[QUOTE=EcksDee;47845120]Probably related to both anime and the western romanticizing of samurai and katana as 'the pinnacle of swords and warriors'.[/QUOTE]
it [I]really[/I] pisses me off how many people think samurai are wandering swordsman commoners from Japan.
[QUOTE=1chains1;47845080]Ive always been torn on these kind of things.
On one hand we see a morally evil person who had no real sense of value of life. On the other hand we gained a LOT of medical knowledge concerning many things from these people. After all they didn't just research how to use bio weapons but also how to contain and control it which involves treatment as well. It puts into perspective what we gained and lost from working with such a person, but honestly I support the decision done. Instead of just giving up more lives and letting these people rot, we used them and their data to further progress.
Sometimes we forget that a lot of the progress we have made is on the back of terrible people who were willing to forego morals and ethics. Does this make them right or good people? Hell no, but it certainly gives you something to think about concerning our nature and the advancement of the human race.[/QUOTE]
I don't think there is anyway to justify the actions of the operations of Unit 731.
They were fucking ruthless when it comes to their experimentations.
[QUOTE=1chains1;47845080]Ive always been torn on these kind of things.
On one hand we see a morally evil person who had no real sense of value of life. On the other hand we gained a LOT of medical knowledge concerning many things from these people. After all they didn't just research how to use bio weapons but also how to contain and control it which involves treatment as well. It puts into perspective what we gained and lost from working with such a person, but honestly I support the decision done. Instead of just giving up more lives and letting these people rot, we used them and their data to further progress.
Sometimes we forget that a lot of the progress we have made is on the back of terrible people who were willing to forego morals and ethics. Does this make them right or good people? Hell no, but it certainly gives you something to think about concerning our nature and the advancement of the human race.[/QUOTE]
I find people like Shiro Ishii to be interesting.
We know he did awful things to people who didn't deserve it, and he didn't get jailed for it. For the most part, though, it ends there. All we know for sure what happened after that is he converted to Catholicism, and even that might not be true. Perhaps he was guilt-ridden, or maybe he truly was just plain evil.
But he's dead now so we're not getting anything more out off him, for better or for worse.
[QUOTE=Ignhelper;47845195]I don't think there is anyway to justify the actions of the operations of Unit 731.
They were fucking ruthless when it comes to their experimentations.[/QUOTE]
This, it's like saying the cold experiments on the Jews helped us understand hypothermia better.
There's other ways of finding out shit like that.
[img]http://firsttoknow.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/unite_731.jpg[/img]
Imagine laying there..
Lets not also forget, that without the nazi experiments on those interned at the concentration camps we wouldn't be able to do organ transplants.
e/ You have to be pragmatic when looking at the allies' dealings with scientists from Germany and Japan after the war; yes they did horrible, inhuman things, but simply killing them, or locking them up til they die, would of had no benefit, where as using their research for the betterment of humanity, sort of balances out the terrible they did.
There will always be a good to the bad, but you have to question if going through the bad was worth it.
[QUOTE=Recurracy;47844636]Funny that the common misconception is that the samurai were exceptionally skilled swordsmen first and fore-most rather than archers though, where did that come from?[/QUOTE]
Blame Japan for that - when guns came along and suddenly every soldier was a crack shot, they retconned samurai as being master swordsmen so they could keep the idea of them culturally relevant (and thus use them for internal propaganda). This was mainly Meiji-period onward, IIRC - might be wrong on the exact period when it started but that was around when it took hold.
Any lesson learned by torturers could've been learned in a lab on animals. We don't need people to torture humans for science. Though if it's already done then not using the data to save lives would be letting the tortured due in vain. Torture for science should never be encouraged though.
There's a difference between justifying human experimentation to gain medical knowledge on one hand and using the data once the atrocious experiments had already been performed on the other. You could make the argument that it would be more horrible not to use the knowledge once it had been gained, because it might end up saving countless lives in the future.
People need to understand that looking at the good things that come out of bad events isn't the same as saying that it was good that these bad things happened.
Just because someone said that the data that came out of these torturers helped medicine doesn't mean they're saying it was justified or a good thing.
