarists or their Emperor. The destruction of Japanese militarism and its imperial cult are the direct results of Japan's unconditional surrender, and the result has been a peaceful and democratic Japan, and peace in East Asia.
And, even if we accept a negotiated surrender would be better, it's irrelevant, because Japan never offered one!
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間 前 (5子コメント)
Taiwan was seized by the Japanese from the Chinese in 1895 in the first Sino-Japanese war. Taiwan is 98% Han Chinese.
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 1時間 前 (4子コメント)
There was no widespread atrocities by the Japanese army in Taiwan as in Korea. Some would say Taiwan prospered under Japanese rule(?)
I do know about Taiwanese history. I learned Chinese under a Taiwanese teacher.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 49分 前 (3子コメント)
Taiwanese people did have a relatively decent time under the Japanese. That said, there is something to be said for self-determination.
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 42分 前 (2子コメント)
We also had a need for self-determination you know, but burgers didn't care about it then.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 31分 前 (1子コメント)
Who's we? I don't know you...
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 15ポイント16ポイント17ポイント 3時間 前 (14子コメント)
In the nicest way... you're an idiot :D
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 3時間 前 (13子コメント)
Care to elaborate?
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 3時間 前 (12子コメント)
I am pretty sure you can read over all of the comments done by other people to figure that one out
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間 前 (11子コメント)
You're just saying that because you want to assert Western hegemony over all forms of discourse, including internet dick-waving.
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 3時間 前 (7子コメント)
Nothing wrong with some internet dick-waving or western hegemony jeez
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間 前 (6子コメント)
Mmyes, Meatspin truly is the high point of Western culture, never to be topped except perhaps by waffles of a certain tincture.
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間 前 (5子コメント)
Or a certain party with a citric nature
[–]protohomBharat 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間 前 (2子コメント)
You don't have to mock me of my purported bias on every comment I make, you know.
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間 前 (1子コメント)
You do enough of that yourself.
Sorry, that's actually a bit harsh.
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 2時間 前 (0子コメント)
By insisting upon some other historical reading by citing sources? I'm Indian. I was raised on Soviet books and American TV.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント 4時間 前* (20子コメント)
Many terrible things were done during WWII to and by the Japanese. But mostly by. Yes they got nuked. They also had the Batan Death March, Hell (Slave) Ships, Unit 731 performing inhuman experiments on Chinese, the Rape of Nanking, and the overall treatment of Chinese as subhuman. So they can't really claim any sort of moral high ground just by getting nuked. No one forced them to invade half of Asia.
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント 4時間 前 (19子コメント)
All these points can be extended to Muricans as well. I don't see how unit 731 or rape of Nanking was worse than Nukes. If anyone is claiming the moral high ground, it's the Muricans.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント 4時間 前 (18子コメント)
Nukes were used to gain unconditional surrender from a proven fanatical military government while the Rape of Nanjing held no strategic value. Not to mention that the Japanese struck first. This gives defending nations a certain moral high ground, yes. And why are you using 'Muricans as an actual term?
[–]HarrisSinclairScotland 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間 前 (1子コメント)
ok if they wanted an unconditional surrender they had to drop a nuke if we accept this they could have dropped the fucking thing anywhere and Japan would have had to surrender just say the next one's on Nagasaki and they would have had no choice
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 2時間 前 (0子コメント)
less shocking value
that's the thing, they could dismissed that or prepared first. and we talk about japanese military government
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 3時間 前 (0子コメント)
Crimes are crimes, no matter what they were used for.
Both sides committed them, but I believe the Japanese were indeed worse in that regard, as in more crimes on a larger scale. That does not mean any side, any army was not guilty of committing terrible crimes however.
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-16ポイント-15ポイント-14ポイント 3時間 前 (14子コメント)
I use Muricans for self-righteous Americans, not the intelligent ones. One could say the sanctions by America was an act of war, making them as the aggressors in the war against Japan. A certain moral high ground doesn't qualify for the wanton destruction of innocent human lives, which could've been avoided otherwise.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 3時間 前 (11子コメント)
They sanctioned Japanese aggression on China and British possessions, soooo not an act of aggression or a justifiable casus belli? Sanctions don't justify a declaration of war haha. Also not wanton, their use had a goal....to gain unconditional surrender.
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント 3時間 前 (10子コメント)
My specific point was about use of nukes to end the war, not about the entire war. I used the sanctions example to show that the causes of war can be interpreted in many ways, the dominant interpretation being that of the victors.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 3時間 前 (9子コメント)
Since when has sanctions been a justified casus belli? Please enlighten me.
[–]aetheriousE Pluribus Unum 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間 前 (1子コメント)
Sanctions interpretable as an act of war? I can see why sanctions cause bad relations and instability, but using that as justification for war is daft.
Is there a word for self-righteous polandballers that use Indian flair?
[–]protohomBharat 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 49分 前 (0子コメント)
Read the rest of those comments. Or go and read Leviathan by Hobbes.
[–]TheG-man98Gib me all your clay 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント 5時間 前 (1子コメント)
I don't think there is a big difference between firebombing a city and nuking it.
