Why is Japan better than the US?

helmut said:

The world outside the US is not aware of this.

Iranians did not see it as a step towards "peace, liberty, and prosperity" when the CIA killed the elected prime minister and brought the shah back to Iran, Chileans did not think it was liberty when they were torched to death by a Junta supported by the USA, which crashed the economy with its Neo-liberal politics, not do Saudi-Arabs who suffer under a regime as bad as, if not worse than, Iranian theocracy.

This are some examples, the list of bad influence (US backing up dictators against the will of the peoples abroad) is much longer, whether it outweighs the positive impacts of the USA I don't know, people are not unanimous about that.

Even if there was no bad will on the side of the US, the US policy sometimes had unhappy consequences. Germany (at least the elderly generation) is thankful to the USA for saving West-Berlin by the famous airlift. Only few know that this consumed so many airplanes who were urgently missed in other places, that Mao Tsedong could overrun half of China in that period. About 2 millions saved in Berlin, more than hundred millions left to the communists in China.

There are regions in the world were the people see the USA as an evil empire, and they have reasons for doing so.

Click to expand...

The peace, liberty and prosperity I alluded to pertains to its citizens. Not to non-citizens.

So your argument is that the intentional and unintentional sins of the US are numerous and that that somehow negates my claim that America's founding and establishment is a special work of God serving as an important apologetic for the Christian worldview? If so, I believe you have failed to do that. If America was the great evil so many claim it to be, it would not attract so many immigrants and continue to be leader in the world pertaining to personal liberties, such as free speech.

Perhaps you have been overly influenced by the anti-American deconstructionism that has saturated much of higher education and leftist media. That is, consistently and persistently presenting only certain negatives of a thing (in this case, the historical and current US) as if they represent the thing in its entirely, with the end goal of attempting to create a lasting negative impression of the thing.

AACJ said:

Sorry, I don't understand your meaning here.

Click to expand...

Did you ever learn how the killing of a prince escalated into a World War in 1914? It had much to do with politicians not listening to one another, either because they stuck to their principles or because they wanted to make their country great.

AACJ said:

Claiming natural causes for the success of America is simply another way of directly or indirectly denying or attempting to mitigate the validity of the Christian worldview; for the predominate worldview in historical America was indeed the Christian worldview, and of course the creation and establishment of any nation does not occur outside of the predominate worldview of those involved in such creation/establishment.

Click to expand...

I have some difficulties to think that all the crimes committed by America as a nation (e.g. Slavery or tolerance to it) are unimportant compared to the profession of a Christian world view at the same time.

AACJ said:

In addition, such appeal to natural causation is effectively an affirmation of the claim that Good fruit can be derived from a corrupt tree. Think about it.

Click to expand...

Jesus said that God blesses the righteous and unrighteous alike, as has been pointed out by others before (Mt 5:45). Perhaps you should blame Him for my wrong concepts, or better think twice how all what Jesus said fits together.

AACJ said:

I wonder how many concurrent or consecutive "coincidences" does it take to convince deniers that the creation and establishment of America is a special work of God, that consequently also works as one of the greatest apologetics for the Christian worldview.

Click to expand...

AACJ said:

America's sins do not represent the totality of its history.

Click to expand...

Of course not. But only to look on one side of the facts will lead to a biased conclusion.

AACJ said:

no more than the reality of King David's sins negate his success or the glorification of the works of God resulting from God Almighty having guided and worked in and through his life.

Click to expand...

Yes, David had a mixed biography, for some time he lived from racketeering, he became the servant of the Philistines, he committed adultery - but he was repentant, and this made him a man according to the heart of God.

Not the victory over the Philistines makes David unforgotten, rather his Psalms which show his love to God and his confession, e.g. in Ps 51, or the praise of God's forgiveness in Ps 32. This surpasses even the success of Solomon, who rather lived from the blessings to David.

RDKirk said:

Industrialists in the US were perfectly aware of the bonus side of the war.

Click to expand...

This was a side effect, and of course the industrialists you have in mind were aware of it.

The bombing of industrial complexes was at some point abandoned, for the allies didn't see much effect (there was a huge impact, if bombing the industry had been continued, Germany's ability to fight would mach sooner lost than in 1944/45). Instead, inhabited quarters became the primary object of bombing. Doesn't look as if the US industry determined what to bomb ...

