Point of view. Benedict Arnold betrayed the Americans as he was loyal to the crown. George Washington betrayed the crown as he was loyal to the Americans. Jeffe Point of view Benedict Arnold betrayed the Americans as he was loyal to crown George Washington Jeffe
Upload
Login or register

Point of view

 
Point of view. Benedict Arnold betrayed the Americans as he was loyal to the crown. George Washington betrayed the crown as he was loyal to the Americans. Jeffe

Benedict Arnold betrayed the Americans as he was loyal to the crown.
George Washington betrayed the crown as he was loyal to the Americans.
Jefferson Davis conquered the slaves while he tried to liberate CSA.
Abraham Lincoln conquered the CSA while he tried to liberate the slave.
TheodoreVan Kirk was a genocidal war hero when he dropped the nuke.
Hirohito was a genocidal war hero when he slaughtered more Asians than Hitler did to the number of Jews.
Kim Jong-un is...

+490
Views: 29062 Submitted: 02/24/2013
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (56)
[ 56 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
38 comments displayed.
#7 - wowewowe
Reply +8
(02/24/2013) [-]
Hirohito was a puppet controlled by the Military leaders of Japan; that's why he wasn't tried for his war crimes
#15 to #7 - anon
Reply 0
(02/24/2013) [-]
Sort of, he had power but was bound by traditions. He did however participate greatly in WWII and broke several traditions. He played a great role in the Japanese army, but Tojo & co did most of it. He was kept because it would be easier to stabilize and get the country back on it's feet with the emperor than without. Several people were against this, but the American general whose name escapes me, and who was leading the pacific war. He recommended he should stay emperor and not be tried.
#21 to #15 - zenethe
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
was it McArthur or was that further down the road in like Vietnam? or wasn't Vietnam Westmoreland? I think you're thinking McArthur
#30 to #21 - anon
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
Yeah I believe it was McArthur. Also why is this tumbed down? It is more correct than what wowewowe said. Ah well, doesn't matter, not like I have an account.
#2 - ilikeeatingcheese
Reply +7
(02/24/2013) [-]
Loyalist means you support the crown dude
#3 to #2 - lolwatthe
Reply +4
(02/24/2013) [-]
Royalist*
#4 to #3 - ilikeeatingcheese
Reply +5
(02/24/2013) [-]
No I spelled it right.
#5 to #4 - lolwatthe
Reply 0
(02/24/2013) [-]
Royalists were those loyal to the crown, Loyalist can be anyone who is in support of the current government, not just a monarchy.
#8 to #6 - lolwatthe
Reply +1
(02/24/2013) [-]
loyalists plural of loy·al·ist (Noun)
Noun

1. A person who remains loyal to the established ruler or government, esp. in the face of a revolt.
2. A colonist of the American revolutionary period who supported the British cause; a Tory.

You're using the second definition, also it still fits into the definition, but still you were saying that they only support a crown, I was correcting you since they support any established government.
#10 to #8 - ilikeeatingcheese
Reply 0
(02/24/2013) [-]
Why does it matter? You're ignoring the main point that George Washington was not a loyalist
#11 to #10 - lolwatthe
Reply +2
(02/24/2013) [-]
I never said he was, the main point from my point of view was to correct the term that you used.
#12 to #11 - ilikeeatingcheese
Reply 0
(02/24/2013) [-]
But it wasn't in that situation it would be a loyalist because its the american revolution vernacular.
#13 to #12 - lolwatthe
Reply +1
(02/24/2013) [-]
You know what, lets just stop debating and say we're right in our own point of view, ok?
#53 to #13 - ilikeeatingcheese
Reply +1
(02/25/2013) [-]
Fair enough truce. And pitvipertacos leave the anon alone. Just like his parents did.
#14 to #12 - anon
Reply 0
(02/24/2013) [-]
haha, you must be the stupidest and most ignorant piece of **** out there. C´mon, how can you be so stupid? Go kill yourself or just make sure that you will not breed, because you are cancer.
#46 to #14 - pitvipertacos **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#9 to #8 - ilikeeatingcheese
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#35 - kingofunnyjunk
Reply +6
(02/25/2013) [-]
#26 - megaton
Reply +4
(02/25/2013) [-]
i am confused whos point of view is this from.
#31 to #26 - herecomesjohnny
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
british with british, americans with americans, and americans with japanese
#41 - psykojet
Reply +2
(02/25/2013) [-]
How dare you insult items
#48 to #41 - eclecticparadigm [OP] **User deleted account**
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
I just did, she doesn't understand English.
#43 - metalbass
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
TheodoreVan Kirk had no say in the nuke. He was like any other soldier, and was given orders to fly over Hiroshima and drop the nuke. He didn't know its power or anything. He was just following orders
#47 to #43 - BuffaloSpringfield
Reply +1
(02/25/2013) [-]
I've been at the mercy of men just following orders.
I've been at the mercy of men just following orders.
#54 to #47 - metalbass
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
So? Don't blame them. Blame the men giving the orders
#56 to #54 - BuffaloSpringfield
Reply 0
(02/26/2013) [-]
*sigh* It's a quote from the movie
#57 to #56 - metalbass
Reply 0
(02/26/2013) [-]
oh... im an idiot
#24 - anon
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
>Lincoln
>went to war to free the slaves

This is gross historical revisionism. Lincoln did not give two ***** about the slaves, did not believe it was his right to end slavery and was just as racist as every other white person of his era
#36 to #24 - thethc
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
He did want to end slavery, but he originally wanted to ship the slaves back to Africa.
#40 to #36 - karson
Reply +1
(02/25/2013) [-]
I have to agree with anon. Lincoln was quite racist. Slaves weren't even made an issue until 1863, when the war started in 1861.
#50 to #40 - bknob
Reply +1
(02/25/2013) [-]
From what I've read, Lincoln was totally racist (as you said) but was against slavery as a whole. He wasn't for freeing the slave because they were black, but just because they were slaves. I read that it was because as a kid he was forced to work at a farm without pay and found it despicable to do any labor without compensation or pay, which was why he was against slavery. He was still racists, just like most others in that time period. It actually surprises most people to hear that he was racist.

tl;dr Lincoln was against slavery as a concept, not against racism, as he was still racist himself.
#55 to #40 - thethc
Reply 0
(02/26/2013) [-]
The Emancipation Proclamation wasn't made until 1863, but that's only because Lincoln couldn't say that's what the war was for. It wasn't ALL the war was for, but it was a major part of it.
#51 to #40 - verby
Reply 0
(02/25/2013) [-]
No, he did run on teh platform of ending slavery
#19 - beatiejuice **User deleted account**
+1
has deleted their comment [-]
#29 to #19 - eclecticparadigm [OP] **User deleted account**
Reply +1
(02/25/2013) [-]
Nuke testing again
#18 - vileghas
Reply +1
(02/24/2013) [-]
I wouldn't be too quick to judge Kim Jong-Un... He did win the people's choice of Time's Person of the yea 2012.. Just sayin
#16 - TheOriginalNerd
Reply +1
(02/24/2013) [-]
washington wasnt always a loyalist though