[QUOTE=OvB;47846106]Any lesson learned by torturers could've been learned in a lab on animals. We don't need people to torture humans for science. Though if it's already done then not using the data to save lives would be letting the tortured due in vain. Torture for science should never be encouraged though.[/QUOTE]
I don't see how testing those types of things on animals is any different, humans are after all, just a type of animal. Bottom line is you just can't have morals going into something like this.
Nazis also were pioneers in rockets and helped us get to the moon
Thank you Nazis
[QUOTE=zach1193;47846733]I don't see how testing those types of things on animals is any different, humans are after all, just a type of animal. Bottom line is you just can't have morals going into something like this.[/QUOTE]
Oh man please tell me your joking, pleeeaaaaaaase
[QUOTE=Jmir 54;47846877]Nazis also were pioneers in rockets and helped us get to the moon
Thank you Nazis[/QUOTE]
Fuck you, Moon.
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;47841986]Samurai armour wasn't impractical, at all. If it was, it wouldn't have been used, simple enough.
It provides adequate mobility, as this video showcases. I haven't found more videos, but I know you can do rolls and stuff in it as well.
The armour itself is sturdy and can take a lot of shit. It was usually made out of plate and leather lamellars with some chainmail backing, and it was laced with silk. Interestingly enough, the silk acted as a bit of extra protection as tightly woven silk get properties a bit similar to kevlar. This made parts of the armour more or less arrow-proof, which is obviously super. As far as weapons go, it will more or less deflect any slashing or cutting, but it was probably susceptible to being pierced by spears.
There are also later examples of armour being shotproof, but this was only the cuirass. Also worth noting obviously that 16th century muskets aren't exactly top tier guns.
tl;dr: yorois are awesome and they exist for a reason.[/QUOTE]
If the photo's date is 1869 it would have been right at the end of the [url=http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boshin_War]Boshin War[/url] effectively the very end of the Samurai.
[IMG]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/5/12/1305206704396/Huck-Finn-006.jpg[/IMG]
also, here's a photo of Twain without a shirt. for some reason.
[IMG]http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/321989/slide_321989_3029791_free.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=BusterBluth;47846956]Oh man please tell me your joking, pleeeaaaaaaase[/QUOTE]
Tell me why I'm wrong, if we're talking morality, how can you possibly think testing on an animal is any better than testing on humans. We're not talking shampoo here...
[QUOTE=zach1193;47846733]I don't see how testing those types of things on animals is any different, humans are after all, just a type of animal. Bottom line is you just can't have morals going into something like this.[/QUOTE]
because fuck the rest of the animals
we're at the top of the food chain for a reason and i would gladly sacrifice fifty thousand mice and chickens if it meant saving just one human life.
i'm so tired of this babbys first encounter with morality horseshit that legitimizes so many vegans
[QUOTE=Melnek;47848387]because fuck the rest of the animals
we're at the top of the food chain for a reason and i would gladly sacrifice fifty thousand mice and chickens if it meant saving just one human life.
i'm so tired of this babbys first encounter with morality horseshit that legitimizes so many vegans[/QUOTE]
All this proves is that everyone views morality at a different rate. there's no set everyone agrees upon moral ground, so you may believe that another might disagree. That's why I stated that you must leave morality out of the question when dealing with those kind of affairs.
[QUOTE=kittykaty;47845474]Lets not also forget, that without the nazi experiments on those interned at the concentration camps we wouldn't be able to do organ transplants.
e/ You have to be pragmatic when looking at the allies' dealings with scientists from Germany and Japan after the war; yes they did horrible, inhuman things, but simply killing them, or locking them up til they die, would of had no benefit, where as using their research for the betterment of humanity, sort of balances out the terrible they did.[/QUOTE]
Basically this. Whether we like it or not, a LOT of modern science stands on top of these horrible things. There's some stuff you just can't test with rats or what ever. Even today. The nazis, though, fucking enjoyed it and tortured the people. [I]That's[/I] where your problem lies.
[QUOTE=zach1193;47849234]All this proves is that everyone views morality at a different rate. there's no set everyone agrees upon moral ground, so you may believe that another might disagree. That's why I stated that you must leave morality out of the question when dealing with those kind of affairs.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, morality is a social construct, it's why different cultures view differents forms of punishment differently.