AACJ said:

The peace, liberty and prosperity I alluded to pertains to its citizens. Not to non-citizens.

Click to expand...

For citizens only, reminds me of the Roman empire. The Romans believed their country was founded with the help of the Gods, and they could point to a big success story (from a small town to a world empire, the imperial "constitution" lasting for more than 300 years, highest technical and economic level in the world, people fleeing to it ...).

AACJ said:

If America was the great evil so many claim it to be

Click to expand...

Not me. I have a balanced view between the "great evil" thing and your "God's country" thing.

AACJ said:

Perhaps you have been overly influenced by the anti-American deconstructionism that has saturated much of higher education and leftist media. That is, presenting only certain negatives of a thing (in this case, the historical and current US) as if they represent the thing in its entirely, with the end goal of attempting to create a lasting negative impression of the thing.

Click to expand...

Maybe you are too much influenced by the media you consume? We will perhaps never agree on that point.

helmut said:

For citizens only, reminds me of the Roman empire. The Romans believed their country was founded with the help of the Gods, and they could point to a big success story (from a small town to a world empire, the imperial "constitution" lasting for more than 300 years, highest technical and economic level in the world, people fleeing to it ...).

Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. To many differences to be an accurate comparison. For example, they never had a single-document Constitution glorifying the the Judaeo-Christian God and that lasted as long as the US Constitution.

AACJ said:

Apples and oranges. To many differences to be an accurate comparison. For example, they never had a single-document Constitution glorifying the the Judaeo-Christian God and that lasted as long as the US Constitution.

Click to expand...

I did not say that the Romans were a Godly country, but they themselves thought they were a country under the blessings of the gods. So Your difference reduces to them seeing other gods as source of blessing to their empire than you do in your case.

This does not strengthen your world view ...

AACJ said:

This is Sad.

Click to expand...

Indeed, it is. But the sooner we Americans (collectively) face the truth, the sooner it can become the Christian country some espouse it to be. Not to take away from the faith of the average citizen, but their faith doesn't reflect - and even gets used - by those higher in society.

straykat said:

Indeed, it is. But the sooner we Americans (collectively) face the truth, the sooner it can become the Christian country some espouse it to be. Not to take away from the faith of the average citizen, but their faith doesn't reflect - and even gets used - by those higher in society.

Click to expand...

Of course the faith of genuine Christians are reflected in our leaders to a great degree, at least as pertains to their actions. A politician does not have to be a genuine Christian in order to be positively influenced by Christian prayer/activity and thus benefiting the Church. For example, even if it is true that there are unsaved persons in the Trump administration, it still has defined life as beginning at conception. That is good and just the tip of the iceberg.

AACJ said:

So What? You going to attempt to portray Locke as a secularist or deist? You can try.

Click to expand...

You asked whether I believe the notion of human rights espoused by Jefferson in the DOI derive from British political tradition. I showed that they do. I would also point out that just because Locke was a Christian doesn't mean that his philosophy are one in the same. Yes, his concept of natural rights does derive from an interpretation of Christian teaching - but then again so does the doctrine of the divine right of kings.

Japan has better values. America is Christian only in lip-service.

America should be more cursed than Japan, because we have knowledge of the truth and still do evil.

helmut said:

This was a side effect, and of course the industrialists you have in mind were aware of it.

The bombing of industrial complexes was at some point abandoned, for the allies didn't see much effect (there was a huge impact, if bombing the industry had been continued, Germany's ability to fight would mach sooner lost than in 1944/45). Instead, inhabited quarters became the primary object of bombing. Doesn't look as if the US industry determined what to bomb ...

Click to expand...

As the bombing began to severely impact Japan's concentrated industrial centers, Japan dispersed its industrial activity into homes to avoid those attacks. Accordingly, then, American bombing turned toward attacking where the industrial activity was moved.

In Germany, just as well, the primary strategy was always to keep weapons from reaching the battlefield by destroying the capacity to produce them.

There was never a strategy of attacking inhabited quarters instead of industrial activity.

helmut said:

For citizens only, reminds me of the Roman empire. The Romans believed their country was founded with the help of the Gods, and they could point to a big success story (from a small town to a world empire, the imperial "constitution" lasting for more than 300 years, highest technical and economic level in the world, people fleeing to it ...).