[–]protohomBharat 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 5時間 前 (0子コメント)
There is. For example, no one knew what can a full scale nuclear blast can do humans. This is why Murican doctors refused treatment to survivors and studied them. Also, heard of the Hibakusha? It's one thing to de, and another to live on a life of unbearable misery.
[–]jPaoloGrey Poland creator 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 47分 前 (2子コメント)
Holy shit!
Oh man, no other nation downvotes here as heavily as fatass burgers.
[–]protohomBharat 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 40分 前 (0子コメント)
You missed out all the fun though, if you were here, this could've been turned into a second hypocrates.
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 1時間 前 (1子コメント)
Make that -34
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 1時間 前 (0子コメント)
I'd set a new Polandball record I think. My total negative Karma in this thread is -170.
[–]PerNihilAdNihilOne Nation Under Trees! 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間 前 (2子コメント)
mRRicans understanding of history is quite limited
they imagine the world was created in 1492 and that they are "god's chosen people" - they even created an entire mythology to justify their human rights violations (ie, 'manifest destiny') which they to this day will shrug off as somehow 'irrelevant' (even though they happened only, you know, 200 years ago and are well-documented though 1/3 of them have no problems swallowing whole undocumented (and perhaps even plagiarised) fictional works dating as far back as several thousand years ago
[–]martybadIowa 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間 前 (0子コメント)
No, history started in 1776, everything before that was a mistake.
But I expected those who come here to have some brains. Seems like I'm wrong.
[–]Takuya813Germany 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間 前 (2子コメント)
I love how people are downvoting you and saying things like “ we don’t know the main reason”
I studied this as one of the intelligence failures of the united states. We had intel, we knew the soviets could mediate peace. We had a bad secretary of state who misled fdr and got him to witheld information from the ussr at Yalta which led us to nuke japan and the cold war.
We also had a few translation issues along the way.
So yeah-- could have ended the war without nukes.
[–]polioperativeAMAMURICA 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 2時間 前 (0子コメント)
No, thats dumb as shit. The Allied powers made the decision to only accept an unconditional surrender from Japan and Germany. The USSR couldn't mediate because they had already agreed to invade Japanese mainland possessions.
The only worst war crime was committed by Japan and Germany, they lost.
[–]protohomBharat -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 2時間 前 (0子コメント)
Thank you. What really confuses me is that most don't even bother to read the sources before commenting and accuses me of anti-American bias. If you're an American, why do you have a Germany flair?
[–]martybadIowa 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間 前 (2子コメント)
Wow I really thought you were /u/jpaolo there for a second
[–]protohomBharat 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 55分 前 (0子コメント)
jPaolo is amateur compared to me now.
[–]ButtstacheOhio 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 32分 前 (0子コメント)
Just as dumb, but with less to say!
π Rendered by PID 5447 on app-222 at 2015-05-25 16:53:50.268435+00:00 running 7d6cd40 country code: JP.
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]protohomBharat 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント (180子コメント)
[–]CurlyNippleHairs 107ポイント108ポイント109ポイント (179子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -36ポイント-35ポイント-34ポイント (178子コメント)
[–]DrdresSweden 48ポイント49ポイント50ポイント (103子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 43ポイント44ポイント45ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 26ポイント27ポイント28ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]zeniizJapan 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]Unsub_LeftyPennsylvania 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]zeniizJapan 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (1子コメント)
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-28ポイント-27ポイント-26ポイント (91子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 32ポイント33ポイント34ポイント (90子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 17ポイント18ポイント19ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント (0子コメント)
[+][削除されました] (1子コメント)
[deleted]
[–]ItsJustACorpse 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]DiplomjodlerGermany World Champion -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント (45子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント (28子コメント)
[+]DiplomjodlerGermany World Champion スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント (27子コメント)
[–]safarispiffHong Kong 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (11子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント (13子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]DiplomjodlerGermany World Champion 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]TheHatGod 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント (37子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント (36子コメント)
[–]Grappindemen 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント (3子コメント)
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10ポイント-9ポイント-8ポイント (30子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント (21子コメント)
[–]safarispiffHong Kong 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]Sadnot 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]Sadnot 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント (18子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (17子コメント)
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (8子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]124876720The Athens of the North 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (4子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (3子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 15ポイント16ポイント17ポイント (14子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (13子コメント)
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント (12子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (11子コメント)
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント (7子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (6子コメント)
[–]blackninja9939United Kingdom 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (5子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]tungstencomptonUniquely Singapore 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント (20子コメント)
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント (19子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 22ポイント23ポイント24ポイント (18子コメント)
[–]HarrisSinclairScotland 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]KnightModernSmoke Country -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]sabasNLNetherlands best lands! 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント (0子コメント)
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-16ポイント-15ポイント-14ポイント (14子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント (11子コメント)
[+]protohomBharat スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント (10子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント (9子コメント)
[–]aetheriousE Pluribus Unum 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]TheG-man98Gib me all your clay 16ポイント17ポイント18ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]jPaoloGrey Poland creator 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]ArtfulLoungerTaiwan 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (1子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]PerNihilAdNihilOne Nation Under Trees! 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]martybadIowa 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]Takuya813Germany 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]polioperativeAMAMURICA 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]martybadIowa 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント (2子コメント)
[–]protohomBharat 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)
[–]ButtstacheOhio 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント (0子コメント)