[img]http://i.huffpost.com/gen/3013908/original.jpg[/img]
[quote]In this Jan. 5, 1973 black-and-white file photo, four-year-old Beau Biden, foreground, watches his dad, Joe Biden, center, being sworn in as the U.S. senator from Delaware, by Senate Secretary Frank Valeo, left, in ceremonies in a Wilmington hospital. Beau was injured in an accident that killed his mother and sister in December. [/quote]
[img]http://i.huffpost.com/gen/3013906/original.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Melnek;47848387]because fuck the rest of the animals
[b]we're at the top of the food chain for a reason[/b] and i would gladly sacrifice fifty thousand mice and chickens if it meant saving just one human life.
i'm so tired of this babbys first encounter with morality horseshit that legitimizes so many vegans[/QUOTE]
Honestly, "because we're superior" is just some shitty excuse.
I mean yeah, I get that chickens and mice aren't that fucking smart or biologically advanced, and I get that we've gotta survive off of them, but I'm sure as hell not gonna deny that the double standards exists.
[QUOTE=Skerion;47850299]Honestly, "because we're superior" is just some shitty excuse.
I mean yeah, I get that chickens and mice aren't that fucking smart or biologically advanced, and I get that we've gotta survive off of them, but I'm sure as hell not gonna deny that the double standards doesn't exist.[/QUOTE]
The human range of experience is far greater than that of a chicken. It isn't clear that chickens can even be classified as conscious.
[QUOTE=Explosions;47850308]The human range of experience is far greater than that of a chicken. It isn't clear that chickens can even be classified as conscious.[/QUOTE]
That first part seems obviously true and and second seems entirely possible. It's just that while I hardly consider myself a vegan, I really feel that I should mention that it seems somewhat contradicting that a lot of us will appear to care for the well-being of others of whatever race or gender just as long as we're generally the same species and the person we're suppose to care for isn't too morally unattractive while we pick and choose whatever species we should also care for simply based on how smart they are. Again, I just feel like pointing out what appears to be an inconsistency.
If it turns out that chickens aren't actually conscious at all, then I suppose it shouldn't be a big deal.
[QUOTE=Skerion;47850427]That first part seems obviously true and and second seems entirely possible. It's just that while I hardly consider myself a vegan, I really feel that I should mention that it seems somewhat contradicting that a lot of us will appear to care for the well-being of others of whatever race or gender just as long as we're generally the same species and the person we're suppose to care for isn't too morally unattractive while we pick and choose whatever species we should also care for. Again, I just feel like pointing out what appears to be an inconsistency.
If it turns out that chickens aren't actually conscious at all, then I suppose it shouldn't be a big deal.[/QUOTE]
The way I look at it, it depends on the outcome of the actions you're taking
If you're just killing/"torturing"/experimenting on animals with no real end goal in mind, and no real good comes out of it, you're a piece of shit
If the suffering of an animal can somehow save and improve human lives, it's acceptable for that to happen
Depending on the moral ground you stand in while looking at this unfold, sure it's fucked, but again, morality is a construct that only really exists within society and the rules we created in it, in nature a species does whatever it can to survive.
I know that sometimes art is posted here, and I know that mine might be not that cool in comparison, but it's about a cool fantasy concept so I decided to share it here. Basically it's a train station really high in the sky, no backstory.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/biR6xAV.jpg[/img]
Full-res cleaned up and cropped version can be found [url=http://i.imgur.com/OEuHo4U.jpg]here[/url]
[QUOTE=Tmaxx;47849740]Basically this. Whether we like it or not, a LOT of modern science stands on top of these horrible things. There's some stuff you just can't test with rats or what ever. Even today. The nazis, though, fucking enjoyed it and tortured the people. [I]That's[/I] where your problem lies.[/QUOTE]
Can I get a source on this? Maybe some stuff, but the "a LOT" is something I haven't heard about.