Not me. I have a balanced view between the "great evil" thing and your "God's country" thing.


Maybe you are too much influenced by the media you consume? We will perhaps never agree on that point.

Click to expand...

I've had the opportunity to browse the CIA library. I'm not impressed by the righteousness of the US.

The US is, essentially, a distant province of the Roman Empire. You can discern that merely by examining an American one dollar bill, if not listening to our speech or examining the roots of our government.

The US is just a toe of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

I'm waiting to see some proof of the premise that Japan is better than the US. If you base an OP on a premise such as Japan is better than the US, you ought to be able to prove that premise is factually correct. First, what do you mean by better and second how does Japan qualify as better than the US in relation to that meaning.

RDKirk said:

As the bombing began to severely impact Japan's concentrated industrial centers, Japan dispersed its industrial activity into homes to avoid those attacks. Accordingly, then, American bombing turned toward attacking where the industrial activity was moved.

Click to expand...

I'm no expert on Japan in WW II, so I can't say anything to that.

RDKirk said:

In Germany, just as well, the primary strategy was always to keep weapons from reaching the battlefield by destroying the capacity to produce them.

There was never a strategy of attacking inhabited quarters instead of industrial activity.

Click to expand...

Contrary to what you write, the strategy changed. Whole quarters without any construction site were bombed. You may say that this was no "attacking inhabited quarters instead of industrial activity", for construction sites were bombed, too, but part of the strategy was bombing on inhabited quarters in the hope that would break the loyalty of the people to the government. It didn't work (such a scheme will never work), and as later shown, the continuation of the initial strategy (bombing industry, including, of course, displaced construction sites when they were found) might have brought the industry to a breakdown which would end the ability to fight effectively, as happened in the very last time of WW II.

RDKirk said:

The US is just a toe of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

Click to expand...

The dream of Nebuchadnezzar was about the time until the arrival of the Messiah, and since Daniel (as OT prophets in general) did not discern between the first and second coming, he closed the vision in Daniel 7 with the ascending of the Son of Man from the earth to God and the end of the world. The time after Jesus' ascension is simply no part of the vision of Daniel.

In Revelation 13, there is a beast with as many horns as the fourth beast in Dan 7, a body like the third beast, feets as the second beast and and a mouth like the first beast. And it has as many heads as the four beasts in Daniel together. So we have all four beasts of Dan 7 in one beast in Rev 13, the order of appearance is reserved.

This is not the Roman empire (that has gone long ago), it is a new empire as a sort of successor of the four beasts. Something not in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 2.

And a byside remark: Had that dream of Nebuchadnezzar the objective to show the whole history, including the time of the Church, there would certainly something about the biggest empires in history, the Moguls (Genghis Khan and successors) and the British Empire. Or the Muslim Empire which ruled the Middle East longer than the empires seen in that vision, and was bigger than any of them.

SoldierOfTheKing said:

You asked whether I believe the notion of human rights espoused by Jefferson in the DOI derive from British political tradition.

Click to expand...

I didn't ask that.

Pertaining to human or natural rights, the principles discussed in the works of Locke from which the Founders so heavily relied were not, in the absolute sense, derived from a British political tradition, they were Bible based and therefore derived from Scripture. Locke agrees. He referenced Scripture some 1500 times in his Two Treatises of Government.

SoldierOfTheKing said:

I would also point out that just because Locke was a Christian doesn't mean that his philosophy are one in the same.

Click to expand...

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

SoldierOfTheKing said:

Yes, his concept of natural rights does derive from an interpretation of Christian teaching - but then again so does the doctrine of the divine right of kings.

Click to expand...

You seem to have confused issues here. The fact that devine-right advocates claimed biblical justification literally has nothing at all to do with the question of whether or not Locke's ideas on natural rights were Bible based. I have claimed that the US Constitution is a unique work in its totality, construction, duration, and effect; an obvious work of God. Any supposed biblical justification for the doctrine of rule by divine right has nothing at all to do with my claim. I mean, it literally does not follow that because both divine-right advocates and Locke made appeals to biblical authority, then Locke's or the Constitution/Declaration appeals to biblical authority are therefore somehow in error.