DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Was I wrong to do this? I have no regrets

**vladekad** · 09-22-2012, 02:45 AM

I don't really want to get into a discussion about modern "multinational colonization" except to say that it applies also to "developed" countries such as my own.

Yes it does and even my country has been overtaken by this rulership. But away from that and back to your question on my reasoning. Correct it is not much different from the French during the German occupation. However the difference is the French have nothing to hide and do not deny that they were taken by the third reich. The difference however is that Thailand denies that they were ever colonized. They may not have been invaded, but their country was not always their own even through modern history such as Japan and WWII.

Colonization, my point all along, does not have to mean that the name of country changes and it's people change. It does not mean that there will be thousands of immigrants moving in either. You may call it close relations, but relations so close that one obeys the other constitutes colonization. That does not even include the more modern concept of colonization. After all which concept would be easier for the Thai's to digest?

Thailand used slave labor of allied forces to build a bridge for the Japanese, killing thousands upon thousands in the cruel and unusual treatment of the allied prisoners of war. Thailand should have been held responsible for her actions.
Or simply, Thailand was colonized by Japan during the war and Japan treated the POW's so badly that some died when they were forced into slave labor with terrible conditions and lack of human compassion.

Because in reality the Japanese at the time had quite a reputation for their treatment of slaves. What happened between Konkuita and Kanchanaburi was actually very commonplace treatment for slaves of Japan. I wouldn't think that Thailand would want the reputation that Japan held. Just because there were no maps produced saying that it was a Japanese territory, does not mean it was not given orders from Japan, and those orders followed, thus as the definition above says: Colonization - the act or process of establishing control over a country or area by a more powerful and often distant country.

09-22-2012, 02:45 AM	#35
vladekad Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 445 Senior Member	I don't really want to get into a discussion about modern "multinational colonization" except to say that it applies also to "developed" countries such as my own. Yes it does and even my country has been overtaken by this rulership. But away from that and back to your question on my reasoning. Correct it is not much different from the French during the German occupation. However the difference is the French have nothing to hide and do not deny that they were taken by the third reich. The difference however is that Thailand denies that they were ever colonized. They may not have been invaded, but their country was not always their own even through modern history such as Japan and WWII. Colonization, my point all along, does not have to mean that the name of country changes and it's people change. It does not mean that there will be thousands of immigrants moving in either. You may call it close relations, but relations so close that one obeys the other constitutes colonization. That does not even include the more modern concept of colonization. After all which concept would be easier for the Thai's to digest? Thailand used slave labor of allied forces to build a bridge for the Japanese, killing thousands upon thousands in the cruel and unusual treatment of the allied prisoners of war. Thailand should have been held responsible for her actions. Or simply, Thailand was colonized by Japan during the war and Japan treated the POW's so badly that some died when they were forced into slave labor with terrible conditions and lack of human compassion. Because in reality the Japanese at the time had quite a reputation for their treatment of slaves. What happened between Konkuita and Kanchanaburi was actually very commonplace treatment for slaves of Japan. I wouldn't think that Thailand would want the reputation that Japan held. Just because there were no maps produced saying that it was a Japanese territory, does not mean it was not given orders from Japan, and those orders followed, thus as the definition above says: Colonization - the act or process of establishing control over a country or area by a more powerful and often distant country.
	Quote