Like I think the only halfway useful experiment I've heard about is the hypothermia one, and tbh it totally makes sense that Nazi science on inmates didn't really result in much useful science - most of it was focused on the army, and I don't think it was necessarily well documented or indeed scientifically sound. Maybe some of it was, but I doubt much of it is useful today.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;47843360]Samurai armor and weapons and tactics were designed to be good at the type of warfare waged in Japan.
Knightly armor and weapons and tactics were designed to be good at the type of warfare waged in Europe.
Samurai were primarily archers, not swordsmen. That's why they had light full-coverage armor, supplemented with sloped plates - perfect for deflecting projectiles. Their swords were their backup, for when the enemy got too close. Samurai were the high-ranking soldiers, but most of the armies were poorly-armored pikemen - so their swords were sharp, not hard, and slashing weapons, not stabbing ones.
Knights were primarily cavalry, not swordsmen. Their swords were backup weapons, for when they were dismounted from their horse. And armor was common enough on the battlefield that the common swords were thrusting-type - [B]not very sharp (some styles actually call for gripping the sword by the blade at times!)[/B], but hard, to withstand the impact they would produce. Polearms were again common for infantry, which were a somewhat-effective counter for mounted knights, but the frequent extra-european wars (like the Crusades) against different types of armies made them less disposable, and social inertia took care of the rest. Only when guns were cheap enough to field en masse did the knights cease to be effective.
A war between medieval Japan and medieval Europe would have been hard to predict, simply because the styles of warfare were so different. I would expect the winner would be whoever's terrain formed the battlefield - different styles of warfare often evolve due to the terrain being fought over. I have a hard time imagining an army of crusaders fighting effectively in a flooded rice paddy, and I have an equally hard time imagining an army of ashigaru being victorious in the Swiss Alps.[/QUOTE]
This is a false factoid. Medieval longswords were well sharpened the entire way, and half-swording, as it is called can be done without gloves and if you do it right you still won't cut yourself. Also, you wouldn't use a sword in this way to thrust, you would use it for leverage. If you thrust a sword through plate armour you might get through, but it's the last thrust you will ever do with that sword.
As for the roles, samurai weren't exclusively archers. Depending on where you were (and what time), their primary role has also included spears and other weapons, on horseback, same as the european knights.
[editline]1st June 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Recurracy;47844636]Yeah I've just been reading up on the samurai culture since not too long ago, so any misinformation on my end is completely my ignorance speaking, heh.
Funny that the common misconception is that the samurai were exceptionally skilled swordsmen first and fore-most rather than archers though, where did that come from?[/QUOTE]
I'm prepared to debate that Japan would sell that image during the meiji-restoration, I believe that it's because of the 200 years of peace after Tokugawa united Japan. If there's no war, there's no point in using bows unless for recreational use, so the use of swords were greatly favoured as you could duel the shit out of each other. This spawned some master swordsmen that probably helped the image of the samurai as a master swordsman. Look at Musashi, for instance.
[editline]1st June 2015[/editline]
Actually Japan could still sell that during the meiji-restoration, but then my argument is that it was based on their previous 200 years of peace, not the 600 years of war that followed before.
Visit the [URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1456747"]HEMA[/URL] thread if you guys ever have any questions about something. I've been doing historical martial arts in both japanese and european fields for a while, and it's insane how much you learn from just doing it. Can recommend it to anyone.
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;47851426]This is a false factoid. Medieval longswords were well sharpened the entire way, and half-swording, as it is called can be done without gloves and if you do it right you still won't cut yourself. Also, you wouldn't use a sword in this way to thrust, you would use it for leverage. If you thrust a sword through plate armour you might get through, but it's the last thrust you will ever do with that sword.
As for the roles, samurai weren't exclusively archers. Depending on where you were (and what time), their primary role has also included spears and other weapons, on horseback, same as the european knights.[/QUOTE]
Most European swords were sharpened all the way, but they were not sharpened to nearly the level of a katana. That was one of the engineering trade-offs of European weapon design - much better hardness and resilience, and less sharpness (not "unsharpened", just "less sharp" than a katana or scimitar). I mentioned half-handing just to show the most extreme example of it.
Also, my understanding is that half-swording was also used for thrusting with extreme accuracy, ie. for trying to stab between armor plates.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
